By rugbyfuture -
January 22nd 2010 @ 4:18am
Get a Roar profile
Loading ...Related coverage
Will low viewing numbers push rugby free to air?
It is quite apparent that rugby in Australia is currently at a very firm down. We are yet to see what the new season will bring. There is a possibility, however, that this limiting down may break rugby back into free to air.
Before the viewing numbers were such that is wasn’t viable for FTA channels to buy the rights, but highly viable for Pay TV.
Now, as viewing figures are reaching possible record lows, rugby could cost the same as bull riding, the new fast pace basketball, and various other obscure sports.
The difference being that there is still a presence, which once the FTA barrier is broken, could be capitalised on.
There are two cost barriers with free to air TV.
One is the cost barrier for the sports, which can be capitalised on and provide ratings success; the other is the low cost, low budget airtime filling sports, such is seen often on ONE HD.
So current ratings set forth by various media monitoring could be a benefit to the rugby watching public.
This larger exposure then leads to slightly greater ratings and eventual re-growth, hopefully past retention point, to a competitive viability.
This system is possible, and quite probable if, after this season, rugby continues on its slope in terms of viewing figures. It may be a blessing in disguise.
Going to the Waratahs v Brumbies blockbuster at ANZ Stadium, Saturday 24 April? If you're keen to meet up with other Roarers, register you interest and we'll keep you informed on the place to meet. Register now.
Get Australia's best Rugby opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(440)
MattRusty said | January 22nd 2010 @ 6:19am | Report comment
Latest tv figures for rah rah isn’t good…
Statistics released recently by TV survey company Repucom:
“While the battle for top spots was between NRL and AFL clubs, the Rugby Union crew would be sadly disappointed with their following in Australia. The Super 14 Union sides were unable to rank higher than the newly formed A-League competition and despite ever-increasing coverage and international flavour, the Rah Rah’s are unable to cement themselves as serious contenders in the Australian sporting landscape.”
In some interesting rankings; the following are the Top 10 sporting teams across all Australian codes rated by TV viewers:
1. Brisbane Broncos
2. Parramatta Eels
3. Collingwood Magpies
4. Geelong Cats
5. St George Illawarra Dragons
6. St Kilda
7. Canterbury Bankstown Bulldogs
8. Melbourne Storm
9. Carlton Blues
10. Western Bulldogs
Whats even more interesting about the statistics, is that the Melbourne Storm NRL franchise continue to rate highly despite being broadcast at early hours of the morning into the Victorian market.
The Storm in their short career have achieved not only Premiership success several times, but are highly followed across the country.
http://www.nrlnews.com/2010/01/22/broncos-eels-outrate-afl-teams-on-tv/
rugbyfuture said | January 22nd 2010 @ 6:26am | Report comment
exactly what this is in response to
Sam el Perro said | January 22nd 2010 @ 9:10am | Report comment
It seems clear. It is affirming your argument that Rugby is, indeed, at what you call a “very firm down” by showing there isn’t a rugby union team in the top team sporting teams in Australia.
Justin said | January 22nd 2010 @ 7:15am | Report comment
The list is no surprise. Its a mix of current winning teams and traditional powerhouses. Of course the Storm will be high up they are the team of the decade and would be heavily viewed in NSW and QLD.
Big Steve said | January 22nd 2010 @ 9:21am | Report comment
Can anyone shed anymore light on what these numbers mean?
I clicked on the link and all it says is what Mattrusty quoted above, “the following are the Top 10 sporting teams across all Australian codes rated by TV viewers:”
What does this mean?
It sounds like the results of a pole of peoples favourite sporting teams by people who watch tv?
If it is based on numbers of people who watch TV, is it total numbers of viwers for a year? Total number of viewers per year/number of games played? Is it higest rated game per year?
Satistics mean nothing without the very specific details of what data they are based on?
Dogz R Barkn said | January 22nd 2010 @ 1:30pm | Report comment
We know all the ratings for individual matches – so my guess it’s just an accumulation of these by club.
Dogz R Barkn said | January 22nd 2010 @ 12:05pm | Report comment
Here’s the fuller DT article:
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/nrl/why-nrl-deserves-bumper-tv-deal/story-e6frexnr-1225822324520
Not a bad ranking for the CB Bulldogs – but we can do better.
I note that our Southern cousins are in 10th spot – that’s interesting – I wouldn’t have thought they were a big drawing club.
The article says that the A-League and Super 14 clubs fill out the bottom 12 spots, but the A-League clubs are doing much better than the rugby clubs.
Sth Auckland First XV said | January 22nd 2010 @ 5:47pm | Report comment
The last place to find true objective sports reporting is the Daily Telegraph. That is a crap paper (or, more accurately, should be used for crap-paper) with no credibility. They use false figures and twist the truth. The league reporters are second rate scribes who don;t seem to have had any training in proper journalism. There have been so many league stories and beat ups in that paper that have never come true. It a girls paper, which I would put in the same category as Women’s Day and New Idea.
Robbo said | January 22nd 2010 @ 10:00pm | Report comment
What an objective and rational response. Just because you don’t like it it doesn’t mean it isn’t true. Union in Australia is unfortunately in a very bad state – and pretending it is not will just make it worse. I urge all Union fans to do their best to get out to the games, watch it on TV and drag your friends along. If we do that it might make a difference. Pretending Union is going well when it clearly isn’t won’t help at all.
Bay35Pablo said | January 23rd 2010 @ 6:24pm | Report comment
SthAuckFirstXV, Robbo is right, you are out of your mind. I would never use the Daily Terror for toliet paper. Not even good enough for that!!!
Matt said | February 6th 2010 @ 11:51am | Report comment
Are you kidding? Where do you get your stats from? Look at sponsorship for the sports and rugby is way out in front in sports played in Australia. True most rugby fans would love to see it back on free to air but we know they can’t afford it.
RedWho? said | February 11th 2010 @ 5:02pm | Report comment
I understand that bottom line is, Foz has rights for another year or 2, then ARU will consider free to air.
I wrote to ARU and mentioned that NRL are destroying their game (changing the rules every year, usually having to reverse the stupid ones from previous year). It would be a great opportunity for ARU to take on all us disgruntled ex-NRL supporters, but you can’t support a competition that you never see a game of.
It’s not just televising the games either – it’s advertising. Who are the Reds? WIth Broncos, I know where and when they train, I know the places they hang out, I know the ex-players and where they work etc.
Roar spent a heap of money on advertising – they really forced their name down our throats – everyone in Brisbane knows who the Roar are.
I know *nothing* about the super 14 – I don’t even know who the teams are.
But free to air television is crucial if you want people to start supporting the game.
Seems like a catch 22. Won’t get on tree to air if nobody’s watching, but nobody’s watching coz we can’t see the games.
I’m going to follow the NFL – at least I can see that on One HD.
macavity said | January 22nd 2010 @ 7:20am | Report comment
So, your argument is that Rugby should be shown on FTA exactly BECAUSE it is so awfully supported?
Is this upside-down day?
I take it your reasoning is that the Rugby TV rights are so worthless that a digital channel will throw the ARU a few dollars for the rights, while Fox won’t be interested in paying more than a few cents?
The Link said | January 22nd 2010 @ 7:46am | Report comment
I thought this article was a joke, but perhaps its not? Perverse logic to conclude that because less people are watching a sport that it will break onto a new medium. What’s the business case for this?
Sth Auckland First XV said | January 22nd 2010 @ 5:52pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Dogs Of War said | January 22nd 2010 @ 6:27pm | Report comment
Well the article writer does. In case you have noticed the first line reads “It is quite apparent that rugby in Australia is currently at a very firm down.”
So the article is talking about Rugby Union in Australia. if you don’t care about that, then find another article to comment on.
macavity said | January 22nd 2010 @ 7:22pm | Report comment
pathetic as usual.
Ken said | January 22nd 2010 @ 7:39am | Report comment
Well RF, no-one could say that you aren’t a glass half-full type. The theory you’ve put forward is a bit optimistic, mostly because it ignores that Fox requires far more low cost sports content than the FTA channels do. If the current ratings lower the next TV deal to super-low levelsl, it will likely just be Fox saving some money. Even if your scenario did come to fruition, if they’ve bought ‘filler’ then it’s likely to be broadcast sometime between midnight and midday rather than primetime.
Realistically, the more obvious way of Super Rugby gaining interest from the FTA channels is to increase its ratings on Foxtel. Both Rugby and PayTV appeal, according to those wacky demographic marketeers, to those of above average affluence. If they can’t draw reasonable ratings there, the FTA channels aren’t going to want to touch them with a ten foot pole
Brett McKay said | January 22nd 2010 @ 7:47am | Report comment
this is certainly an interesting, and somewhat unexpected, angle to getting rugby a bigger FTA footprint…
LT80 said | January 22nd 2010 @ 7:49am | Report comment
The descent into obscurity could in fact be the saviour of rugby union?
Champagne comedy, RF! You gotta look on the bright side!
Foxy Loxy said | January 22nd 2010 @ 8:46am | Report comment
Maybe they can put the Super 14s on instead of the Shute Shield on Saturdays?
You would have thought there was a big free to air interest in 1995 for Super 12 games. But Super 12 was a specifically made for pay television product, thanks to David Moffett when he was running the NZRU.
RU has repead what it has sown in Australia. Because only the Wallabies are on free to air, the code has dropped off the radar. The Shute Shield hardly fills the hole.
Dave said | January 23rd 2010 @ 4:49pm | Report comment
What other rugby union games were on free to air in Australia apart from the Wallabies in the past ?
Bay35Pablo said | January 23rd 2010 @ 6:26pm | Report comment
Foxy, the ARU is reaping letting Seven not show FTA back in 1996 on, when Seven was too busy showing AFL. If they had insisted on Seven using the rights they had bought with the Tests, they might have built some exposure and audience share then.
keeper11 said | January 22nd 2010 @ 8:28am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Foxy Loxy said | January 22nd 2010 @ 8:42am | Report comment
How? That table shows that NRL and AFL are equal. So we should expect the Melbourne & Sydney media to split their coverage 50/50 between AFL and NRL. Of course, we know that won’t happen as both states are just as biased against each other’s code.
And for what it’s worth, I have no idea what Rugbyfuture was trying to argue in this story. It just gave me a headache.
M1tch said | January 22nd 2010 @ 8:47am | Report comment
Well you see, anything that says Rugby League is going okay, really upsets some people, they cant accept it
keeper’s post is laughable when AFL beats the NRL over-all.
Dirk said | January 22nd 2010 @ 4:45pm | Report comment
20 pages of league a day.. Bring it on
Siva Samoa said | January 22nd 2010 @ 8:46am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Foxy Loxy said | January 22nd 2010 @ 8:50am | Report comment
Oh dear. You back again. How are the RU ratings going?
Jay said | January 22nd 2010 @ 9:02am | Report comment
mate – focus on your own backyard.
Sam el Perro said | January 22nd 2010 @ 9:14am | Report comment
Just to go back onto the actual topic here,which is the parlous state of Australian rugby union (as demonstrated in the You Tube footage of the Gold Coast 7s which you claim as “very popular”… if a handful of people at a suburban park is defined as “very popular” in the rugby community, then rugbyfuture’s thesis that union is at a deep low is deomonstrably correct), whatever equality or otherwise that there may be between league and Aussie rules, union is sadly a long way off the pace at the moment.
Whether being unpopular in the community will lead to broader exposure through broadcasts, a curious argument, will be seen when SANZAR signs the next broadcast agreement.
Siva Samoa said | January 22nd 2010 @ 12:34pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Jim Wilson said | January 22nd 2010 @ 5:12pm | Report comment
Speaking of Gold Coast Union – what venue got the lowest crowd in the now defunct ARC?
http://www.austadiums.com/sport/event.php?eventid=6787
»ARC: Aces d Vikings
East Coast Aces 35
Tries: Ben Mowan, Marshall Milroy, Sam Batty, Brett Stapleton
Conversions: Andrew Walker 3/4
Penalties: Andrew Walker 3/4
Canberra Vikings 34
Tries: Matt Carraro, Francis Fainifo, Peter Kimlin, Anthony Faingaa
Conversions: Matt Carraro 4/4
Penalties: 2/3
Crowd: 784 (4% of current capacity)
Date: Sunday 2nd September 2007, 04:00 PM
Venue: Carrara Stadium
Web: http://www.rugby.com.au
Corey said | January 25th 2010 @ 9:44am | Report comment
You’re right League beats AFL there.
Redb said | January 22nd 2010 @ 8:54am | Report comment
Your concept is that as rugby on TV has declined in ratings it can be bought by free to air more cheaply.
Rugby is not basketball back in the day when it was a new but untried sports product for TV. It’s unfortunate track record is fall on FTA and then Pay TV, I’m sure the TV execs aren’t that absentminded.
If the goal is get onto ONEHD or other digital channels then that will apply to many sports – if the game is sold for a song then how it will put funds into further development?
The best path is build from Pay TV to FTA with a product that attracts viewers and has further potential. First step is to rebuild the pay TV audience to increase its relative value, not talk it down.
Redb
keeper11 said | January 22nd 2010 @ 9:14am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Mungoballer said | January 22nd 2010 @ 9:17am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Bay35Pablo said | January 23rd 2010 @ 6:29pm | Report comment
Agreed, we are in a trough, we will come out of it. Usual manic-depressive cycle of fans and media.
I expect 2011 and the new S15 will give it a kick, and I am excited about the conference system and the Rebels coming in.
Realist said | January 26th 2010 @ 5:21pm | Report comment
“I expect 2011 and the new S15 will give it a kick, and I am excited about the conference system and the Rebels coming in” — Bay35Pablo
Bay35Pablo,
The introduction of the Super 14 and 2007 World Cup didn’t give rugby union the ‘kick’ it needed back then, did it?
” Rugby is expanding rapidly around the world unlike poor Mungoball.” — Mungoballer
Mungoballer,
I guess that’s why rugby leauge has experienced more growth around the world over the last 10 or so years than it has during its entire history!
Seriously mate, your emotions don’t trump facts.
Saint 60 said | January 22nd 2010 @ 11:17am | Report comment
Rugby will be fine – but laughable when compared to league and aussierules in Aust…
what i do find as hard to take..Aussierules in 09 was on in primetime in Syd on Friday nights and also most Sunday nights…on channels 10 and 7 this im informed is not the case in Melbourne for the Nrl there are not much in the numbers on those nights in Syd but they do count =
ehhh its all Tv deals so long as the codes are making a quid outa the dam TV good
Big Kev said | January 22nd 2010 @ 1:45pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Realist said | January 26th 2010 @ 5:22pm | Report comment
“so what? Rugby will still have 100 x the viewers that League has globally and we live in a global village so who cares if league out-rates Union in 2 states in one country in the entire world!” — Big Kev
Big Kev,
Rugby league kills rugby union in PNG.
keba said | January 26th 2010 @ 6:16pm | Report comment
And rugby kills league worldwide
Realist said | January 27th 2010 @ 1:41am | Report comment
“And rugby kills league worldwide”
Only because its standing within the English establishment during the 19th and 20th centuries gave it the opportunity to expand throughout the British Empire’s vast colonies around the world. If rugby league held a strong standing with the English establishment then it would be the more globalised code.
san jorge said | January 30th 2010 @ 9:02pm | Report comment
maybe
Rickety Knees said | January 22nd 2010 @ 2:04pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Dogs Of War said | January 22nd 2010 @ 4:58pm | Report comment
Yeah, as we see Soccers global profile translates into sporting success for the Australian Soccer clubs. So why not Union?
Sth Auckland First XV said | January 22nd 2010 @ 5:41pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Dogs Of War said | January 22nd 2010 @ 5:43pm | Report comment
Given it peaked only 6 years ago in Australia. Why has it fallen off it’s perch so badly?
Can you provide a link for the Tahs vs Crusaders final.
Dogs Of War said | January 22nd 2010 @ 8:03pm | Report comment
http://blogs.sunherald.com.au/whoweare/archives/2008/12/the_week_the_mo.html
Here is the link, will place the top 20 watched shows in the list. Do notice that a normal round League match still beat the final of the S14 final, and no other Super 14 match even made the list.
Sports Programs
1 LIVE: RUGBY UNION: BLEDISLOE CUP Fox Sports 3 350
2 LIVE: FOOTBALL: WORLD CUP QUALIFIER AUST V QATAR Fox Sports 3 345
3 LIVE: NRL COWBOYS V PANTHERS Fox Sports 2 338
4 LIVE: RUGBY UNION: S14 FINAL CRUSADERS V WARATAHS Fox Sports 3 333
5 LIVE: FOOTBALL WORLD CUP QUALIFIER AUSTRALIA V IRAQ Fox Sports 3 330
6 LIVE: NRL COWBOYS V STORM Fox Sports 2 328
7 LIVE: NRL RAIDERS V STORM Fox Sports 2 322
8 LIVE & ACTIVE: NRL DRAGONS V COWBOYS Fox Sports 2 320
9 LIVE & ACTIVE: NRL SHARKS V SEA EAGLES Fox Sports 2 314
10 LIVE: NRL PANTHERS V ROOSTERS Fox Sports 2 310
11 LIVE: NRL COWBOYS V ROOSTERS Fox Sports 2 304
12 LIVE: NRL WESTS TIGERS V STORM Fox Sports 2 302
13 LIVE: NRL DRAGONS V TITANS Fox Sports 2 300
14 LIVE: NRL SEA EAGLES V SHARKS Fox Sports 2 300
15 LIVE: NRL KNIGHTS V EELS Fox Sports 2 299
16 LIVE: NRL BULLDOGS V RABBITOHS Fox Sports 2 297
17 LIVE: NRL STORM V WARRIORS Fox Sports 2 297
18 LIVE: NRL TITANS V DRAGONS Fox Sports 2 295
19 LIVE: NRL RAIDERS V DRAGONS Fox Sports 2 294
20 LIVE: NRL ROOSTERS V STORM Fox Sports 2 294
big Kev said | January 22nd 2010 @ 8:09pm | Report comment
The Bledisloe game was also live on channel 7…. plus Union games get a few hundred thousand extra viewers in SA, NZ and Europe so not even close where League gets 43 people watching the highlights outside of NSW and QLD!
Dogs Of War said | January 22nd 2010 @ 8:15pm | Report comment
Yeah, but most Friday night league matches beat it in the ratings.
Other countries aren’t important in this particular argument, because they really don’t brign in any real large audiences that broadcasters will pay for (well not for either of these sports at this level). Do you really think the Super 14 final got outstanding ratings in Europe? It would have only attracted a few expats, and diehard Union lovers. That’s it!.
The point was that he said that the Super 14 final outrated all the NRL matches on Pay TV, I just want to point out that he is fibbing.
Anyway, talking about what is popular in Australia to a Union supporter is like talking to a brick wall. You guys are like the soccer mob, thinking that because a sport is popular elsewhere in the world, that it’s automatically is a better sport. Well your wrong.
John Ryan said | January 22nd 2010 @ 10:22pm | Report comment
Curious as to how you know that Big Kev,have you researched it I know they were over 100,000 watched State or Origin on TV in Perth, and when 9 deigned to show the Sunday game between 10,000 to 30000 would watch it. And as you don;t get a breakdown of Pay TV viewing figures by the State I don’t know how many here watch it on Sat arvo,I do when I get back from watching my local club play,9 5000 watched the pre season game last year and 18000 turned out for the Storm Souths game.
Bit more than 43 I think
big Kev said | January 22nd 2010 @ 10:31pm | Report comment
yes I was exagerating but to be honest the numbers are tiny where a Union test for eg between Aus and NZ will get millions of viewers (5 – 10m?) outside of those countries….
KhoiSan said | January 22nd 2010 @ 10:38pm | Report comment
Im with you big kev we all watch the tri-nations games between the wallabies and the all blacks. We just love our rugby in South Africa and the tri-nations is a great tournament
Jannerboyuk said | January 22nd 2010 @ 11:00pm | Report comment
Well according to BARB live tri-nations rugby shown on sky sports 3 in the uk on saturday 18 july came 7th in the weekly top 10 with 27,000 viewers. So im not sure where the 5-10 million comes from.
http://www.barb.co.uk/report/weeklyTopProgrammes?
Jim Wilson said | January 22nd 2010 @ 9:43pm | Report comment
More on the Waratahs v Crusaders & their GF Pay TV Ratings in 2008:
http://www.astra.org.au/content/pdf/MediaReleases/ASTRA-Ratings-for-Week-080525.pdf
1 LIVE: NRL COWBOYS V PANTHERS Fox Sports 2 Sat 19:30 324 324 1,440 639
2 LIVE: RUGBY UNION: S14 FINAL Fox Sports 3 Sat 17:30 324 324 1,392 705
3 LIVE: NRL BULLDOGS V SHARKS Fox Sports 2 Mon 19:00 238 238 1,166 577
4 NRL KNIGHTS V WARRIORS Fox Sports 2 Sat 21:20 222 222 1,179 571
5 LIVE & ACTIVE: AFL W BULLDOGS V N MELB Fox Sports 1 Sun 16:32 221 221 1,131 583
6 LIVE: AFL HAWTHORN V WESTERN BULLDOGS Fox Sports 1 Sat 14:00 184 184 1,090 547
7 LIVE & ACTIVE: NRL STORM V BULLDOGS Fox Sports 2 Sat 17:30 182 182 1,392 585
8 LIVE: AFL BRISBANE LIONS V ST KILDA Fox Sports 1 Sun 13:00 179 179 1,159 503
9 AUSTRALIA’S NEXT TOP MODEL FOX8 Tue 19:32 177 273 1,079 615
10 LIVE: NRL WARRIORS V ROOSTERS Fox Sports 2 Sun 14:00 173 173 1,226 420
11 THE SIMPSONS FOX8 Sun 10:40 152 209 779 1,860
12 FUTURAMA FOX8 Wed 18:22 140 180 798 1,018
13 SELLING HOUSES AUSTRALIA Lifestyle Wed 19:30 140 176 1,276 535
14 LIVE: AFL BRISBANE LIONS V NORTH MELB Fox Sports 1 Sat 19:00 132 132 1,430 592
BTW RL has been & probable still is England’s second biggest spectator sport.
big Kev said | January 22nd 2010 @ 10:15pm | Report comment
Union is so far ahead of RL in terms of spectator numbers and TV viewers in England it’s not even funny. What a ridiculous, innacurate statement.
The League Grand Final and league test matches in England get an audience of about 300,000 versus between 3 and 14m for a rugby union final or test. Dream on
Sam el Perro said | January 22nd 2010 @ 10:20pm | Report comment
Interestingly, you are both wrong. Horse racing is the second biggest spectator sport in England in 2009!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/horseracing/6990498/Racing-is-the-second-biggest-spectator-sport-Horse-Racing.html
Realist said | January 26th 2010 @ 5:50pm | Report comment
“Union has been very successful in the past and has had its moments in the sun. The 2003 RWC final is the most (or second – not sure) most watched sporting event in Australian history. The Waratahs v Crusaders final in 2008 was the highest rating programme on Fox Sports for 2008. The 2003 world cup was a fantastic success, the 2001 British & Irish Lions tour also, and at times (when Australian teams win), the Super 14.” — Sth Auckland First XV
Your example provs Australians will support a rugby union team that is a) an underdog and b) able to beat their more fancied opponents. The support dwindles when the teams are hopeless and are most likely going to lose to their more fancied opposition on most occassions.
The same trend applies in tennis.
What this means is the typical Australian attitude of supporting the ‘battler who is beating the odds’ is what has held rugby union up in the past. If the Wallabies continue to slide down the rankings — which is a real possibility given the game’s precarious state, both on and off the field — then the game could reach its lowest point.
Realist said | January 26th 2010 @ 6:02pm | Report comment
big Kev,
I wouldn’t get too carried away with the Wallabies’ so-called “support” at their home Test matches. A large chunk of the people who attend the Tri-Nations matches in Australia are migrants from New Zealand and South Africa. The same applies when England and the British Isles play the Wallabies in Australia.
Hey Kev, look at this!
“The bad news is this year’s highest-rating Bledisloe Cup match, on free-to-air, attracted 521,000 viewers while May’s rugby league Anzac Test drew 917,000.
The highest-rating 2008 Bledisloe Cup Test achieved 727,000 on Channel Seven, a massive 206,000 more than 2009. Both were out-ranked considerably by the ARL Kangaroos Tests.” Josh Rakic, “It’s too much for a game to bear”, SMH, October 25,2009
big Kev said | January 22nd 2010 @ 9:20pm | Report comment
well it certainly translates into big dollars for australian soccer players – so guys you have never heard of are earning far more than your overhyped League and AFL stars in places ranging from Europe to Japan to the middle East. Same for rugby – even league players are running after Union dollars in Japan, France, England, Ireland, Wales, Scotland. Why do you think that is DoW?
Dogs Of War said | January 22nd 2010 @ 9:25pm | Report comment
I don’t watch sport because I hope the players can earn lots of money overseas where I am unlikely to watch them week to week, or get the chance to see them live in the flesh. I watch it because it entertains me, and who knows, I may meet them.
I think your idea of what sports are all about are a little warped. Good on those guys for earning as much money as they can, at least they will leave me memories of how good they were when they played League, and guess what, the next SBW, Gasnier etc appears and we all think how good is this bloke!
So lucky for you, you can enjoy late nights watching Pay TV, so you too can see the overpaid ex-League stars playing Union for some team you don’t identify with, while I will walk down to Homebush and watch the Bulldogs in the flesh, and maybe even meet them after the game.
big Kev said | January 22nd 2010 @ 9:31pm | Report comment
I only mention it because it is a directly result of a far greater interest in the sport. you have every right to want to walk to your local ground and watch your neighbourhood team play your chosen sport – but you are somehow trying to big up your chosen sport because in one tiny corner of the world there is more interest in it! The fact that RL is more popular in Aus that RU or soccer means absolutely nothing to anyone other than the people here. As RL, RU and soccer players have shown, it is certainly appealing to them to have the opportunity to go and play RU or soccer for far more money overseas. This is a direct result of a far greater global interest in the game. And as we live in a small world, getting smaller and smaller, it really is completely irrelevant how many people in NSW or QLD watch a game when the global audience pays the bills in a far greater way.
Sam el Perro said | January 22nd 2010 @ 10:06pm | Report comment
You said: “The fact that RL is more popular in Aus that RU or soccer means absolutely nothing to anyone other than the people here.”
The article said: “It is quite apparent that rugby in Australia is currently at a very firm down.”
Given that we are commenting on the article, to talk about popularity in Australia is particularly on point, as opposed to meaning absolutely nothing.
John Ryan said | January 22nd 2010 @ 10:14pm | Report comment
Thats funny I have pay,as far as I know I pay for it,I don’t watch Rugby Union so how does the global audience pay the bill, as far as I know in football most don’t give two hoots about what happens overseas.
And judging by the Audience figures they dont care much about RU either
big Kev said | January 22nd 2010 @ 10:20pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Jannerboyuk said | January 22nd 2010 @ 10:32pm | Report comment
@ Kev any reference for that heinekin cup figure?
big Kev said | January 26th 2010 @ 5:30pm | Report comment
JBK: http://www.ercrugby.com/eng/80_118.php
Dave said | January 23rd 2010 @ 5:16pm | Report comment
You don’t identify with any other rugby league teams outside of the Bulldogs ? I support my local team in NZ but I also have teams I watched in the English and French rugby championship. Is there anything wrong with that DOW ?
Dogs Of War said | January 26th 2010 @ 6:50pm | Report comment
I don’t have foxtel, so no point following teams via Newspaper, plus life is much better if you live it. Love getting on my bike and going for a ride, so a little sport following my local team is more than enough.
Don’t know where you find the team to really watch English and French Rugby. Now and again when Channel 9 show the ESL on a Sunday afternoon I may watch whatever teams they show, as I may with the Shute Shield on Saturdays if I am around (Go Randwick!)
Jim Wilson said | January 22nd 2010 @ 10:41pm | Report comment
Second biggest spectator sport hve a look here:
http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/SportsHistorian/1996/sh16d.pdf
Extract:
“…Stephen Jones, brave soul that he is, provides this analysis of Rugby
League in the serene knowledge that he won’t be challenged – either by his
editor or by his colleagues on The Sunday Times. As a so-called vehicle for
the disinterested coverage of sport The Sunday Times gives no genuine
coverage to Rugby League, despite the game still being the second most
popular spectator sport in the country. As Martin Sadler has said: ‘There
is no Rugby League writer for that newspaper who can put right the gross
distortions that a writer like Jones inflicts upon a gullible readership
Sam el Perro said | January 22nd 2010 @ 10:48pm | Report comment
To be fair, the source you are quoting is 14 years old.
big Kev said | January 22nd 2010 @ 10:51pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Jannerboyuk said | January 22nd 2010 @ 11:05pm | Report comment
The clue is in the spectator bit, i.e. people turning up through the gates. Not sure where it is, dont particularly care, but im curious as to what sports you think occupy the top ten if league doesnt get a place?
Springs said | January 22nd 2010 @ 11:47pm | Report comment
The ESL in 2009 had around a 1,800,000 aggregate attendance. The Guiness Premiership had ~ 1,450,000. The Challenge Cup drew 227,000 aggregate. While in the Heineken Cup 2008-09, the English clubs drew around 271,000.
English International Union drew 246,000 to the 6 Nations, other tests probably taking the figure to 500,000. England League Internationals drew around 110,000.
Co-Operative Championship drew 217,000, Championship 1 71,000. I Don’t know about the Union lower tiers.
My estimates for League= ~2,425,000
Union = 2,221,000 + the Union lower tiers.
To me Big Kev, that seems like League would be in the Top 10 of English Spectator sports.
Colin N said | January 22nd 2010 @ 11:53pm | Report comment
“The ESL in 2009 had around a 1,800,000 aggregate attendance. The Guiness Premiership had ~ 1,450,000.”
The Super League play more rounds, that’s why their aggregate attendence is higher.
Springs said | January 22nd 2010 @ 11:59pm | Report comment
I understand that Colin, the ESL also play more games per round. I’m not saying this to provide proof of a foolish argument that League is more popular than Union in England, just to disprove the foolish statement that bighead kev posted.
Siva Samoa said | January 23rd 2010 @ 12:31am | Report comment
is he adding all the superleague crowds including france and wales or just the english crowds for both codes ?
Jannerboyuk said | January 23rd 2010 @ 2:16am | Report comment
Just to break down the rugby league attendance figures in the uk futher, it seems to include all superleague games including those played in france and wales but doesnt include the french elite figures. 1,872,827 includes 1,608,291 for superleague (up from 916,000 in 1997) and 264,000 for other divisions (down from 353,000 in 1997) but does not include millenium magic or the northern rail cup. The overall aggregate is the highest since the 1967-68 with 2,126,734 albeit in an entirely english set up. This was put together by the League Express in the 11th January edition. For the record their calculation differed slightly with the official RFL figure, which was higher. Make of these figures what you will.
Dave said | January 23rd 2010 @ 5:44pm | Report comment
Lets cut with the chase around and not worry about the pass crowds and glory. Lets just put up the figures for last year . Why would you inlcude superleague games played in France and Wales but not heineken cup and challenge shield games played by English teams in Wales, Ireland, France, Italy and Scotland ? Why don’t you include club and international games played in Wales and Scotland ?
http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/SportsHistorian/1996/sh16d.pdf
This website is so outdated and bias. I hope JW will do his homework and give us a real indicate in 2009 of which code of rugby has the most spectators in the UK or England .
Jim Wilson said | January 24th 2010 @ 10:10am | Report comment
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/8476169.stm
HEC game yesterday
Edinburg v Stade Francais
Att: 3,792
Edinburgh 9-7 Stade Francais
Edinburgh (6) 9
Pens: Paterson 3
Stade Francais (7) 7
Tries: Pape Cons: Beauxis
big Kev said | January 24th 2010 @ 10:38am | Report comment
Heineken Cup 2008–09:
total attendance: 1,177,064
Ave 14,900
Record: 82,208
Competition is only a few years old and is growing rapidly
Jim Wilson said | January 22nd 2010 @ 10:54pm | Report comment
For Kev (an article a bit dated but what the heck)
…Why is it that rugby league has never had a greater national and international appeal in its history?
Sailor’s departure has had little effect on the appeal of his former league team
Because at last young men can try their hand at the game without fear of a ban from the rival code.
Hence, alongside the many thousands of amateurs and schoolchildren in the heartlands of rugby league, students play at over 75 universities and colleges throughout Britain.
The sport thrives in the armed forces, and over 30 new clubs prosper in Ipswich, Crawley, Coventry, Nottingham, Durham, Gloucester, Leicester and elsewhere.
Others in Greenwich, Maidstone and Bristol are on the horizon.
At professional levels, the comparision between league and union is revealing, for league wins hands-down in support.
What price profile when Super League attracts, on any weekend, far higher attendances than union’s Zurich Premiership?
Low union attendances
Widnes and Leigh, just two of 19 clubs in the Northern Ford Premeiership, have a higher crowd aggregate than the whole of the 15-a-side game’s second division.
What price profile when the whole of the Welsh/Scottish premier rugby union league can attract barely 20,000 supporters through the turnstiles on any given weekend?
Edinburgh and Glasgow can welcome 500 spectators on a wet Friday night – hardly a respectable attendance for amateur rugby league clubs Skirlaugh, Wath Brow or Woolston.
Few are unaware of the media hype and profile surrounding the union code’s international fixtures, and it is right that league is now adjusting its priorities in this direction.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_league/1387575.stm
big Kev said | January 22nd 2010 @ 11:10pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Siva Samoa said | January 23rd 2010 @ 12:12am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Dave said | January 23rd 2010 @ 5:53pm | Report comment
Im glad you like to live on past glory JW with all those old articles. Did you know the English Rugby Premiership was only started in the 90’s and was the games were attended only by a man and his dog then. Funny how the tide has turn Could you tell us what the average crowds of the current Guiness Premiership is ?
Working Class Rugger said | January 23rd 2010 @ 6:09pm | Report comment
I’m sorry Jim but using an article form 9 years ago doesn’t add wieght to your argument. Hell, it hasn’t been the Zurich Premiership for some time now. The simple fact of the matter is. Wasps vs Quins drew 76,000 on a col miserable Boxing Day fixture. There wasn’t a Cup on offer. Just a regular Guiness Premiership game. As much as it may hurt to admit it since the article you provided Union has superceded the ESL. Just look at the annual growth rate of both crowds and viewers to Rugby in the UK. Many clubs have upgraded their facilities to cope with the expansion.
In terms of Edinburgh and Glasgow. Well I watch a fair bit of the Magner’s League and I can assure you that the crowds have certainly grown well past 500. Not spectacular but healthy and once again growing.
Colin N said | January 23rd 2010 @ 6:20pm | Report comment
“What price profile when Super League attracts, on any weekend, far higher attendances than union’s Zurich Premiership?”
This is what I believe is clutching at straws because it has been proven that in terms of the average gate, the Guinness Premiership attracts higher crowds than the Super League nowadays. If anything it shows how much Rugby Union has grown as a spectator sport since then.
Dave said | January 23rd 2010 @ 6:24pm | Report comment
And the average will continue to go up once Leicester, Bath, Northampton and other Guiness clubs get their stadium up to date and a higher capacity. The French clubs are also looking at expanding their stadiums or built new ones.
Corey said | January 23rd 2010 @ 10:26am | Report comment
I wouldn’t say the Soccer clubs in Australia are seeing success, Brisbane Roar will be looking for a new stadium shortly as they can’t afford to stay at Suncorp, where the Reds can. I don’t think Australia is that bad, we just have two very similar codes and Rugby League is more popular here. But Australia are always in the top 10 (and mainly in the top 5) in the world for Union. Union does need FTA, but this should be done by sacrificing money that they receive from Foxtel. So sell it cheaper to One HD or Channel 7, don’t sell it to Channel 9 because they will disadvantage it even more.
Jannerboyuk said | January 22nd 2010 @ 10:19pm | Report comment
Seriously i genuinely want to see an actual measure of this. Under what terms? Numbers of countries or people? Participation or viewers. When you say this what do you actually mean and what is the evidence to back it up and how is it compared to other sports?
The top ten accumluative attendances for domestic attendances are for example, according to wiki, baseball, basketball, baseball again, american football and then five football comps. The top ten average attendances in a domestic league are american football, cricket, football, afl, football, baseball, canadian football, football, baseball.
Its only when we get to outdoor ‘events’ i.e. a one off game (remember still domestic) do we find a rugby union game mentioned 7th and 9th in 2009. Beaten by the NRL and two Gaelic games and the AFL final. One entry at number 4 in a list of 7 international club comps (not including leagues with clubs from different countries of course)
The international section is much better with 3 spots in 13 entries, 1st (six nations which means a lot less games then some of course but still impressive), 3rd and fourth (interrestingly the latest FIFA world cup listed is from 1994 held in the US!).
This is of course more then respectable, especially on the international front but unless you use a very different measurement i really fail to see how anyone can claim union as second to football.
Realist said | January 26th 2010 @ 5:26pm | Report comment
“the fact is that Rugby is a global sport second only to Futbol. ” — Rickety Knees
Cricket is more globalised than your precious rugby union. So is tennis, golf, pool, basketball, swimming, athletics and volleyball.
SA said | January 26th 2010 @ 6:25pm | Report comment
How is cricket Realist? how many teams play in the cricket world cup compared to the rugby world cup? surley that alone shows that rugby is a lot more globalised. and your not giving reaaly good examples, tennis, golf and swimming are not team sports. give it up mate
Realist said | January 27th 2010 @ 2:18am | Report comment
“How is cricket Realist? how many teams play in the cricket world cup compared to the rugby world cup? surley that alone shows that rugby is a lot more globalised.”
Err no, it doesn’t. All it shows is the rugby union world cup uses a format that allows more teams to compete during its final stages. It doesn’t reveal anything about the amount of countries that play the sport. In order to know this then you’d need to look at how many countries are associated with the sport’s governing body. The ICC has over 100 members, and some of them are in massive countries that have the potential to deliver huge economic returns — not like the tiny countries that take rugby union seriously. The ICC is bestowed with more money than the IRB can count because of cricket’s massive following in India. The popularity of cricket in highly-populated counatries such as Pakistan, India and Bangladesh mean it has more fans and a larger market, thus making it more globalised. Your sport can be “number one” in many tiny nations (IE. Wales and New Zealand — or tiny island nations that have barely enough people to make up a small city — but that hardly makes them globalised. Rugby union is only highly popular in a handfull of nations. THe bulk of the countries that “play it” hold it as a minority sport.
“your not giving reaaly good examples, tennis, golf and swimming are not team sports” — SA
Since when were we speaking exclusively about team sports? The person I responded to, Rickety Knees, said “Rugby is a global sport second only to Futbol” [sic]. That means he was speaking about all sports, including individual pursuits such as tennis.
Tennis, golf and swimming can be — and often are — played as team sports. Ever heard of doubles tennis or the relay events in swimming?
ilikelollies said | January 22nd 2010 @ 3:45pm | Report comment
Rickety knees, 2nd only to football, thats comedic gold.
Im sure fans of basketball (mens and womens), ice-hockey, baseball and cricket will find that comment hilarious
SA said | January 22nd 2010 @ 6:01pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Jannerboyuk said | January 22nd 2010 @ 9:22pm | Report comment
What billion viewers? Can someone actually prove these figures instead of just stating them as fact. Even FIFA have been forced to downgrade their ‘estimates’ to a billion.
Baseball is a massive game in the us, mexico, cuba, japan, korea, just because its a sport not in the main expressed through national teams is irrelevant.
As a comedian noted t’other day on british TV “We were going to make rugby union the national sport after eng;land won the world cup, but we realised that only 8 countries gave a toss and 4 of them was us!”
That doesnt stop rugby union being the 2nd greatest sport in the world (after rugby league of course) i just dont understand why people buy into the IRB corporate bullshit. They even contradict themselves in their own press release, where a potential reach becomes an actual cumulative audience. http://www.irb.com/newsmedia/mediazone/pressrelease/newsid=2022301.html
Of course the IRB are the smaller (relatively) corporate whore trying to emulate the bigger corporate whore FIFA who are themselves being forced to admit telling porkies:
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/why-fifas-claim-of-one-billion-tv-viewers-was-a-quarter-right-438302.html
I can find one refrence to a viewing figure that doesnt appear to be a ‘reach’ accidentally slipping to an actual figure. (this quote mistakenly as far as i can see says this is an official report when it is in fact an independent report, please correct me if anyone knows better.)
“However, the extent of its popularity can be summed by a statistic in the official report of the International Rugby Board (IRB) published in July 2008, entitled ‘Putting Rugby First’. It pointed out that of the 33 million people who watched the 2007 Rugby 15-a-side World Cup Final on global television, 97 percent came from the eight founding members of the Board, that is to say the four nations in the British Isles, France, South Africa, New Zealand and Australia.”
http://www.aroundtherings.com/articles/view.aspx?id=33285
Even assuming that every fixture got the same viewing figure (absurd of course) then 48 fixtures gets 1.5billion. The reality is that its nowhere near that.
The daft thing is that it is quite clear that the IRB have made the world cup a fantastic, successful and moneymaking event which if handled well will develop into an even more massive event so why the IRB and the more hysterical unionistas need to BS i never quite understand.
Jannerboyuk said | January 22nd 2010 @ 9:47pm | Report comment
So does union have professional competitions in as many countries in europe as ice hockey? ice hockey has dozens of countries playing in several professional leagues. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ice_hockey_leagues#Major_professional
Again with the made up viewing figures. Show some bloody evidence, just for once.
Springs said | January 22nd 2010 @ 10:53pm | Report comment
Alright I was going to stay out of this Union thread until I read this. No Union and League is not equal popularity-wise globally but they are not equal domestic-wise either. In Australia League is more popular, whenever League fans say that Union fans straight away say ‘Who cares, we are a true global game, Australia doesn’t matter, blah blah blah annoying bias crap etc.’ but we never claim that League is bigger than Union globally. And stop saying you are a ‘true global game’, 110 countries or whatever is not the entire globe, League is played in fifty countries, yet we know that it is only seriously played between 10-15 countries. Union is probably only played seriously in about 25-35 countries or less.
And basketball is played in far more countries than Rugby, with far more casual players. Cricket has India which is around 1 billion people. Rugby is barely played at all in China/India/most of Asia which is around 1/3 to 1/2 of the world’s population.
I always hear Union fans calling Rugby World Cup (or in your case the entire sport) the 3rd biggest sporting event on the planet. I have never heard anyone say what the fourth biggest is. Winter Olympics? Cricket World Cup? Chinese Table Tennis Championships? The thing is, if the RWC is the 3rd biggest, than the League World Cup would be in the Top 10, and yes I mean Top 10. You say RWC is third biggest because of attendances and TV Ratings, well tell me what event (not competition) beats League World Cups in terms of attendances and TV Ratings. I know no baseball, basketball, ice hockey events would beat it, and I know the RLWC08 had a higher average attendance than the last Cricket World Cup.
League is nowhere near last on the global scale, in fact I would say it is very close to Union. If you try and say Cricket, ping Pong, baseball etc is bigger because of the countries who play them (India, China, Japan, USA, Korea) have higher populations I can say the same thing about Union.
Siva Samoa said | January 23rd 2010 @ 1:22am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Realist said | January 27th 2010 @ 2:28am | Report comment
” i’ll provided you with information that rugby is played seriously in most countries who are members of the irb” — Siva Samoa
I guess that’s why the bottom 90% of the IRB’s members would get flogged by 50-200 points if they played against the top 10 nations…
Seriously, the inability for the IRB’s buttom 90% of member nations to compete with the top 10 says everything we need to know about the global state of the game.
big Kev said | January 23rd 2010 @ 10:37am | Report comment
you gotta be kidding right?
Professional rugby union comp in:
SA, NZ, Australia, Japan, England, France, Scotland, Ireland, Wales, Italy
Well organised long standing amateur rugby union comp:
USA, Canada, Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, Kenya, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Romania, Argentina, Russia, Georgia, Hong Kong, Sri Lanka, Fiji, Samoa, Tonga +++++++
Professional 7s Rugby”
53 countries when I last looked
Professional rugby league comp in:
Australia, , England + 1 team in NZ, France & Wales
Well organised long standing amateur rugby league comp:
PNG, NZ, France …. any others with more than 2 or 3 teams?
Jim Wilson said | January 24th 2010 @ 10:18am | Report comment
Wrong Big Kev
Japan & Italy don’t have professional RU competitions. They have competitions that have some (full-time) professional players – big difference.
Outside the UK & Ireland France is the only country with a full-time professional RU competition in the NH.
Rugby League
Lebanon & Cook Islands are a couple I can think of at the mo.
Here’s some interesting news about RL in Lebanon
http://www.rlef.eu.com/news.php?id=1287
big Kev said | January 24th 2010 @ 10:36am | Report comment
are you for real Jim? You are clutching at straws.
Are you really suggesting that somehow Japanese and italian rugby is not worthy of being on this list (they most certainly are professional leagues) yet somehow RL in Lebanon is a professional league, and Cook Islands too! Mate there are 50 countries with a bigger, more popular more established Union competition than those 2 – aren’t you embarrassed to have to use those 2 as examples of the growing global appeal of your game?
Jim Wilson said | January 24th 2010 @ 11:02am | Report comment
My mistake.
I didn’t wish to convey the impression that Lebanon & the Cook Islands had full time profession RL competitions.
I was replying to the question in your last sentence about RL competitions.
& yes I am suggesting Japan & Italy’s RU aren’t worthy of being called full time professional competitions.
I bet they don’t charge admission to their games?
Are their crowd numbers such that that they would cover the cost of one player if they did charge admision?
big Kev said | January 24th 2010 @ 11:22am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
rugbyfuture said | January 24th 2010 @ 11:23am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Realist said | January 27th 2010 @ 11:01pm | Report comment
“There are 718 rugby clubs within Italy. These clubs support 73,419 registered male players, as well as 8,118 registered female players. Many teams are either from Veneto or Lombardy in the North of Italy.”
How popular is it outside of those areas?
Corey said | January 25th 2010 @ 9:57am | Report comment
USA, which will be starting a professional comp in 2011. Jamaica, Russia, Ukraine.
Big Kev said | January 25th 2010 @ 10:08am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Big Kev said | January 25th 2010 @ 10:15am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Sam el Perro said | January 25th 2010 @ 10:08pm | Report comment
Kev: another factual error. There are rugby league teams in the US. You have been caught out in another falsehood, I’m afraid.
big Kev said | January 25th 2010 @ 10:13pm | Report comment
Yeah Perro – it’s called poetic license. Whoop de do 11 league teams in the USA v 500 or so Union teams and you guys get all excited and jump up and down.
League is a pimple on Union’s arse. Just saw the movie Invictus – let me know when League can have such a huge impact on the lives of so many people and we can talk.
Sam el Perro said | January 25th 2010 @ 10:39pm | Report comment
Kev, you seem to have a response for each time you make a false claim. Poetic licence is fine, but it probably requires some poetry to go with it. Your sentence “the USA for FFS there is not ONE RL team in the USA” does appear to meant quite literally.
If you think it will advance the cause of other rugby supporters on these forums to
(a) make false statements to back up whatever claim you are making, then
(b) claim that it was “poetic license [sic]”
then by all means do so, but I can’t imagine that other people here who are trying to have a constructive discussion (on both sides of the fence) will thing that you are adding much to The Roar.
How about you take a deep breath, regather and we can start the discussion over again without the need to make things up? Deal?
big Kev said | January 25th 2010 @ 10:44pm | Report comment
Perro, why do you post on a rugby forum? What are you contributing? You never respond to anything other that what you think is a slight on league.
Why did you not comment on the absurd post by Corey in response to a discussion about serious RL and RU competitions around the world?
“USA, which will be starting a professional comp in 2011. Jamaica, Russia, Ukraine.” laughable!
You probably gave him the +1!
What about the even more ridiculous notion that Touch is League? No comment from you on that? You have zero credibility. get off the Union forum.
Sam el Perro said | January 25th 2010 @ 11:00pm | Report comment
Kev, you appear upset that I have caught you out in serial falsehoods. That is understandable, and I won’t hold it against you. As for the notion that I am somehow a league “booster”, please find a single post that I have made that substantiates that claim. I won’t elevate this implication of yours to the status of outright lie, but it is certainly untrue. No surprises there.
As for what have I contributed to a rugby forum (and strangely enough I thought The Roar was “Your sports opinion”, not just “Sports Opinion You Agree With”) I would say that my comments have followed down two paths.
Firstly, correcting outright falsehoods. It is down this path that you and I have continued to cross swords. Secondly, for an example of other comments I have made, feel free to look at the thread discussing looking forward to the 2010 or 2011 seasons.
As for Corey’s comment that you wish me to take umbrage with, I am afraid I cannot. This is because:
- he did not say that there was a US professional league in place, merely that one was starting. I cannot contradict this because his statement is true: http://www.rugbyleague.com/rugby-league-news/974
- Jamaica – I cannot contradict that there is a competition in Jamaica because his statement was true: http://jamaicarugbyleague.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15&Itemid=21
- Ukraine – I cannot contradict that there is a competition in Ukraine because his statement was true: http://www.rugbyleague.org.ua/
As you can see, it is only you that are getting caught out telling lies. Enough. I have given you an opportunity to put this behind you and start again. You are only interested in abuse. Beyond pointing out what falsehoods you publish, there is no further point responding to you. I will leave it to others to give you the thumbs down.
Sam el Perro said | January 25th 2010 @ 11:04pm | Report comment
Kev, you appear upset that I have caught you out in serial falsehoods. That is understandable, and I won’t hold it against you. As for the notion that I am somehow a league “booster”, please find a single post that I have made that substantiates that claim. I won’t elevate this implication of yours to the status of outright lie, but it is certainly untrue. No surprises there.
As for what have I contributed to a rugby forum (and strangely enough I thought The Roar was “Your sports opinion”, not just “Sports Opinion You Agree With”) I would say that my comments have followed down two paths.
Firstly, correcting outright falsehoods. It is down this path that you and I have continued to cross swords. Secondly, for an example of other comments I have made, feel free to look at the thread discussing looking forward to the 2010 or 2011 seasons.
rugbyfuture said | January 25th 2010 @ 11:11pm | Report comment
Kev is right though perro, you do tend to swing further to the league side, but atleast you try and respond in mind and not only idiocy, i would like to imagine that you vote on things that deserve them rather than targeting factoids and accounts.
big Kev said | January 25th 2010 @ 11:17pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Sam el Perro said | January 25th 2010 @ 11:17pm | Report comment
I am probably just swinging a certain way because of some of the things that I am responding to. I just gets under my skin when untruths or vilification are posted. You will note that I am definitely not getting on the Lismore thread (which had some interesting match info, IMHO) and bagging people out about crowd sizes of anything else. And that’s the thing, the discussion is better when we are discussing the sport, whatever sport, in the real world, not just inventing rubbish to justify our convictions or vilifying followers of other sports to feel better about out choices. Hence the fact that I won’t be using the words “rah-rah” or “mungo”. I don’t think they add much to a debate, but they immediately set the person called one, or the other, on edge/
Imagine a thread about the potential for a great Super 14 season, or NRL season, that just had people discussing the sport without getting bogged down in mud slinging? Imagine!
Sam el Perro said | January 25th 2010 @ 11:22pm | Report comment
Kev, re: the administrators comment. I have addressed that several times. See the earlier comments. I believe you referred to them as “disingenuous bulls**t” so you probably don’t agree. So be it.
Re: League on a global scale. I don’t think that I have made any comments about League on a global scale (although I did respond to you in on this topic, but a few links meant the the response got lost in moderation). I certainly haven’t made any claims on this front. As for responding to comments that others have made, you and others have already done so, in some cases with some damning retorts. It would be a waste of bandwidth for me to chip in in those circumstances.
big Kev said | January 25th 2010 @ 11:30pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
big Kev said | January 23rd 2010 @ 10:38am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Dogs Of War said | January 23rd 2010 @ 11:12am | Report comment
Well Kev, move to england. Then you will have someone to talk to around the water cooler.
To be honest, I think everybody was starting to think you were a bit weird mumbling to yourself
Dave said | January 23rd 2010 @ 4:31pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Siva Samoa said | January 23rd 2010 @ 8:41pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Springs said | January 30th 2010 @ 8:15pm | Report comment
Sorry Siva I’ve been away for the past week.
Here they are:
Countries with pro comps:
England
Australia
Countries with pro teams/semi-pro comps:
France
Wales
New Zealand
Papua New Guinea
USA
Russia
Countries with amateur comps:
Catalonia (France/Spain)
Cook Islands
Czech Republic
Fiji
Germany
Greece
Ireland
Italy
Jamaica
Lebanon
Morocco
Netherlands
Samoa
Scotland
Serbia
Solomon Islands
South Africa
Tonga
Ukraine
UAE
Countries with 9s/7s comps:
Argentina
Denmark (Scandinavia 9s)
Malta
Norway (Scandinavia 9s)
Countries who have national teams/amateur clubs:
American Samoa
Austria
Belgium
Estonia
Hungary
Japan
Latvia
New Caledonia
Niue
Portugal
Sweden
Tokelau
Countries with ‘observer’ status in the RLIF:
Canada
Cuba
Georgia
Kazakhstan
Moldova
Pakistan
Panama
Spain
Saudi Arabia
Tuvalu
33 countries with some kind of national competition.
12 countries who have clubs playing in inter-country comps and play in international competitons.
10 countires who play Rugby League or have played Rugby League but do not or no longer have a national team or national competition.
hutch said | January 24th 2010 @ 12:30am | Report comment
once again, the rugby ‘union’ world cup is not the worlds 3rd biggest sporting event, and it does not attract anywhere near 1 billion tv viewers. the rugby types in the press (and these boards) like to throw these figures around, but the fact is that they are lies.
Dave said | January 24th 2010 @ 12:52am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
rugbyfuture said | January 24th 2010 @ 1:58am | Report comment
like the nrl being the biggest “rugby” competition in the world?
big Kev said | January 24th 2010 @ 12:47pm | Report comment
yes it is and you are right the TV audience was not 1bn, it was far higher than that – cumulative audience of 4bn actually
Corey said | January 25th 2010 @ 9:59am | Report comment
you’re kidding, 2/3 of the world watched the Union, albeit over 50% of the world do not own a tv, and I know most of them weren’t there at the game. So how do u get that figure?
Big Kev said | January 25th 2010 @ 10:12am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Dogs Of War said | January 26th 2010 @ 7:14am | Report comment
Big Kev, if 4 billion viewers is true, that means that each of the 42 matches had an average of 95,238,095. From what I understand, not even the final had that many viewers, so unless there are certain people rewatching the matches over and over (big kev?) while the IRB counts them, then the IRB is shown to be lying.
Dave said | January 26th 2010 @ 7:24am | Report comment
DOW. We all know what cumulative audience means ? How are the Warathas going in their pre-season games ?
Dogs Of War said | January 26th 2010 @ 7:44am | Report comment
I don’t have Foxtel Dave. So it’s only what I read in the Newspapers, though will go down to the pub to watch when the season kicks off. Heard they played some running rugby, which is a lot easier to watch.
Realist said | January 27th 2010 @ 2:47am | Report comment
“Go back to your own discussion pages”
Tell that to Siva.
Dave1 said | January 23rd 2010 @ 4:15pm | Report comment
“Im sure fans of basketball (mens and womens), ice-hockey, baseball and cricket will find that comment hilarious”
we do
rugbyfuture said | January 22nd 2010 @ 4:42pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Dogs Of War said | January 22nd 2010 @ 5:00pm | Report comment
So you want to be like Basketball? It’s made Basketball a real force in Australia, especially Sydney!
chris said | January 22nd 2010 @ 7:43pm | Report comment
Rugby Union in Australia seemed to have the peak years between 1996-2004 then ‘O’Neil got stabbed in the back for bringing the game into a profit and Union started to fall apart.
John’O'Neil is like a Muhammed Ali when he thought Leon Spinks.
Jim Wilson said | January 22nd 2010 @ 9:54pm | Report comment
Union was always going to come out of the blocks fast as soon as they became openly professional.
However, they couldn’t have their cake & eat it too. While they were supposedly amateur they could discriminate or institutions where they had some influence such as the armed services, educational institutions couldn’t sustain their discrimination against RL.
The best thing that has happen to RL is that union now is openly professional IMO.
Siva Samoa said | January 23rd 2010 @ 12:18am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
macavity said | January 23rd 2010 @ 10:08am | Report comment
You assume the wallabies and s15 teams WILL start winning again.
Rugby was much smaller in Oz than NZ and SA to begin with, and has only gotten proportionally smaller and more irrelevant….. and the teams have sunk as well.
The ARU is down to pretty much relying on the arrival of a Rugby messiah or 10, and is then relying on them to not chase cash overseas.
Without a stellar crop of young players coming through, they aren’t going anywhere. And the vast majority of suitable young talent is already playing one of the other football codes.
Siva Samoa said | January 23rd 2010 @ 2:46pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Dave said | January 23rd 2010 @ 5:05pm | Report comment
Your saying the Wallabies and any Super 15 Australian teams will never to well ever again ? Where can I find information ?
ilikelollies said | January 22nd 2010 @ 7:44pm | Report comment
looked through my post, didnt mention league genius (sic)
Basketball, 2nd most popular sport in the world easily. 3rd is way back
Ice Hockey, popular in Russia, Usa and Canada and northern Europe. Combined pop. of the first 3 countries alone, 700,000,000. A shitty suburb in Moscow has more people who follow Ice Hockey then the combined pop. of South Pacific, White South Africa, New Zealand and small areas of Australia.
baseball – All USA, central amercia, Japan, Korea, China. Again, populations of those countries dwarfs the countries we’re union has any resonance.
Your contention that the Union WC is the 3rd biggest sports event in the world is laughable, getting 1 billion viewers even more so. I dont know if roar will give me enough space to list the ones ahead in viewing audience and cache but heres a few.
Euro football championships
South American football championships
Basketball World titles
U-20 world youth cup
NFL Superbowl
African Nations Cup (you know, in the sport Africans actually support)
World Athletic titles
NBA Finals
keba said | January 26th 2010 @ 5:33am | Report comment
the sport africans actually support ahhhhh you make this black boy laugh….. nigeria, senegal, ghana and cmaeroon are not the whole of africa my friend.
Springs said | January 22nd 2010 @ 11:12pm | Report comment
Why is it that an article can only get comments if it attracts a code war? I don’t know what attracted League fans to this or why Union fans decided to deride League yet again to make themselves feel better.
On the concept rugbyfuture I think it would be a good thing if Super 15 or whatever can get on to free-to-air without clashing with League/AFL. Fans should be able to watch their chosen sport for free and is exactly why many League fans want the Storm to be on prime-time in Melbourne and other League games to be prime-time around the country. Why not?
Jim Wilson said | January 22nd 2010 @ 11:16pm | Report comment
Big Kev
The best ratings for the BC last year in the UK were about 106,000. It was all down hill from there.
Go to the BARB site.
http://www.barb.co.uk/report/weeklyTopProgrammesOverview/?report=weeklyterrestrial&requesttimeout=500
I don’t think any other of the BC games made it into the Top 20 Lists. Have a look they were played on the 18 July, 22 August &19 September. I can’t remember the Japan games date.
Feel free to give me details on other countries ratings. I can’t find any.
Siva Samoa said | January 23rd 2010 @ 12:23am | Report comment
what game are you on about and who are the bc ?
big Kev said | January 23rd 2010 @ 10:42am | Report comment
OK so that is in the UK, how about in NZ? South Africa? France? Argentina? USA? PI? Japan? Let me tell you now the total viewership for a Bledisloe is more than the SoO or RL grandfinal. Without a doubt.
Dogs Of War said | January 23rd 2010 @ 11:10am | Report comment
Well they are some grand claims. How about proving it? Because I have no doubt that most people in other countries are not interested in a contest between Australia and NZ. Well not enough that would make up the difference between what the NRL grand final rates, and the biggest International match Australia play.
Jim Wilson said | January 23rd 2010 @ 12:44pm | Report comment
Kev
The BC cup when it is televised world wide is restricted to Pay TV. Only 1% of the Japanese population has acess to Pay TV according to Eddie Jones.
One of those BC games last year rated 27,000 in the UK. You were given the BARB site which collects these numbers for the UK.
You can’t produce any evidence from a reliable source for the ratings from any other country. Until you do you should refrain making such claims.
BTW it would appear that each of the BCs rated world wide of not much more than a million or about a third of each of the SOOs & NRL GF. Or about the same as a run-of-mill Friday Night Football RL or AFL game.
Siva Samoa said | January 23rd 2010 @ 8:27pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Jim Wilson said | January 22nd 2010 @ 11:26pm | Report comment
Big Kev
Tells us about Romania>
Siva Samoa said | January 23rd 2010 @ 12:25am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Ian Noble said | January 23rd 2010 @ 9:32am | Report comment
Trying to take a dispassionate view on the relative merits of both rugby codes, if you were a TV executive who was looking to invest in either code over the next five years where would you put your money.
In Europe, the best international club cup competition is the Heineken Cup, the best annual International tournament is the 6Ns. The best league in France, is the top 14 and it is a toss up between GP and ESL in England. The problem with professional RL in England it is predominately a sport centred on the M62 and has struggled to expand elsewhere in England. Professional RU is strong in the south, west and midlands of England and although being weaker in the North has a greater national coverage. Both codes have grown in terms of participation in Europe, of which RU has attracted the greater number. In Wales, Scotland and Ireland there is no competition to RU’s Magners League.
In the SH, the 3Ns shortly to become 4Ns is the strongest international annual tournament, with the NRL probably being as strong as the Currie Cup in SA with ANZ cup and the Aussie equivalent following on behind.
It is difficult to compare like with like but if we were to look at say FTA in the UK, on the BBC the 6Ns attracts between 5/7M for each televised game whereas the RL Challenge Cup Final attracted 1.2M.
Is this conclusive, of course not both codes are guilty of hyping their sport and each set of committed fans will slag each other of, claiming their game is the greatest; as an basketball fan or NFL fan would say about their sport. The acid test is where would you put your money is see real growth over the next five years. Rugby regardless of either code is still a minority sport and battles hard to hold its own in Europe. However where RU gains over RL is that it’s competitions at club and region level are more international and as a spectator sport it is growing steadly. Internationally there is no comparison and with the introduction of rugby 7s into the Olympics RU is well ahead. RU also through it’s background of being closely linked to universities, the financial institutions and in general the higher echelon of business circles potentially has the greatest spending power. It is also an area where demographically there is the greatest potential of growth not only to attract sponsors and advertisers but also sell satelitte dishes, why quite simply the majority of RU fans in the UK are not followers of football and probably would not have a dish.
RL in Europe will still retain it’s core support but the signs are that it is going backward. Many of it’s stadia are outdated, The RLF recently have warned some clubs about their commitment when winning the franchise to build or upgrade their stadia, attendances have been dropping. Whilst it maintains it viewing figures primarily because if it’s switch to summer, it has not been able to grow in spite of the switch when it is the only kid on the block. Is cricket really competition to RL? 20/20 may be but what else?
There you have it the choice between a market that probably has reached maturity and a market where there is untapped potential. I think I know where I would put my money.
JW
As a matter of interest open your hyper link and look at the top 10 list and scroll down to Sky Sports 2 and you will see that the big game between Quins and Wasps at Twickenham on Sunday 27/12 attracted 203K viewers( 76K at the stadium). Reasonable figures bearing in mind it went head to head with football on ESPN. If you also look at previous weeks top 10 the HC games have been attracting circa 200k. The figures this weekend will be different as SKY are showing two games from the each group simultaneously as it is the final round of group games and presumably the viewing figures will be split between both games.
Jim Wilson said | January 23rd 2010 @ 1:16pm | Report comment
Ian
What sort of TV Ratings did this match attract:
“London Irish dropped more home points as Worcester recorded a third straight GUINNESS PREMIERSHIP draw in a scrappy affair at the Madejski Stadium Reading
Attendance 8,561
http://www.guinnesspremiership.com/rugby/12337.php
Dave said | January 23rd 2010 @ 5:02pm | Report comment
Why would you ask for TV ratings for that particilar match JW ?
Bay35Pablo said | January 23rd 2010 @ 6:55pm | Report comment
Nice one Jim. Ian gives one of the best posts on this thread, and you manage to try to ignore the 643 good points he raised.
What’s the median (not average) SL crowd attendance by comparison.
76K for Waps etc is huge, but a one off, as most GP crwods are much lower.
Ian Noble said | January 23rd 2010 @ 11:24pm | Report comment
JW
I don’t know if it was televised, but not surprised by the gate as Worcester have been struggling and as proven are not much of a draw. Today London Irish play Leinster at Twickenham in the Heineken Cup and the gate will be circa 40K. It will be televised and goes head to head not only with an FA Cup tie on FTA (ITV) but the other game in the group. It will be interesting to see. Unfortunately as far as I am aware there is no means of noting the number of viewers in Ireland, where I suspect the real volume will be. If anybody know of viewer research in Ireland …..?
Jim Wilson said | January 23rd 2010 @ 9:37am | Report comment
BC Bledisloe cup
Romania RU: How’s it going now?
Wasn’t to healthy a few years back.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/3014118/Rugby-sounds-rallying-call-to-save-nation-in-decline.html
…Listen first to Dumitru Mihalache, the opera-singing, Guinness-loving president of the Romanian Federation: “Romanian rugby is close to disappearing altogether, we are in complete crisis, who knows if we can survive and come through. The next two or three years will tell.
“Perhaps in five years’ time there will be no such thing as Romanian rugby, it will just be something you read about in books, a curiosity in our history. We need every bit of help that is available. Now is the time for rugby to show solidarity. We will not beg for money but please help us in other ways.”
From an all-time high of 110 clubs, there are now just 28 competitive senior teams in Romania. Including schools and colleges, there used to be more than 12,000 players. Now there are barely 4,000, a figure declining rapidly. The game in Romania is running out of coaches, referees, officials, supporters and hope. Following last month’s record 81-9 defeat to Wales at the Millennium Stadium, morale is at an all-time low.
The problem is not grinding poverty, though money isn’t exactly awash in a country where the average wage is less than £50 a month. The problem is capitalism, the free market and how to deal with it. As captain and No 8 Alin Petreache succintly put it: “When the rest of the rugby world was amateur, we were professional, now rugby is professional we are completely amateur. Help.”
Petreache is referring indirectly to the Ceausescu years, when all sport assumed massive importance for Romania, as is the norm in totalitarian regimes. Top players were directed to the Army (Steaua) and Civil Service (Dynamo) sides, they trained and played six days a week and enjoyed the best facilities and back-up…
Dave said | January 23rd 2010 @ 3:37pm | Report comment
First we had a article from 1996 that suppose to make rugby league second spectator sport in the UK behind soccer and now we have 2001 article about Romania rugby. Currently there are 326 Romanians rugby players playing at various levels of the French league system.
Romania now have nine national teams, across all age groups and sexes, whereas before we only had two. Theyalso have an academy too, the only one in eastern Europe
Im sure the NZ rugby league and French rugby league didn’t look to good in 2001.
And here is an item in the match programme written by Chris Thau, a poignant reminder of the events now 20 years old:
RUGBY HEROES (scanned with OCR _ I didn’t type it all!)
ROMANIAN rugby paid a heavy price for the freedom of the country. Radu Durbac, an Army officer and the assistant coach of the Steaua army club, was the most senior of the six departed heroes. He died during the early days of the fighting which followed the uprising, defending his club against the attacks of the Securitatea agents, attempting to capture an armoured unit behind the Steaua sports complex. He was machine gunned not far from the neat rugby ground used by the England rugby squad during their Bucharest tour last May. Florica Murariu fell in a hail of bullets at a roadblock. when the nervous recruit who stopped him lost his cool and opened fire. Rapid-Metro club lost three of its players, Petre Astafei, Florin Butiri and Bogdan Stan, while the fourth youngster Christian Toporan played for the youth team of the Energia club. Petre Astafei was the son of the former Romanian pole vault champion and record holder Petre Astafei and the brother of the current junior high jump world record holder Alin Astafei.His coach. Ioan Theodorescu described him as a particularly talented player, with a great future in the game. Astafei, was shot in the Palace Square on December 22, the day when the dictator was overthrown. Twenty year old Florin Butiri went with his girlfriend to Romanian Television, to defend the headquarters of the Revolution with their bodies. The gentle giant (16st. and 6ft.6ins.) was mowed down by machine gun fire in front of the TV Centre and died in hospital two days later.
Bogdan Stan was one of the youngest who, through their sacrifice, became the catalysts of the uprising. He fought on the barricades on the night of December 21, when the unarmed youth of Romania confronted the might of the repressive communlst system. Bogdan Stan and his comrades stood up to the Army and Securitatea crack units confronting the revolutionaries. When the Army eventually opened fire and the armoured vehicles ploughed into the crowd, Bogdan and his best friend fled, seeking refuge on the Batistei Street, between the Intercontinental Hotel and the American Embassy. They were followed by uniformed and plainclothes Securitatea agents who opened fire on the fleeing crowd at close range. Bogdan’s friend died in his arms. with a bullet in his neck and one in the head. Bogdan, tore off his friend’s bloodied shirt and escaped, managing to avoid the police roadblocks. He arrived home in the early hours of the morning. His mother Elena was shocked by his looks. ‘He was soaked to the skin from the water cannons used by the fire brigade in their early attempts to disperse the crowd. His eyes were red, swollen from the tear gas and his face and hands were blackened by smoke and ash. ‘He showed me the shirt of the youngster killed behind the Intercontinental Hotel. He had a shower, had something to eat and changed his clothes. He wore black, a black suit, a white shirt with a black tie, as a sign of mourning for his friend killed the night before. He also told me that he must go back, to join the Revolution. ‘I implored him not to go. I told him that he was our only hope and support, and without him we (myself and his sister Ramona) would be destitute. He looked straight into my eyes and said: “Mother, I must go, This is my train and I must catch it.” ‘He gave me his saving certificate saying that I could use it if needed. then he left for the TV Centre where they were making appeals to people to come to form a human chain around the building to defend it against attacks.’ Like his team-mate Florin Butiri. The young open side flanker never returned home. He was shot in front of the TV station. in which the National Salvation Front had taken refuge – and died during an operation two days later.
Several other rugby players were injured during the fighting, in both Bucharest and Sibiu the heaviest death and injury toll of any sport in Romania. ‘We must now do all the things they would have done. had they been alive. We must not disappoint our martyrs’ the new secretary of the Romanian Rugby Federation. Radu Demian said. Demian, a former world class No.8, is confronted with the momentous task of rebuilding Romanian rugby, confronted with enormous problems, from shortages of basic playing eqiupment, like boots, and balls, to the problem of playing fields. There are now less grounds in Romania than when I commenced playing some 25-30 years ago. A senior club like Dinamo Bucharest has banned the rugby team from using the playing fields inside the main Dinamo complex, arguing that the rugby players destroy the pitch of the footballers.
I visited the Tineretulai Comolex near the ‘Arc de Triumph’. where I stirted playingrugby many years ago. At the time, rugby players – the youngsters from the Central Schools club – were allowed to have an occasional shower in the nearby antiquated dressing rooms. Nowadays, the facilities are identical with those of 30 years ago. The only difference is that the rugby players are not now allowed to have a shower in the complex anymore. The Tineretulai Complex is the cradle of Romanian rugby. That is the place where the first rugby game took place on Romanian soil. In fact the Romanian Rugby Federation celebrated 75 Vears since that memorable date, three years ago. The Federation is trying to convince the new authorities to allow Rugby to take over its former property and develop the much needed National Rugby Centre. The Tineretulai (Youth) Complex should become the Twickenham of Romanian rugby, and the Charity Appeal launched by the RFU could help the Romanians towards fulfilling this dream The game at Twickenham was born during those emotional days in Bucharest last May. In spite of their desperate poverty, the Romanian rugby fraternity tried to make the English feel welcome. Very few of the guests realised that most of the friendly, warm people surrounding them were breaking the law when talking to the ‘foreigners’. Very few knew that we had special minders from Securitatea following us until we left the country. Very few understood that the Romanian Rugby Federation went almost bankrupt in an attempt to make us feel ‘at home’, But virtually everyone felt that there was something special in the way we were treated. During those strangely emotional days the lasting bond between the English and Romanians was born. And when a tearful Romanian approached Dudley Wood on December 23 in Northampton – a day after the overthrow of the tyrant – to ask him to’help the Romanian’, the reaction of the RFU secretary was: “we will do everything we can to help”. As it happened, the RFU Marketing guru Mike Coley was around and chipped in: “We can fill Twickenham if needed.” It was left to the eternally cheerful and hard working Bob Weighill to piece together the Four Home Unions jigsaw and with the kind support of FIRA and my friend Jacques Fouroux, today’s match became a reality. Thank you guys! Vá Multumim Drasi Prieteni.
http://www.fira-aer-rugby.com/forum2007/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3293
Ian Noble said | January 23rd 2010 @ 10:08am | Report comment
It is true that Romania rugby is not as strong as in previous years. As you suggested Ceausescu supported rugby and the national side and some of the club teams were very strong. Times have changed, there are number of Romanian players playing in the French leagues and two club sides in the Amlin Challenge Cup, which is the second tier Heineken Cup. However Romania is now the poor relation in Europe. It’s soccer teams are struggling as well and I am trying to think where on a sports field it is strong as it was during the iron curtain years. It is no different from a number of countries that have declined on the sports field since the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Hopefully, it will change as Russia as an example has a pity good 7s side and has taken part in the recent IRB 7s world series. It is also building up a head of steam on the 15s front as well. All these countries will find their level and rugby in Romania will survive particularly if some of their players in the French leagues return to coach etc.
big Kev said | January 23rd 2010 @ 10:48am | Report comment
Jim,
check this out
http://www.convictcreations.com/football/battlestats.html
its 2006 and Union has grown since then but you gotta love this one:
Rugby Union played in 129 countries players: 3,500,000
Rugby League played in 5 countries players: 450,000
Sam said | January 23rd 2010 @ 11:12am | Report comment
The league figure can’t be right. The same page says that 390,000 people play League in Australia alone. I know there aren’t that many in NZ (maybe ~20,000) but in the UK there must be more than 50,000 league players?
Jim Wilson said | January 23rd 2010 @ 1:01pm | Report comment
The figures are wishful thinking. That site convict creations RU information was put their by a union nutter Big Stu. It has zero creditability.
Here’s something from one of the NRL’s directors:
http://www.watoday.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/forgiving-fans-in-a-league-of-their-own-20091001-geit.html
…By majority I mean the 425,000 registered players, including a record 124,319 aged between six and 18….”
Bring in the Touch Numbers as RL 1908 has & you get more than a million:
http://www.rl1908.com/History/touch-football.htm
“…Touch football is recognised as the largest participation sport in New Zealand, with over 300,000 players.
In Australia, touch is played across the nation (not just NSW and Queensland) by more than 300,000, another 500,000 in school competitions.
Other forms of modified rugby league have also been taken up inclusing OzTag (over 400,000 participants), as well as more recent variant games of “Touch Rugby League” and “Kick It Touch”.
All of these games provide a means for people to enjoy and gain an appreciation of the game of rugby league, particularly the ball-passing and running skills.
There seems little doubt that participant and spectator interest in these modified social forms of rugby league will continue to grow.
Combined with the over 400,000 playing the full 13-man version of rugby league, the participant numbers playing the various forms of rugby league push well beyond the 1 million mark, dwarfing those of Australian rules and rugby union, and rivaling soccer (another code which is played in various modified forms).
Sam said | January 23rd 2010 @ 1:33pm | Report comment
I had quite a good look at the page and doesn’t seem too bias to me – regarding any code. Certainly I wouldn’t say it has zero credibility. If anything it takes the piss out of all the football codes, which I quite enjoyed. I was querying one figure, you don’t need to rattle off statistics. I’ll say one thing though, touch rugby should not be classed as rugby league – they are completely different sports. Certainly in NZ rugby league, union and touch are classed as completely separate and independent sports by the vast majority of people.
Jim Wilson said | January 23rd 2010 @ 4:29pm | Report comment
Sam
Really who cares what they do in NZ or how they clasify Touch Football.
Why shouldn’t Touch be classified as an abbreviated form of RL. Isn’t 7s a form of union?
How does Soccer classify Indoor Soccer with regard to their playing numbers.
Six touches & a play the ball invented by RL players & played on RL players for many decades. All they need is for the Touch association to be affiliated with the ARL.
Dave said | January 23rd 2010 @ 4:58pm | Report comment
7’s rugby is run by the IRB. Just as most soccer games are run by FIFA. Touch rugby is not rugby league and its not run by the International Rugby League Federation or the Australian Rugby League. Simple answer.
Sam said | January 23rd 2010 @ 5:56pm | Report comment
There are significant differences between touch rugby and rugby league. If the only difference between the sports was the number of players you would have a point. For example there is no kicking in touch rugby! It changes the sport completely! Just because there are six touches before a play of the ball means very little. It may have more in common with rugby league than rugby union, but that doesn’t mean that touch rugby is a form of rugby league!
Dave said | January 23rd 2010 @ 6:00pm | Report comment
We played
touch rugby ages ago it use to be ten touch and then hand over. Then it came down to eight and then down to six touch. The numbers of players on the field were also different every year until in 1990’s where they stick to what it is now. This has nothing to do with rugby league.
Ian Noble said | January 23rd 2010 @ 11:39pm | Report comment
The RFU organise beach rugby in the summer (all two weeks of sun) which attracts big crowds. This is all part of programme not only to get new people to the sport but persuade people who have left the sport to return. All sports in the UK suffer from a big fall out when players leave school or college. For junior rugby, tag rugby is the game with tournaments across the country and attracts some registered 400+K pre teen players both boys and girls.
Touch rugby allows both sexes to play and is popular in both codes. However one area which is growing very quickly in the UK is the ladies game. Sky have signed to televise England ladies RU internationals. The first televised international was England v NZ and attracted a reasonable viewing audience. It was the first ladies international I had seen and I was surprised by the high standard, the speed of the game and commitment by the players as were some of the male internationals looking on. Presumably a pre cursor to the Ladies RWC in England later this year.
Big Kev said | January 23rd 2010 @ 1:43pm | Report comment
Now I’ve heard it all – touch is league! Might as well count Leafue (and Aussie Rules and NFL) as part of union! NZ, SA, UK all play touch – it is certainly not league.
Dave said | January 23rd 2010 @ 3:42pm | Report comment
Anybody who thinks that any kind of touch rugby/football is rugby league or part of rugby league should have their head check. Touch rugby/football is an interpendent body control by their own national and international federation.
I was told by others that the 425,000 numbers in Australia were participation not registered players.
John Ryan said | January 23rd 2010 @ 4:34pm | Report comment
Well I was playing a version of touch here in WA in 1964when I was playing RL in Perth,as far as I know touch is a version of modified RL,but then Big Kev given your not noted for accuracy, I am starting to wonder if your just another version of Siva,or Turdy as he is known,along with his 1000 other alias,s on a lot of forums across all football codes.
Dave said | January 23rd 2010 @ 5:08pm | Report comment
I was playing touch rugby in NZ in 60’s as well and it wasn’t rugby league but a version a game that the Springboks and returing All Blacks brought with them to NZ in 50’s.
big Kev said | January 24th 2010 @ 7:31am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
rugbyfuture said | January 24th 2010 @ 12:53pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Big Kev said | January 23rd 2010 @ 1:49pm | Report comment
Question: besides the 3 game origin series, is there a single RL competition anywhere in the world with average crowd attendance over 15k?
Not NRL, ESL, WC, 4 nations… Anything?
Dogs Of War said | January 23rd 2010 @ 2:18pm | Report comment
The NRL averages over that. How about a Union domestic comp, which one averages over 15K?
Dave said | January 23rd 2010 @ 3:46pm | Report comment
Is the NRL a domestic Australian only competition ?
big Kev said | January 23rd 2010 @ 5:49pm | Report comment
There are 2 types of sports in this world – those with a “tribal” local following, typically sports that locals have grown up with and have a close affiliation with. These are often sports that are only popular in one particular region or country. Examples include NFL, NHL, AFL, Rugby League …
Then there are sports that have spread internationally, more representative sports, like cricket and rugby, which have little interest at a local or club level but major interest at representative international and state level.
The only sport to really transcend this is soccer, due it’s overall popularity.
Union has always had strong local competitions in a few countries like SA and NZ, but these were always based on state/regional representative teams rather than clubs.
League fits into the first category and overall Union is in the second – with some downward “creep” towards local competitions as representative teams have moved towards the “franchise” concept. European club rugby has always been small, as as club rugby in all countries.
The question was not about “domestic” comp but overall. When comparing crowds as part of a general discussion on popularity of sports you cannot ignore the fact that millions watch a sport at the highest level, spending big money on tickets, and as a result the “lower” levels of a sport draw lower crowds.
6 nations averages about 60,000 per game, tri-nations over 50k, past 2 World Cups well over 40k average, Currie Cup in it’s present form around 30k, Super 14 over 20k. Yes I know NRL has just snuck over the 15k mark recently but how can you compare based on those other figures?
Dogs Of War said | January 23rd 2010 @ 6:41pm | Report comment
C’mon, answer the question. It was quite simple, but you want to compare apples with oranges, because your apples are crap.
I will make it easier. Which comp gets the most bums on a seat in total in one season. And no you don’t get to lump them all into together.
big Kev said | January 24th 2010 @ 7:44am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Dogs Of War said | January 24th 2010 @ 8:47am | Report comment
So finally you admit the NRL is far stronger in Australia that Union is.
About time. Now remember that so we don’t have to go through the same code war dramas when you don’t like the fact that Australia Rugby is at a low, what happens Internationally is of little relevance to this discussion as I have pointed out to you before. If it did, soccer would be number one in every country.
Dave said | January 24th 2010 @ 9:35am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
big Kev said | January 24th 2010 @ 9:46am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
hutch said | January 24th 2010 @ 12:11am | Report comment
the nrl is the largest domestic “rugby” comp on earth! and rugby league is not just popular in one country. nobody here claims that league is as big as rugby union, but people like you somehow have a problem with the fact that rugby league is now played in more countries than ever and is growing around the world. why does this bother you so much?
allblackfan said | January 24th 2010 @ 12:25am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Dave said | January 24th 2010 @ 12:54am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Sam el Perro said | January 23rd 2010 @ 2:58pm | Report comment
Big Kev, you are giving the rugby community a bad name by making repeated claims that are demonstrably false. The NRL averages over 16000. Why fan the flames with yet another falsehood?
big Kev said | January 24th 2010 @ 6:35am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Sam el Perro said | January 24th 2010 @ 6:42am | Report comment
Demonstrably false means that which can be demonstrated to be false. The claim you mentioned was one. The claim that no league players had been signed since Tahu was another.
You have said “shoot me” for making a error at the keyboard, but the fact is you were asking a direct question, and then immediately answering it yourself, falsely for rhetorical effect.
big Kev said | January 24th 2010 @ 7:33am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
big Kev said | January 24th 2010 @ 7:34am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Sam el Perro said | January 24th 2010 @ 9:18am | Report comment
You said, in the thread “Rebels to further destroy Australian rugby”:
“really – please show me a single quote of a rugby administrator saying that they are going to sign a rugby league player since Tahu? Not gonna happen, waste of money.”
This statement says that no rugby administrator is going to announce, let alone sign, a rugby league player since it is a waste of money. “Not gonna happen” were your exact words. It did happen.
You’ve been caught out. Deal with it.
Norm said | January 24th 2010 @ 12:09pm | Report comment
We don’t call him dud Kev for nothing.
big Kev said | January 24th 2010 @ 12:19pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Sam el Perro said | January 24th 2010 @ 4:08pm | Report comment
Kev,as I noted above, but you appear not to have read, not only have they talked about signing players, they acrtually have done so. You said that this wouldn’t happen as it would be a “huge waste of money”. While this may be your opinion, it hasn’t been the opinion of, for example, the Reds.
You can continue to hijack this thread by ignoring my response. For some reason you seem hell bent on painting me as a “league fan”. Please look through EVERY POST I HAVE MADE on the Roar and show me what has given you that impression.
One focus I have had on this site is clearing up distortions, hence the fact that you have come to my attention. For some reason, if somebody doesn’t toe the ARU line you think they are a “league fan” and unable to participate on a thread.
While I have called some of your statements falsehoods, because they are (and I have indicated where so) I have not resorted to personal insults (“disgrace”). Maybe you could reflect on your manners…
big Kev said | January 24th 2010 @ 4:33pm | Report comment
Perro, that is just disigenious bullshit and you know it. I was very clearly talking about, as indicated by my words, the fact that rugby administrators had previously used the signing of league players as a PR exercise – hence the quote “please show me a single quote of a rugby administrator saying that they are going to sign a rugby league player since Tahu” – the fact that league players have been signed since Tahu is neither here nor there. My view is that it’s a waste of money and you wont see it happen. Yes a few league players have been signed since the Tahu failure followed the Rogers & Sailor disasters but they fit within the clearly enunciated strategy of signing former Union players and younger or lower profile league players not on inflated terms and only those who really want to cross codes.
Let me take a little bet that Jonathan Thurston will not be signing with an Australian Union side as per the above.
Sam el Perro said | January 24th 2010 @ 8:47pm | Report comment
Manu Vatuvei.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/sport/rugby-league/3257102/Manu-Vatuvei-eyed-for-Melbourne-S14-switch
Norm said | January 25th 2010 @ 9:36pm | Report comment
Rebels now linked with Mark Gasnier as well as Manu Vatuvei.
big Kev said | January 25th 2010 @ 10:16pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Norm said | January 26th 2010 @ 9:18am | Report comment
Dud Kev I think this quote perfectly sums you up: “His genius lay not so much in his ability to conceal his thought as in the absence of any serious thought to reveal.”
Norm said | February 7th 2010 @ 9:22pm | Report comment
dud Kev you might be interested in this story.
http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,26685778-5002381,00.html
rugbyfuture said | February 7th 2010 @ 10:09pm | Report comment
I’m going to be as clever as norm here and try and make his name sound stupid.
so “Low Form” (woah clever)
you’re quoting american republicans now? you realise these are the same people who send their kids to (shock horror) private schools? and universities in the US who play Rugby?, this must mean all league people are from a niche market of private schools! and are also supporters of the republican party
rugbyfuture said | February 7th 2010 @ 10:17pm | Report comment
and just to add that the fact that top form athletes switch from league to union doesn’t mean much, its a proffesional world and many rugby players would switch if league were the bigger player. The fact that whole clubs at a time switched to league from rugby could also be brought up, to argue for the rugby codes, but this is of no consequence. and even though many leagueys don’t believe it, yes the NRL scouts constantly pursue schoolboy rugby players, you can look it up yourself.
Dave said | January 23rd 2010 @ 3:03pm | Report comment
How many rugby league competitions are there outside of the NRL and Superleague ?
Dave said | January 23rd 2010 @ 4:55pm | Report comment
Why are there all this +2 +6 and -1 -8 on every post ? And why is most post by rugby league fans are all + and most by rugby union fans all minus ? Is it a voting system where your mates vote to delete your post or not ?
hutch said | January 24th 2010 @ 11:59am | Report comment
because the rugby union fans on this site talk absolute rubbish sometimes, and the people are voting!
Dave1 said | January 24th 2010 @ 12:02pm | Report comment
maybe because more people like league than union
Jim Wilson said | January 23rd 2010 @ 5:00pm | Report comment
The WC average was over 15K surely?
big Kev said | January 24th 2010 @ 7:17am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Working Class Rugger said | January 24th 2010 @ 11:53am | Report comment
Big Kev
The important word there is “cumulative”. The fact that only 33 million watched the Final is often thrown up to disprove Rugby position. But you have hit the nail on the head. Last I checked the Football WC drew audiemce into the 10 of billions. How does it do that. Cumulative audience. That’s how they tally the number’s for all major sporting events not for how many watch a single match.
Jannerboyuk said | January 26th 2010 @ 2:51am | Report comment
WCR i posted the links elsewhere but FIFA have been forced to stop spinning silly numbers that they have no evidence for and the 4 billion quoted so often for the RUWC, with never a single scrap of evidence, is even in the IRB press release that i also linked is ‘reach’ which they then in the same press reease allow to become cumulative. Right now the IRB and unionistas everywhere are making a claim for a figure which is over four times bigger then FIFA claim for the world cup! Lets be clear 4 billion cumulative would be 83 million for each of the 48 pool games staged in, which is in itself over 2 and half times the verified figure for the final. Can you start to see the proble with these numbers?
I ask again why the need for the overstating when the RUWC is already an unmitigated success, generating millions for the sport and clearly getting bigger (although the New Zealand world cup may be a mistake at last in terms of pure profit, i dont doubt that the Japan WC will be a fantastic success. Im sorry but the hyperbole puzzles me in that context.
Working Class Rugger said | January 26th 2010 @ 1:12pm | Report comment
Janner
The thing is these cumulative figures are compiled by the broadcasters and then passed on to the respective Federation i.e. IRB and FIFA. They actually have quite alot of importance in this respect. Broadcasters and sponsors use these to determine whether or not to ‘invest’ in the event. Although FIFA may have stopped advertising them I can guarantee those who ‘invest’ on their events sure haven’t. The IRB simply passes on the information. It’s all about reach.
Working Class Rugger said | January 26th 2010 @ 1:20pm | Report comment
Janner
I personally think NZ will be a success on and off for international Rugby. The IRB recieves a hosting fee plus a significant portions of the TV,sponsorship, ticketing and merchandising. So they make a decent profit. Most likely around the same as 03. 07 if they’re lucky. Everyone focuses on the loss that will be made assuming Rugby and both the IRB and NZRU will be the ones suffering. The NZRU will likely at best break even the greatest loss will be felt by the NZ Govt who are the one investing quite heavily to host the event aswell as develop the necessary infrastructure to do so.
The 2015 RWC in England will set a new record for the tournaments success financially. Its projected that the IRB will make a little over $1 billion AU for that particular event. The 2019 event in Japan will hopefully be a success for the game, not necessarily financial althoug it will likely prove anither good earner.
Jannerboyuk said | January 26th 2010 @ 2:59am | Report comment
So how exactly does the cumulative total of 4 billion (divided by 48 games=83million each game) fit into a verified total of 33 million for the final? I mean exactly how. Im fascinated to know that.
By the posted elsewhere that FIFA have been forced to stop lying about the verifiable audience for the fotball world cup but ive never seen them claim 10 billion. Do you have a source or was that a typo?
Ian Noble said | January 26th 2010 @ 3:54am | Report comment
There is no doubt in my mind that the RWC is a major international tournament and following on from OZ and France has it’s own momemtum. The size of the beast is such that there are serious question marks as to whether NZ will be able to manage. The TV reach is enormous with potential audiences to match, and in the UK it will be on FTA. If I recall the final of RWC2007 the viewing audience in the UK was 13M.
I treat all potential viewing figures with a big pinch of salt, all professional sports have to sell their product and there is inevitable hype. Frankly I don’t believe the IRB need to overstat the product as it speaks for itself and the inclusion of 7s in the Olympics makes the sales pitch pretty simple. It will never compete with FIFA WC but it is growing and although I anticipate because of structural difficulties in NZ, numbers will reduce, By the time England in 2015 and Japan in 2019 it will be on an upward cycle. Unfortunately because of size and the accompanying infrastructure required it will only be able to be hosted by countries which probably have had the Olympics. But outside the present top tier nations it opens the likes of Canada, US, Russia, Spain and Korea as potential venues..
Working Class Rugger said | January 26th 2010 @ 1:27pm | Report comment
Ian
Russia could definitely be a future venue. They are currently bidding for the 2013 7s WC and should make the up coming event judging by their form. So by 2023 interst could definitely be there.
big Kev said | January 26th 2010 @ 7:11am | Report comment
Jannerrboyuk,
you are absolutely correct, that number is “potential global reach” which is very different from cumulative audience. I am not exactly sure but would imagine “reach” to mean the total number of subscribers/viewers each of the signed up broadcasters have. Agree?
But of course if 1% of those people (43 million) watched 28 games, then the cumulative audience would be 1.2 bn? Is my logic correct?
Can anyone shed any light on this?
the other thing is that the total audience includes those who watched packaged highlights and not just live coverage right? Or are we talking live audience?
Working Class Rugger said | January 26th 2010 @ 1:23pm | Report comment
Janner
I’m not privy to how they calculate the figures. But as I have stated its the broadcasters that do the sums. I suspect alot of also has to do with delayed coverage. And again that important word ‘reach’.
Big Kev said | January 23rd 2010 @ 5:23pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
nick said | January 23rd 2010 @ 6:17pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
hutch said | January 24th 2010 @ 12:01pm | Report comment
that gave me a good laugh, rugby union fans blowing up over the lack of line breaks. there hasnt been a line break in international union since 1983!
Nick said | January 24th 2010 @ 6:35pm | Report comment
Hutch thats just um… silly me thinks you have rugby confused with league
Realist said | January 27th 2010 @ 1:06am | Report comment
nick,
The reason you didn’t see a linebreak during the 50 minute period of the one origin game you cited — nice way to use selective information to support your anti-league agenda — is because State of Origin’s emphasis on toughness, endurance and defence can lead to an occasion or two where the teams cannot afford to play an expansive game for 50 or so minutes. But to use the aforementioned anomaly — no matter how you try to paint it, the fact remains it’s rare for a game of rugby league to not include a line break within a 50 minute time-frame — shows you need to clutch at straws in order to find a ‘fault’ with rugby league.
There’s more ball-movement in rugby league. Why? Because its 10-metre rule and play-the-ball system gives its ballplayers and ballrunners the time and space required to implement advanced attacking plays. The result is the backline plays in rugby league usually involve a greater degree of ball-running and ball-playing skills. The reason rugby league’s backs are able to jump to union and make their opponents look stupid is because rugby union’s emphasis on the breakdown and set-piece play does not give its backs enough time and space to develop their skills.
Realist said | January 27th 2010 @ 1:19am | Report comment
I didn’t express my comment about set-piece play very well. What I meant is the only times the backlines of rugby union teams have enough time and space to do anything with the ball is on set-piece plays — or the few times when there are about 5 backs on 1 — which is not the same as having enough time and space on every play. The set-piece plays in rugby union are usually performed in a robotic manner as they’re planned out well before the match begins. Rugby league’s backline plays involve more skill and improvisation as the players have to think on the spot and alter their play to fit the situation.
Nick said | January 30th 2010 @ 6:29pm | Report comment
is because State of Origin’s emphasis on toughness, endurance and defence can lead to an occasion or two where the teams cannot afford to play an expansive game for 50 or so minutes. – like rugby internationals.
no matter how you try to paint it, the fact remains it’s rare for a game of rugby league to not include a line break within a 50 minute time-frame. – the state of origin i watched had close to nothing in line breaks, same to the goald caost titans vs parramatta eels i saw live.
the reason rugby league’s backs are able to jump to union and make their opponents look stupid. – please name me one league player that has made it in rugby and made his opposition look stupid??? seem to remember a certain timana tahu made to look like and idiot agianst the boks, app he was a state of origin player.
rugby union back line players need a lot more skill to play the game of rugby, they need to pass well, kick well, defend well (not this straight line league kak) complicated defence
Dave1 said | January 27th 2010 @ 10:15am | Report comment
“i tried showing a couple of mates state of origin 2009″
some of my mates walked into the pub when the currie cup was on and said “whatws that rubbish”
Realist said | January 27th 2010 @ 8:39pm | Report comment
I cannot watch a game of rugby union without falling asleep.
Nick said | January 30th 2010 @ 6:32pm | Report comment
The fact the currie cup is shown in aus says it all… we have 9 diff sport channels and no NRL or state of origin
Dogs Of War said | January 30th 2010 @ 6:46pm | Report comment
Well it’s SA’s loss really. How does the Currie Cup rate in Australia Nick?
Nick said | January 30th 2010 @ 8:11pm | Report comment
DOW you have no point to argue, the fact that the currie cup is shown in your country says it all. Im not sure about the ratings but i no for a fact that they are better than the NRL ratings in SA (Non-exsistant)
SA’s loss, i can assure you we are not missing anything
Dogs Of War said | January 30th 2010 @ 8:28pm | Report comment
The point is that if they rate virtually nothing in this country, then they may as well not be on.
How can you speak for your whole country when you say “we” are not missing anything? I know plenty of South African’s who enjoy League. Just cause you don’t doesn’t mean a thing really.
Siva Samoa said | January 23rd 2010 @ 6:47pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
mjg said | January 23rd 2010 @ 6:51pm | Report comment
Forget code wars, rugby union has a huge latent following that’s slipped recently in terms of attendances and TV ratings while Australian teams perform badly.
Expect this to bounce back quickly when the Wallabies improve and if Australian teams do better in the Super 14/15. The Victorian team will give a massive lift to the sport in 2011 and boost TV ratings with the increased number of derbies.
Olympic profile offers medium-term benefits.
Jim Wilson said | January 23rd 2010 @ 10:58pm | Report comment
MJB
I disagree. Any RU fan in Melbourne would already be a Pay Tv subscriber.
Regarding the talent available I wouldn’t be so optimistic. The Captain & Vice Captain of Wallabies recent NH tour both left the NRL as reserve graders. Ryan Cross & Wycliffe Paula weren’t playing first grade either.
Dave said | January 24th 2010 @ 12:16am | Report comment
Rocky Elsom and Berrick Barnes both left the NRL before they turned 21. Ryan Cross didn’t play first grade ? Do you even know your own code JW ?
jim said | January 24th 2010 @ 6:33am | Report comment
Ryan Cross didn’t play first grade? he played 143 games for the roosters and two games for City. good effort Dave.
Dave said | January 24th 2010 @ 9:26am | Report comment
Playing mind games is your thing is it ? Ryan Cross played rugby league where millions of born and bread rugby league players in Australia fail to achieve. Majority of rugby league players in Australia never had the chance to play NRL let alone city or country reps.
Jim Wilson said | January 24th 2010 @ 10:42am | Report comment
Cross was a regular first grader at the Roosters. But in his final year he couldn’t make the first grade.
It might have had something to do with injuries.
Elsom couldn’t make first grade at Canterbury & Cronulla.
Barnes only played a handful of first grade at the Broncos. He was a fixture in their feeder club in the Queensland Cup competition. Bennett preferred Seymour at half & Lockyer at 5/8.
This may be part of the reason the more discerning are turning away from union. People just don’t want to watch second raters.
Robbo said | January 24th 2010 @ 10:51am | Report comment
Cross was an integral part of the Roosters team when he was there. When fit (or not suspended) he was in the starting team without a doubt. Ricky Stuart said that Cross’s 5 game suspension in 05 was a key reason the Roosters missed out on finals footy that year. Futhermore Cross was a City origin rep.
I like League more than Union but if you are just going to make up history I will call your bluff.
Dave said | January 24th 2010 @ 2:13pm | Report comment
If it makes you feel better posting that then that your thing JW. But there are two side to each story and Im happy those guys are playing rugby union and for the Wallabies. I really don’t care if they were washing Wayne Bennetts boots or warming some bench. I know thousands and thousands of rugby league players in Brisbane who would die to play or wish they played jessy flegg or sitting on the bench for the Broncos , St George or just play one game of NRL like Rocky Elsom, Berrick Barnes and Ryan Cross in rugby league.
big Kev said | January 24th 2010 @ 7:24am | Report comment
and what is your point, even if inaccurate? They are different sports dude. Plenty League first graders didn’t make it in Union; Carne, Ryan, Tahu, Harris, McGoldrick plus dont forget League has “poached” far more Union juniors than vice versa over the years with many of the greats of your game coming out of Union
Jim Wilson said | January 24th 2010 @ 10:47am | Report comment
Carne played a season for the Reds when he was well past his prime. Ryan played in a Super 12 premiership winning team & Tahu played union for Autralia.
Is the Harris you mention Iestyn Harris who played about 20 games for Wales RU?
big Kev said | January 24th 2010 @ 11:28am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
hutch said | January 24th 2010 @ 12:13pm | Report comment
sam harris was a fringe first grader in rugby league and a state rugby union player. miton thaiday was signed from bush rugby league straight to the waratahs, park footy to the state team in union! sailor played over 30 tests for the wallabies, and most definately not useless, it doesnt say much about the players he beat into the team if he indeed was useless. paul was solid at 15 a side and one of the best 7’s union players in the world. farrell was a prop in rugby league with two dodgy knees, yet started test matches for england rugby union at fly half and inside centre! tahu was the waratahs players player in his last 3 games and got the best back for the year. any more examples of failures?
oh and by the way, wally lewis and ricky stuart were rugby league juniors who went to high school that only played union, they are not union converts. russell fairfax played primarily rugby league throughout his youth too, hardly a convert.
Dave said | January 24th 2010 @ 2:01pm | Report comment
hutch, they were all failure. if the aru and the rfu didn’t paid their wages they wouldn’t have made it . That was money wsted . The only league guys who made it and played well is Jason Robinson, Andrew Walker and Brad Thorn.
Sam el Perro said | January 24th 2010 @ 6:46am | Report comment
You make a good point: winning will attract crowds, and dissipate criticism.
Bay35Pablo said | January 23rd 2010 @ 7:29pm | Report comment
Nice to see the league side stacking the thumbs up and down on this thread.
At times on who it was rather than what said.
Playing the man not the ball?
Dogs Of War said | January 23rd 2010 @ 7:35pm | Report comment
Do you really think big kev and siva with the outrageous claims they post deserve anything but being voted down?
Bay35Pablo said | January 23rd 2010 @ 7:41pm | Report comment
No more or less than some of the pro-league comments do.
Besides, you miss my point. Some of the comments voted down were innocuous, whereas some clangers remain untouched.
Dogs Of War said | January 23rd 2010 @ 7:44pm | Report comment
I totally get your point. I can’t comment on what other vote down, and the option is available to all. Maybe if they stuck to the topic, and stopped posting misinformation, their posts wouldn’t get voted down.
rugbyfuture said | January 23rd 2010 @ 7:57pm | Report comment
including some legitimate posts from the original author, although im regularly targeted these days, this post will probs get voted into obscurity
Dogs Of War said | January 23rd 2010 @ 8:00pm | Report comment
When you start a post with this paragraph “unfortunately for all you leagueys and aussie rules blokes who somehow staggered onto this article even though you complain about the efforts of myself and other ruggers going onto yours, this may be a bit too complex for you to understand so i will try and straighten it out for you.”
What do you expect? A thumbs up?
To be honest, the article is one of the stupidest ones I have read on this site. Low viewing numbers will only push the price of the product down. Now that may mean it can be used as a filler on free to air, but I can’t see it gaining any prime time positions.
rugbyfuture said | January 23rd 2010 @ 8:27pm | Report comment
yes but the statement is true nonetheless that most of us have stopped commenting on the league articles whilst your boys still troll the forums for ways to aggravate us.
it is still a viable way for rugby to get there, i never said prime time, the only chance there would be for it to get onto free to air in non primetime and then try and grow in that spot until it reaches popularity levels to push it into primetime., i understand that you state that u do enjoy rugby Dow, but when macavity, lt80 and foxy loxy start to comment, they’re contradicting themselves by coming onto this forum and laughing at the mere sight of hope that ruggers have. this article may be stupid to alot of people, but it seems like a perfectly viable pathway, for the long term, rather than the short, which is what we should always be looking for in rugby, as you are with your independant commission.
Sam el Perro said | January 23rd 2010 @ 8:31pm | Report comment
Don’t blame the system just because it isn’t vindicating you, if that’s what you feel. I have been voting down only comments with false claims, and you will notice that I have been rebutting there where possible as well. I have not, however, been using this as an excuse to say that the other side is better. Therefore it is wrong to claim it is partisan.
Sam el Perro said | January 23rd 2010 @ 8:32pm | Report comment
Who are “your boys”? I don’t consider myself anyone’s boys, if it is all the same. Does every comment have to be viewed through the prism of a code war? How tiresome.
rugbyfuture said | January 23rd 2010 @ 8:46pm | Report comment
SeP i agree that you have been quite good when it comes to the discussion here, i didn’t point you out at all. they’re there in the last comment
big Kev said | January 24th 2010 @ 7:25am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Siva Samoa said | January 23rd 2010 @ 8:50pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Jim Wilson said | January 23rd 2010 @ 10:30pm | Report comment
Big Al
Tell me this. How has the Currie Cup been restructured so that its average crowds are now 30,000.
Wasn’t the average something like 10,000 or so?
Here are the FTA TV OzTam Ratings (mainland Capitals) for the Wallaby’s for the 2009 season.
(In 000s)
Barbarians 424
Italy (Canberra) 372
Italy (Melb) 321
France 401
Total 1,518
Tri Nations
RSA 86
RSA 81
RSA 352
RSA 462
Total 981
NZ 191
NZ 521
NZ 289
NZ 448
Total 1,749
The Pay TV Rating for the Wallaby games was about a million or so. Also the OzTam figures don’t include regional figures which would be at least another million (guess).
Also I think there might be another half-million or so for the November NH games.
These figures are taken from this site:
http://www.talkingfooty.com/tv_ratings_2009.php
It’s an AFL site. Beware about their comments as they conveniently leave out the Regional Ratings,
kingplaymaker said | January 24th 2010 @ 10:23am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
westy said | January 26th 2010 @ 6:34pm | Report comment
Is Siva Samoa Big Kev? ..and Siva it is you who have made unfounded claims in the past as to alleged phantom posters…You called me Rusty from some League unlimited and at least two other alleged posters when I have only ever used Westy and have not ever posted on League unlimited although you told me to go there.
I respect the way you unflinchingly defend rugby union . However you must give people a little more leeway in Australia. Rugby union history here is not the same as NZ or South Africa. The reality is that we went from a close one or two in 1900 to number four .
We are contrary to the doomsdayers moving up but I for one believe it is imperative to maintain a realistic assessment of where we stand. Our juniors grow overall especially in some areas but falter in others. Having ARU publications that seem to indicate our participants have been increasing by 20000 per year from 1996 without wothwhile assessment of the pattern of actual registered junior playing numbers deserves criticism.
It for example masks the health of rugby in Gordon Dural Noth West Rooty Hill Penrith and Beecroft but its declining junior player numbers in Eastwood / Epping / Carlingford/Dundas and its virtual non existence in Five dock Stathfield Burwood Concord and Rhodes
On a rugby union site you are allowed to open a few wounds to develop the game in Australia. It is in a slightly different mindset here.
I would not bother to post critical rugby comments on a league site. It would achieve nothing.
JON himself in his first period of CEO was the victim of a group in Australian rugby who let us say do not have their mindset around the concept of an expanding the game.
I get some Parramatta rugby teams referred to as Mungoes in Australia and they ain.t referring to rugby league players. In Logan Samoans and Australian indigenous are not on the best of terms. Australian rugby operates in a completely different environment to NZ and South Africa.
At the core is that rugby union in Australia has never been or presented itself as the peoples game as it is in NZ and SA.
Much of what you say may be correct for NZ and SA not here yet.
Touch football as we undestand it here was primarily rugby league derived. .
Limited touch sets were intoduced in touch football in Australia as experimental forerunners to the four tackle rule at laest a decade before the four tackle rule in rugby league. .
I agree with you that NZ and SA rugby would have had their own dominant local versions of touch..
Any touch football that operates with six touches is intricatelly linked with rugby league derived form of touch.
The future will be how we can make rugby a game for a wider audience in Australia and what is the best vehicles for doing so.
Some for instance in the AFL exactly “prefer ” rugby union because in Australia its only strengtht is the international dimension and on past form incompetent in producing an effective domestic competition to compete with it.
This is Australia . Rugby has survived now it has to get on with it.
rugbyfuture said | January 27th 2010 @ 2:29am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Sam el Perro said | January 27th 2010 @ 9:40pm | Report comment
Given that rugby is a global sport (played in how many countries?) doesn’t it stand to reason that it is embraced by ALL ethnicities?
rugbyfuture said | January 27th 2010 @ 9:48pm | Report comment
but alas as with many sports, the traditional local sport of the area is in decline because of a high emphasis on academics, not because of a growth in other sports. there are other reasons as well, the immigrant status of most people moving in means that there is a higher number of older people, as with most of australia, meaning a smaller market of juniors and those that move in again, have less emphasis on sport and recreation and higher emphasis on building education or skills. I’m part chinese myself, but many chinese, japanese and koreans who move in have little to no interest in participating or allowing their children to participate in sport.
rugbyfuture said | January 27th 2010 @ 9:49pm | Report comment
so in short its mainly because in all sports theres a decline, even St andrews AFC and other codes of football
Sam el Perro said | January 27th 2010 @ 10:48pm | Report comment
Not disagreeing with you on the specifics of the area, just pointing out that on one hand we claim how global rugby is, and on the other cite “ethnics” (whatever that might be) as a reason for declining player numbers. Surely you can see the paradoxical nature of those arguments?
rugbyfuture said | January 27th 2010 @ 11:12pm | Report comment
but the usual argument is the look at declining number in relation to other sports. most of the junior numbers which were once prevalient in this area have moved into the hills, kuringai or north shore/northern beaches area. so in relation to what these statements are refferring to its not paradoxical at all. the fact is that rugby league would decline equally if it was the prevalient code in such an area, as with any and every sport other than debating or chess. contrary to your bias opinion on this (and that has been proven) the decline is a temporary one based on the movements and emphasis of the people who can afford to move out of their home nation and into australia, in particular, first wave academic migrants such as can be seen in the northern districts of sydney.
what can be said here is that there is emphasis on rugby here because it was one of the stronger sports in this area, where the decline in playing numbers refers to all sports. so this isn’t a rugby argument specifically, but one of all codes and sports hovered over because of rugby’s strength here.
Realist said | January 27th 2010 @ 12:12am | Report comment
“It is believed the ARU was keen to include a free-to-air television operator in the latest rights deal to increase the sport’s audience, as subscription television penetration sits at about 33 per cent of households.
This is considered highly unlikely because industry sources said the most likely bidder, Ten, was out of the running.
However, Ten does have the ability to negotiate to broadcast a small number of games once the rights deal is finalised.”, James Chessell, TV upstarts drive up costs of sports programming, The Australian.
westy said | January 27th 2010 @ 12:23am | Report comment
realist I notice that Ten’s HD sports channel shows the German Bundesleague premier soccer as its replay costs are not prohibitive. has the ARU thought of or tried to encourage the channel to show the Guinness rugby competition/ Six nations etc if the costs of showing super matches are prohibitive. Any telecasting of quality rugby on free to air is a step in the right direction. SBS has made its content from replaying cheap versions of premier world soccer.
ABC has made a good start with club rugby the danger is that its quality may falter over the next few years.
Realist said | January 27th 2010 @ 11:02pm | Report comment
I think Sentanta own the rights to the Northern Hemisphere rugby union competitions.
Crashy said | January 27th 2010 @ 8:30pm | Report comment
I actually have a friend who works for Channell 10 who suggested that they wanted and bid for the S14 – S15 but were d!cked around by the ARU – so much so that they are reconsidering covering the Spring tour!
Jeez they can make enemies our ARU chums…
Realist said | January 27th 2010 @ 8:40pm | Report comment
No wonder the ARU is going backwards!
Travis said | January 27th 2010 @ 9:32pm | Report comment
There should be a free to air highlights show for 60 minutes each Sunday just for the Australian Super teams.
John Ryan said | January 27th 2010 @ 10:42pm | Report comment
Are you or the ARU going to pay the station to show it,if RU was as wildly popular as people on here believe it would be on FTA now,trouble is though you may not like it, it’s not.
It gets along till the main codes start then drops into obscurity,In SA and NZ they may all do handstands over super 14 15 or 16 but in Australia most don’t care.
circus said | January 28th 2010 @ 12:58am | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Realist said | January 28th 2010 @ 9:26pm | Report comment
“How come the average Super 14 rugby attendance in Australia last year was over 19,000 against 15,000 for the NRL and every league fan in Australia is crowing that rugby is dying?”
There are four reasons behind the Super 14 matches in Australia drawing a higher attendance on average.
1. The Super 14 season is quite short, whereas the NRL season is very long. This has a huge impact because very few fans attend every home game of their favourite team. Most fans probably attend 1 to 4 matches per year. The larger spread of NRL games means the average attendance for NRL matches are diluted.
2. The NSW Warratahs are the sole Super 14 team in Sydney. There are 9 or so Sydney-based clubs in the greater Sydney area. Comparing the average crowd for Sydney’s 9 teams with the Warratahs will offer a distorted result, for obvious reasons. A fair comparison can be made beween the Reds and the Broncos because they are the only Super 14 and NRL clubs, respectively, in the greater Brisbane area.
3. Super 14 isn’t televised on terrestrial television. This means the Super 14 fans who don’t have pay television must attend the games or watch them from a club. Many NRL fans can bypass the option of attending the games because they can watch them on terrestrial television.
4. The other thing we need to take into consideration is the possibility the ARU, QRU, NSWRU, WARU and ACTRU hand out free tickets to so they can fill their stadiums. I’ve heard a lot of people say their employers hand out free tickets to the Super 14 and Wallabies’ Tests because the companies they work for are affiliated with the aforementioned unions. If this is true then it’s example of the old boy’s network in rugby union banding together so they can make themselves look stronger than they are. I suppose Siva will not come in and say this doesn’t happen…….
The reason I say rugby union is dying is because its television ratings, average attendances and playing numbers are on the decline. The ARU’s holy grail, the Bledisloe Cup, has failed to outrate the last two ANZAC Test matches between Australia and New Zealand. The Under-20’s NYC on Fox Sports outrates the Super 14. The majority of persons who play rugby union in Australia are migrants from other English speaking nations.
Realist said | January 28th 2010 @ 9:57pm | Report comment
I forgot to mention the ARU’s dependance upon the South Africans and New Zealanders migrants living in Australia. If they weren’t here then the Reds, Force, Warratahs and Wallabies would struggle to draw large crowds.
Realist said | January 28th 2010 @ 9:57pm | Report comment
I forgot to mention the ARU’s dependance upon the South African and New Zealand migrants living in Australia. If they weren’t here then the Reds, Force, Warratahs and Wallabies would struggle to draw large crowds.
Justin said | January 28th 2010 @ 10:07pm | Report comment
Rubbish
rugbyfuture said | January 28th 2010 @ 10:14pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
rugbyfuture said | January 28th 2010 @ 10:15pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Realist said | January 29th 2010 @ 2:10am | Report comment
Sorry rugbyfuture, but the Australian Bureau of Statistics confirms my claim.
Go look at the following publication if you don’t believe me.
4156.0.55.001 – Perspectives on Sport, May 2009
Previous ISSUE Released at 11:30 AM (CANBERRA TIME) 25/05/2009
“and the tahs, reds and force, and most certainly the wallabies arent supported by these immigrants,”
A lot of them go to the Super 14 matches and Tri-Nations matches, especially when the South African and New Zealand sides are in town. The Force rely heavily on its English/South African population to keep the franchise afloat.
Realist said | January 29th 2010 @ 2:13am | Report comment
Justin and rugbyfuture,
My sister’s husband has been to a fair few Bledisloe Cup matches at Suncorp. He’s been to a South African game or two as well. His neighbour gets free tickets for him. He told me that a large chunk of the crowd is made up of foreigners. You only have to look at all the South African/New Zealand flags in the crowd to see this is the case.
Dave said | January 29th 2010 @ 2:30am | Report comment
I’ve been to a few Kiwis rugby league tests against the Kangaroo’s in Sydney and Brisbane. There were many Kiwi flags and All Blacks jerseys in the crowds as well.
rugbyfuture said | January 29th 2010 @ 2:32am | Report comment
still says 52% are born in australia, and as i said, considering immigrants are the largest growing group in australia, and will pass habits down to their children who will be born in australia its not such a bad thing to me.
i would understand when their teams are in town, as i pointed out, but the other games when they’re not would surprise me. im always told by leagueys that the force hardly have a fan base in perth anyways, so by your stance there isn’t any. i would like to see the proven statistics on the force’s memberships and turnout as to whether they’re supported by everyone foreign as you would call it. and may i remind you that your ancestors were once foreign too, as mine were, and most peoples in australia.
the other thing is when you play international matches, you usually have foreign people coming to support their team (you wouldn’t know that in league) that might be the reason “a large chunk of the crowd” are foreigners don’t ya think? and you heard that your sisters husband was getting free tickets from his neighbour…..
…cool
Dave said | January 29th 2010 @ 2:54am | Report comment
I would love to have some Bledisloe cup tickets for free realist. I’ve been watching rugby in Australia for over ten years and I never got or was offer any free tickets for Bledisloe Cup games. Can you asked your brother in law where I could get some
?
ohtani's jacket said | January 28th 2010 @ 1:12am | Report comment
Well, Australian rugby won’t die for another five years if the rumours about the new Murdoch deal are true.
rugbyfuture said | January 28th 2010 @ 1:27am | Report comment
what are these rumours?
ohtani's jacket said | January 28th 2010 @ 12:13pm | Report comment
A 20% increase over the last contract, though the ARU benefit least among the three unions.
westy said | January 28th 2010 @ 1:38am | Report comment
Circus I agree the problem for rugby union is not our crowd attendances at elite games.. The reality however is is our FTA figures for wallaby test matches were terrible last year. Like it or not FTA 350000/400000 audience over 5 capital cities for rugby tests in Australia and hong kong is a problem relative to weekly AFL and NRL ordinary club games attracting FTA audiences of 700000 or more. Premier rugby tests not able to outrate AFL or NRL club games make the mission to sell the games to FTA that much more difficult.
You can tell we had a problem when Seven started to get Wendell then playing for St george NRL to promote the domestic rugby union tests . Secondly some of the spectacles were even for the converted not exactly exhilerating.
Even in sydney viewing figures were soft. More to the point melbourne did not repond.
Hanging our hats on All Black tests is i think weakening or diluting the product . how many times can we play them in a year.
I think it is imperative that we seek some type of tribal support for the Australian franchises and for a start get them on FTA or FTA digital and playing with an attitude to entertain even a package of highlights.
To be fair to rugby league its crowd attendances may not be compelling but its FTA audience is powerful asset.Like it or not people watch it on TV including quite a few rugby supporters just like me.. it is I am afraid tailor made for television and on a friday night a ratings winner.
I went to the rugby test in Sydney. My problem is where was the television audience?That is the question that continues to hurt us in . Being outrated by repeats of Midsommer Murders and Australia’s Funniest home videos is not a good look.
Ian Noble said | January 28th 2010 @ 1:52am | Report comment
As a matter of interest, it looks as though Murdoch will have a big say in the ESL, as reported by Chris Irvine the RL correspondent of the Times
“We’ll revel in the rugby over the coming months, of that there’s no doubt, but the big story – off the field anyway – will be the licence applications for 2012 and the talk of a reduction to 12 teams that may accompany any new television deal, with the expiry of Sky Sports’ present contract after 2011. If Wakefield, Salford and Castleford can’t deliver on their promises for new stadiums, who knows in their cases ? Only one thing is certain – a team will be coming up from the Championship in two years’ time.
Wood’s shot across the bows of certain clubs was buried deep in the season launch press release: “We are close to finalising the criteria that will determine which clubs will be awarded a Super League licence from the 2012 season onwards and 2010 represents a hugely important period for all clubs.
“The clubs are all aware that to thrive and prosper they need to have facilities which reflect the progressive nature of the sport and I am sure we will see significant progress on new stadia in 2010.”"
In the current climate it is difficult to see how all of these clubs will meet achieve their promises made in the last round and perhaps the perceived threat to reduce the number of clubs in the ESL is perhaps indicative of the either a static TV audience or a trend of reducing numbers. Presumably it also means that Murdoch will offer less money as the implication is that there will not enough TV income available to support a 14 team tournament. In addition to the others, Quins RL have been warned about their gates as they are heavily subsidised by the RFL and the problems of the Crusaders continue. Although it the first game on Friday V Leeds Rhinos in Wrexham is a sell out.
Andrew said | January 28th 2010 @ 7:33pm | Report comment
I think Ian it’s more to do with clubs promising things 3 years ago, and not actually doing them, like building/upgrading stadiums etc. I think the quality may be better with 12 teams, though it would be interesting if they add another French team.
Quins is the one club that the ESL need to work out how to assist in getting bums on seats. Once they do, then they can hopefully work towards a second London team, which is essential if they want to stay relevant.
Ian Noble said | January 29th 2010 @ 2:44am | Report comment
Thanks for that, what I fail to understand on the assumption that number might be twelve, it will mean that at least 3 teams in the present ESL will be kicked out as at least one team from the Championship will replace them. I understand that Widnes, Halifax and maybe Barrow are all preparing business plans to replace the ESL clubs that might be kicked out. I would have thought bearing in mind the commitment shown by these clubs that an enlarged ESL might be the way to go, but presumably that is too big for Murdoch to swallow.
There is a second club in London, London Skolars which has now forged a close liaison with Quins RL.
King of the Gorganites said | January 28th 2010 @ 12:33pm | Report comment
(Comment deemed poor by Roar community - click to read)
Springs said | January 30th 2010 @ 8:22pm | Report comment
Whenever king mentions financial disaster or 4 nations’ bad crowds, drink.
John Ryan said | January 28th 2010 @ 7:22pm | Report comment
Dont hold your Breath while your waiting
rugbyfuture said | January 28th 2010 @ 8:19pm | Report comment
dreams are the foundations of progress
Realist said | January 28th 2010 @ 9:54pm | Report comment
“The battle continues- lets face facts. rugby didnt have a great 2009. but things will get better.” — King of the Gorganites
You don’t know that.
“rugby is now an olympic sport, showing that the game is truly global.” — King of the Gorganites
Some of the sports on the IOC’s program were included not because they were global, but because key members wanted them in. An example is the inclusion of softball. It’s hardly a globalised sport — only 3 countries can win it — yet it was at the Olympics for quite some time.
“a new team in Melbourne with Rode Macqueen at the helm will revitalise super rugby in 2011″ — King of the Gorganites
What makes you think the admission of second team in a non-heartland area — which will dilute the talent pool available to the other franchises — will help repair the game in Queensland and NSW?
The inclusion of the Western Force hasn’t done much for Super Rugby in Queensland, NSW and ACT. If anything, the game has gone backwards in Queensland, NSW and ACT since the Force were admitted into the competition.
“RL on the other hand is strongly on an international stage. it has failed to grow in the last 40 years.” — King of the Gorganites
The game’s development across Europe, USA, Jamaica, Russia and the Middle East suggests you don’t know what you’re talking about. The Lebanese Rugby League Committee was accorded full federation status a couple of weeks ago. This is definitely a form of “development”.
“RL in london is just about dead” — King of the Gorganites
London-based players have represented Great Britain at the junior level over the last few years. This suggests the game is doing something right in London.
“the international game is a fiancial disaster (as evidenced by the recent poor attended 4 nations tournament).” — King of the Gorganites
Ha! The World Cup and 2009 Four Nations drew a profit. The last two ANZAC Tests between Australia and New Zealand have kicked the Bledisloe Cup matche’s backside on TV. If the ARU’s premier event cannot compete with the ANZAC Test match then rugby union is in deep trouble!
“RL is oz is strong, but that wont always be the case.” — King of the Gorganites
How do you know?
“i expcet RU to regain its foothold above RL in 2011.” — King of the Gorganites
Why, because the RWC will be in New Zealand? What makes you think Australians will give a stuff about it? The fact is if the Wallabies have no chance in hell of winning it then no one will care. Casual fans might jump on board if they think Australia can win, but they’ll abandon the game just as quickly once the NRL and AFL seasons are on. There aren’t enough avid rugby union fans in Australia to keep the game at the same level as rugby league.
King of the Gorganites said | January 29th 2010 @ 8:47am | Report comment
It kills you RL types at the very mention of rugby in the olympics. you try to deride the game by comparing it to softball. FYI sofball is no longer in the olympics. it has be replaced by a better larger international game in rugby. for a sport to get into the olympics it has to be a major player on the international stage – something that will never happen for RL.
the new team is melbourne can you a signifcant amount of overseas players, therefore i do not believe it will dilute the talent pool. further, it will help to develop victorian juniors.
who are these londoners who have represented GB? my assertion was based on the quinns who have struggled finanically and drew small crowds. it only survives because the ESL props it up. if quinns fold then RL in london dies. simples as that.
the 4 nations did not make a profit. show me something to the contrary. the irfl spin doctors attempted to assert that it made a profit, however, this is a clear fabrication. that is why a 4 nations will not happen again in the UK. 6K in paris was a financial disaster.
Jamacia…Lebanaon. your really struggling if you cite these two countries as growth areas. its very easy to say things like that, but what are the chances that the game will ever become prefossional there?
Realist said | January 29th 2010 @ 9:34pm | Report comment
“the 4 nations did not make a profit. show me something to the contrary.” — King of the Gorganites
I’ll prove you wrong by quoting Yorkshire Post’s Dave Craven.
“RFL chairman Richard Lewis yesterday revealed the governing body is in line to record profits again while the recent Gillette Four Nations tournament is also set to reap dividends”
The aforementioned quote is from RFL looks ahead to the future in confident mood
“the irfl spin doctors attempted to assert that it made a profit, however, this is a clear fabrication”
Prove it!
“that is why a 4 nations will not happen again in the UK. 6K in paris was a financial disaster.” — King of the Gorganites
Speculative nonsense! The saddest part about your speculative theory is it’s based on an unsubstantiated claim. Hardly a convincing argument.
Realist said | January 29th 2010 @ 9:57pm | Report comment
“the new team is melbourne can you a signifcant amount of overseas players, therefore i do not believe it will dilute the talent pool.” — King of the Gorganites
Australian rugby does not have a great deal of depth to begin with, so any drain on the talent pool will have a disastrous effect on the two bodies that produce the bulk of Australia’s players (Queenslan and NSW). The last thing the Reds and Waratahs can afford is to lose the few talented juniors they’ve produced. If it Rebels take 5 to 10 senior players away from the other state unions then it will have diluted their talent pool. If it takes 1 or 2 promising juniors away from Queensland and NSW per annum then Queensland and NSW will struggle to replace the senior players they’re losing to the Force, Brumbies and Rebels.
Half the reason Queensland have been on the bottom of the ladder for so long is because the juniors they produce at their zealotous GPS system — many of the students at the aforementioned schools play club rugby league, yet are disallowed to play it for their school because the zealots at the top are anti-rugby league — go on to play for the Force, Brumbies and Waratahs. The result is Queensland rugby has sunk quite low over the last decade. The Rebels could be the straw that breaks the QRU’s back.
“further, it will help to develop victorian juniors.” — – King of the Gorganites
True, though it won’t happen overnight. There are a few problems that the VRU will need to consider if it wishes to benefit from the Rebels frahnchise.
They are:
How will they — Rebels and VRU — convince children to choose rugby union over rugby league?
How long will it take the VRU/Rebels to improve the junior system?
How much will the Rebels need to invest into the junior system?
And crucially, how will the VRU convince the privately owned Rebels to pour money into the VRU’s junior system?
If the Rebels can poach players from the other states/nations then it might choose to ignore the VRU junior system. I cannot see the Rebels’ owners investing in the junior system until its place in the Melbourne sports market is certain. It’ll take them a few years to see if the franchise is capable of generating a profit. If it doesn’t generate a profit after 5 years then they might pack their bags and run.
Realist said | January 29th 2010 @ 10:11pm | Report comment
“who are these londoners who have represented GB?” — King of the Gorganites
Louie McCarthy Scarsbrook and Tony Clubb.
According to the RLEF, both McCarthy-Scarsbrook and Clubb are graduates of the London development system. It was mentioned in their article, Quins trio to face Wales
“McCarthy Scarsbrook and Clubb, graduates of the London development system, will both make their International debuts.
….
McCarthy Scarsbrook and Clubb are both products of the London based Greenwich Admirals amateur outfit.”
Realist said | January 29th 2010 @ 10:15pm | Report comment
According to the RLEF’s article, Young England teams in action this Easter, at least two London-based juniors represented England’s Under 15s and Under 16s teams, respectively.
Mike McMeeken – London & The South – West London Sharks – Calthorpe Park – Harlequins
Mike Bishay – London & the South – SunburyMannor Harlequins – West London Sharks
rugbyfuture said | January 29th 2010 @ 10:19pm | Report comment
out of 14 million people
Realist said | January 29th 2010 @ 10:24pm | Report comment
The standard of the game in London cannot be too bad if its junior system is producing talent for the national teams.
Realist said | January 29th 2010 @ 10:20pm | Report comment
According to the RLEF’s article, Carnegie Champion Schools Finals 2009 the junior game is growing in London, Wales and the North West.
“Other areas that also saw a dramatic rise in teams were London, Wales and
the North West. London’s number of teams increased by 27, Wales saw an
additional 17 teams and the North West had an extra 31 teams.
Overall, 27,537 students took part in this year’s Carnegie Champion Schools
Tournament. This is an extra 2,911 players from last year and an increase of
22,369 players from when the competition was re-launched in 2002″
rugbyfuture said | January 29th 2010 @ 11:46pm | Report comment
realist, ill admit that rugby union is a minority sport with a 0.3% penetration of market in australia, when you admit that rugby league is a minority sport in britain with a 0.1% penetration of market.
rugbyfuture said | January 29th 2010 @ 11:49pm | Report comment
and that includes england, scotland, wales and ireland, with a 0.4% market penetration in england specifically, according to a source i havent been able to verify (which is also conflicting with other statistics) havent been able to find stats on wales, scotland and ireland independantly, probable that they are close to non existent.
Ian Noble said | January 30th 2010 @ 1:39am | Report comment
Penetration of what market? Is it the relative numbers playing the sport? Both rugby codes in the UK are minority sports. Interestingly the biggest participation sport is angling with supposingly 4M active participants, football/soccer has about 1.5M, RU 700K and RL I don’t know. I have never seen any figures but I would guess 70K, perhaps somebody else knows.
rugbyfuture said | January 30th 2010 @ 2:14pm | Report comment
this is in the UK, not just england, so its 800-900 thousand, which is still 1.5% penetration.
Dave said | January 29th 2010 @ 2:41am | Report comment
Don’t worry realist. The only thing that count is that rugby is in the Olympics. The Melbourne Rebels inclusion into the Super 15 would help Australian rugby grow. The Force has done well in only a couple of years to become the best rugby franchise in Australia in 2009.
Western Australia rugby participation numbers are now trible so the same will happen in Victoria.
You mention Lebanon RL as a form of development but you also didn’t mention countries that has fold as well. There’s Japan, Canada, Georgia, New Caledonia, American Samoa and Argentina who don’t play rugby league anymore.
Realist said | January 29th 2010 @ 10:46pm | Report comment
“The only thing that count is that rugby is in the Olympics” — Dave
Tell me Dave, how many Rugby 15’s games will be played at the Olympics
“The Melbourne Rebels inclusion into the Super 15 would help Australian rugby grow.” — Dave
Not necessarily. It might help the game’s profile in Victoria, but it does not mean the sport will ‘grow’ elsewhere in Australia. The Rebels’ inclusion could have a negative effect on the other state unions. For example, the game’s decline in Queensland might sink even lower if the Rebels’ inclusion leads to a further draining of Queensland’s juniors.
“Western Australia rugby participation numbers are now trible so the same will happen in Victoria” — Dave
The WARU were’t competing against have a major rugby league franchise for the public’s interest, was it? The Rebels are going up against the Melbourne Storm, who are a highly successful club and quite popular. The fact the Storm draw so much interest when their matches are televised during the early hours of the morning is amazing. The Rebels probably won’t even be on terrestrial television.
“You mention Lebanon RL as a form of development but you also didn’t mention countries that has fold as well. There’s Japan, Canada, Georgia, New Caledonia, American Samoa and Argentina who don’t play rugby league anymore”
Rugby league is still played in Japan.
The Georgian rugby union team took rugby league back to Georgia after the 2003 Rugby World Cup. The reason they took it to Georgia was because they fell in love with it when they were training in Canberra. The only reason it’s no longer played in Georgia is because the zealots from the Georgia Rugby Union threatened to blacklist anyone who was caught playing rugby league.
Do you really think I care if the game isn’t played in New Caledonia and American Samoa? Why would I care if the game isn’t played on two remote islands that don’t even have enough people to fill a small city?
The ARU’s biggest worry is the situation in Queensland. Rugby union is struggling in Queensland. If the zealots from the GPS system weren’t around to keep the game alive in Brisbane then rugby in Queensland would probably end up like rugby in South Australia. Many of the students who are involved in the GPS system play club rugby league. The only reason those students play rugby union for their schools is because rugby league is kept out of the GPS system. The funny thing is the GPS system’s bigotry has allowed Australian rules football to leapfrog rugby union in Queensland. The sad thing is it’s allowing the AFL to poach talent who would probably go to play in the NRL if they were allowed to play rugby league at school.
Ian Noble said | January 30th 2010 @ 1:22am | Report comment
Just a couple of corrections,
It is impossible for rugby 15s to be played in the Olympics. A tournament will take too long to allow for recovery etc. Rugby 7s fits neatly into the early stages of the Olympics as during the first week it can use the main stadium over a period of 3 days including a ladies tournament as well. From previous experience in the Commonwealth, Pan American and Asia games it draws big crowds and has generated a useful element of revenue for the host city when the main stadium would otherwise be unused.
The IRLF banned Georgia because their Georgian RL team was made up of RU players who failed to turn up for a RL international as it clashed with a RU international. A number of the RU players play in the French professional leagues and they presumably know where their bread is buttered. It was the RL authoriies who banned the players, if there wasn’t a clash of dates and the players thought RL offered more opportunities then it might have been a different story.
rugbyfuture said | January 30th 2010 @ 1:29am | Report comment
also, the rebels team would most likely plug the hole in the system where league gets its drip feed of ex rugby players from. many Queensland and sydney GPS schools and their players already know that rugby league isn’t there when they go, so if they wanted to play for a school so bad they could ditch. or alternatively if they hatedrugby so much they wouldn’t play it and play something else.
ohtani's jacket said | January 30th 2010 @ 12:56am | Report comment
I have a question:
If a group of people play [Rugby/League/AFL] in the forest and no-one is around to see it, does that mean the sport is growing globally?
sportfreak said | January 30th 2010 @ 9:05pm | Report comment
Realist – You seem to think that Melbourne / Vic actually care a jot about the Storm. Apart from a few thousand expat kiwis – any discussion in melbourne about the storm either is met with a blank stare or a horrified look of someone that has just admitted that they have herpes.
some points
there are a squillion more RU players in VIC than League ( its not rugby) and RU doesnt even have a professional team yet. You watch – 50,000 RU players in a decade and that’s a conservative estimate.
Reading the local press this weekend ( I was lucky enough to watch Federer) there is a lot of excited talk about the new team and they are embracing this team as it completes melbourne as a truly international sporting city. The sports section today had some stories about rugby. Guess what….. absolutely nothing about league
The most prestigious schools and Universities have strong rugby systems and the Weary Dunlop lunch attracts a thousand punters each year.
Face it – Blue Blood Melbourne cares not for your game. You mungos carry on about no FTA Storm games in Melbourne – no-one would watch thats why.
The prob with league is that it has was stupid enough to try and take AFL head-on in AUS and saw what a smart move that was – complete ignorance and shunning by the media in VIC.
Rugby has realised that it will fill a lovely niche and they will do very well from 2011.
Keep dreaming big boy. The tiresome ‘working class’ story doesnt sell in melbourne.
Dogs Of War said | January 30th 2010 @ 9:14pm | Report comment
Sorry, what were the ratings like in Melbourne for the 2 respective sports over the past few years?
Can’t believe you actually believe that tripe you wrote. Both sports in Victoria have a very small amount of interest. AFL dominates the city, and the Rebels will struggle mainly because they will only be available on Pay TV (just like the Storm really, those replays after midnight don’t count). Hard to get people interested in a game when it’s not easily accessible.
Realist said | January 31st 2010 @ 2:40am | Report comment
“You seem to think that Melbourne / Vic actually care a jot about the Storm. Apart from a few thousand expat kiwis – any discussion in melbourne about the storm either is met with a blank stare or a horrified look of someone that has just admitted that they have herpes.” — sportfreak
The figures from the latest Roy Morgan AFL/NRL poll suggest you don’t know what you’re talking about.
“Melbourne Storm, who appeared in the past four NRL grand finals, winning two, have gone from 497,000 supporters in 2004 to almost 800,000 in the 2009 results and are fourth overall despite being based in AFL heartland.” Wayne Heming, Fox Sports. Brisbane Broncos voted Australia’s most popular football team
Still not convinced?
Look at this.
“Yes, that’s right, the Melbourne Storm, which next year will move its home games from Olympic Park, which is beside Collingwood’s Lexus Centre, a couple hundred metres down the road into the new rectangular stadium nearing completion, rated more fans (826,000) than did the Magpies in an identical Roy Morgan poll released earlier this year.” Stathi Paxinos, The Age. Biggest fan base? Not the Magpies, says poll
Now, let’s move onto the other nonsense you blotted onto the web.
“Face it – Blue Blood Melbourne cares not for your game. You mungos carry on about no FTA Storm games in Melbourne – no-one would watch thats why.” — sportfreak
I guess that’s why the few Melbourne Storm matches that have been broadcast into Melbourne at 7:30pm/8:30pm on Nine have drawn very high ratings……
“The most prestigious schools and Universities have strong rugby systems and the Weary Dunlop lunch attracts a thousand punters each year” — sportfreak
Are the ‘elite’ schools you’re referring to anything like the GPS schools in Brisbane? If so then it’s nothing to gloat about. It’s easy to say ‘no student plays league at this elite school’ when a few bigots in charge don’t allow the students to play it! The fact the bigots in charge won’t allow it to be played at those schools proves they’re scared of rugby league’s potential — if they thought it was incapable of outdrawing union then they wouldn’t try so hard to repress its development.
The schools under the Queensland GPS system do not allow their students to play rugby league — even though many of them play rugby league at club level. I suppose you’re going to say the students from Queensland’s GPS schools wouldn’t be caught dead playing rugby league at club level, right? If so then take a look at this.
“Brian Hain, director of sport at The Southport School, says interest in rugby league is growing in line with the popularity of the NRL. An increasing number of teachers have league backgrounds, while a healthy percentage of students play club league in addition to their school rugby duties.” Phil Lutton, Brisbane Times. Knocking on heaven’s door
Oh and for the record Mr Bias Rugby Union Fan, rugby league has been introduced into many Victorian schools over the last few years and, as a result, us growing rapidly at the junior level.
“there are a squillion more RU players in VIC than League ( its not rugby) and RU doesnt even have a professional team yet.” — sportfreak
Prove it. There are at least 13 rugby league clus in Victoria. Around half-a-dozen of them field junior teams from Under 7’s to Under 18’s. All 13 of them have senior teams. One of the teams has produced an international rugby league player. How many members of the current Wallabies squad can say they learned their trade under the Victorian Rugby Union’s junior system?
Realist said | January 31st 2010 @ 2:43am | Report comment
I haven’t seen any evidence to indicate the Super 15 will be broadcast on terrestrial television. If it isn’t then the Rebels are going to experience the same problems the Storm faced during their first 10 years in the NRL.
Realist said | January 31st 2010 @ 2:50am | Report comment
“Rugby has realised that it will fill a lovely niche and they will do very well from 2011.” sportfreak
Speculation. What makes you think the ARU is going to do well from 2011? The Super 15 isn’t going to be the saviour that the ARU needs to keep up with the other codes.
Realist said | January 31st 2010 @ 2:55am | Report comment
Correction: Not all of the VRL clubs field sinior teams.
Realist said | January 31st 2010 @ 2:56am | Report comment
Correction: Not all of the VRL clubs field senior teams.
rugbyfuture said | January 31st 2010 @ 11:10am | Report comment
i could say the exact same thing, prove it!, its called the internet, come to your senses and be a bit more REALISTIC
rugbyfuture said | January 31st 2010 @ 11:15am | Report comment
unlike rugby league, the IRB and ARU openly toute their figures, not leaving it to fan speculation.
hutch said | January 31st 2010 @ 10:04pm | Report comment
the same irb that stated there were 1 miliion rugby union players in england, which of course is a lie!
rugbyfuture said | February 1st 2010 @ 12:12am | Report comment
how is this a lie?
Justin said | January 31st 2010 @ 1:08pm | Report comment
You seriously believe that the Storm has more supporters than Collingwood? Its a poll, depending on where you do it and when the results can wildly fluctuate. Simple facts are that the Pies have over 40k members and the Storm would have about 10k. Throw in average crowds and TV ratings and its a no brainer. Do not kid yourself about a poll, get hard evidence please. Can you explain what 800,000 supporters actually mans? Whats the criteria for being a supporter and being counted for this 800k?
The Storm matches rate so well in Melbourne that they are virtually never on. If they were such high rating games why do 9 not play them more often here? I cant say which games have been on live in Melbourne but I would suggest they are the GF and maybe the semi, so of course they will rate well when its that time of year and the Storm are a big chance to win.
As for the school thing – its a fact that there is a decent comp in Melbourne and has been for years. Why League doesn’t have one I dont know but you seem pretty sure its bigotry. Doesn’t change the fact that league has virtually zero relevance in schools in VIC. Thats not to say Union is massive but it does have a great little niche with its school comp. The relevance of Brisbane is?
Now your last point is the funniest of the lot – notice that no one else has supported your attempt to show League is bigger in VIC than Union? Why is that? Well I’ll let you in on a little secret -
Vic Rugby –
* has a 1st Division made up of 27 teams (approx) spread over 3 grades from 11 clubs.
* 2nd Division made up of 10 teams from 9 clubs.
* Colts with 7 teams
* Country Division with 5 teams/clubs
* Womens Division with 5 teams/clubs
Now the Juniors
* U12 A & B
* U14 A & B
* U16 A & B
* U18s
All up there are more than 50 teams i these age groups. There have been countless Wallabies and of late Super Rugby players from these clubs and this has been done by the VRU not the ARU. The ARL control junior development in VIC in conjunction with the Storm.
I havent even touched on the school numbers which are similar and growing with numerous schools having 2 teams in each age group. These schools produced 4 kids for the Aussie School Boys Squads this year alone. Then throw in the hundreds of kids running around playing Mini, Midi or Walla rugby (this is for the little kids say 4-10 years old) and Union dwarfs league in VIC in no uncertain terms.
VIC has been producing quality RU players for years and its great that there is a strong contingent of VIC in the Storm junior sides but there still isnt a home grown Storm player is there? Oh I did forget the one International though… who did he play for? Lebabnon? What is his name?
Realist, you may need to get a new name, I dont think yours reflects your posts
Realist said | January 31st 2010 @ 9:44pm | Report comment
“Now your last point is the funniest of the lot – notice that no one else has supported your attempt to show League is bigger in VIC than Union? Why is that? Well I’ll let you in on a little secret” — Justin
At no stage did I say rugby league is “bigger in VIC”. I merely asked your mate to prove that “there are a squillion more RU players in VIC than League”. I showed him how many rugby league clubs were in Victoria, which is actually 16 — I didn’t include the 3 Goulburn Murray Rugby League teams when I responded to your mate. According to the VRU’s website, there are 26 clubs in Victoria. When you consider the fact rugby union has held a club competition in Victoria for more than 100 years, whereas rugby league didn’t have a club in Victoria until the mid-2000’s — it shows rugby league in Victoria is on the rise.
“The Storm matches rate so well in Melbourne that they are virtually never on. If they were such high rating games why do 9 not play them more often here? I cant say which games have been on live in Melbourne but I would suggest they are the GF and maybe the semi, so of course they will rate well when its that time of year and the Storm are a big chance to win.” — Justin
The Broncos vs Storm match at Olympic Park was broadcast live across Victoria via Nine and its affiliates. The ratings for the match were great!
“The relevance of Brisbane is?” — Justin
If it happens in Brisbane then there’s a chance it happens — or has happened — in Melbourne. It happened in England for well over a century.
“There have been countless Wallabies and of late Super Rugby players from these clubs and this has been done by the VRU not the ARU.” — Justin
Can you please name them?
“VIC has been producing quality RU players for years and its great that there is a strong contingent of VIC in the Storm junior sides but there still isnt a home grown Storm player is there? Oh I did forget the one International though… who did he play for? Lebabnon? What is his name?” — Justin
Jeremy Smith played for the VRL’s Altona Roosters. He represented the Kiwis.
Justin said | January 31st 2010 @ 10:18pm | Report comment
“There have been countless Wallabies and of late Super Rugby players from these clubs and this has been done by the VRU not the ARU.” — Justin
Can you please name them?
Sure – Digby Ioane, Lloyd Johansen, David Palavi, Tamitai Horua, David Fitter. There are others who are in Super squads and Academy’s.
Great effort from Jeremy Smith to make the grade.
I’ll take your word that the rating were “great” for the Broncs match.
Rebelsbaby said | January 31st 2010 @ 6:02am | Report comment
13 clubs in VIC. Well blow me down. In a state of 5 million punters ( my state actually) thats clearly a very good result.
Dont need to prove the playing numbers between the 2 as its fact – you seem to know how to use Google so give it a crack. And registered players at clubs and schools only please – not 2 bit ‘development’ sessions where some bench players attempt to pass a ball to some disinterested AFL kids.
There were 5 players from vic in the 2009 Australian school boys Rugby team, so I would suggest their program is doing just fine thanks.
Using TSS as an example of GPS players playing league? Mate you picked a 2 bit bogan school from the Gold Coast? ( ie not Brisbane). Find me some examples from some proper GPS schools. I hardly think you can use the old cliche in Melbourne that their private schools wont allow their students to play league. They have a strong rugby comp thanks and most kids their dont know what league is unless they read about a player punches a woman or unloads in a hallway.
Please dont trot out cumulative crowd figures – they mean nothing and the double counting would be the most when discussing crowd figures in Melbourne. Face it champ. Your average Victorian knows nothing or cares about league.
Now back to the rugby – nice sell out crowd of 7000 in Orange – well done. Rugby is clearly dying.
go back to your league page and argue about whether NZ should have a state of origin!!!hahahahahahahahahah
Norm said | January 31st 2010 @ 10:54am | Report comment
-”a 2 bit bogan school”..more systemic prejudice from the rugby fraternity.
Sam el Perro said | January 31st 2010 @ 11:06am | Report comment
The Southport School is the most prestigious school on the Gold Coast. It’s 2009 Tuition fees range from $8,994-$15,136.80 Boarding fees are $14,151.20. In what sense is it what you disdainfully call “a 2 bit bogan school”?
Realist said | January 31st 2010 @ 9:50pm | Report comment
“13 clubs in VIC. Well blow me down. In a state of 5 million punters ( my state actually) thats clearly a very good result.” — Rebelsbaby
If you include the Goulburn Murray Rugby League teams then the number is 16. There are only 26 rugby union clubs across Victoria. This proves rugby union doesn’t blow rugby league away in Victoria.
Considering there were zero rugby league clubs in Victoria during the early to mid 2000’s, I think the VRL has done a great job. According to Justin, it’s taken the VRU over 100 years to set up 30 clubs — he’s wrong, the actual number is 26. Says everything we need to know about which sport is on the rise, doesn’t it Rebelsbaby?
“Dont need to prove the playing numbers between the 2 as its fact” — Rebelsbaby
Very silly logic.
The onus is on your ilk to prove it since the lot of you are always going on about your sport’s so-called popularity in Victoria. The fact your sport has only 30 clubs in Victoria proves it is a minority sport. I’ll take the VRL’s 16 clubs any day of the week considering they didn’t exist 7 years ago!
“Using TSS as an example of GPS players playing league? Mate you picked a 2 bit bogan school from the Gold Coast? ( ie not Brisbane). Find me some examples from some proper GPS schools” — Rebelsbaby
What an ignorant comment.
“Your average Victorian knows nothing or cares about league.” — Rebelsbaby
Maybe they don’t, but the same can be said about your sport, which is nothing but a minority sport that’s propped up by a small group of elitists.
“They have a strong rugby comp thanks and most kids their dont know what league is unless they read about a player punches a woman or unloads in a hallway” — Rebelsbaby
Quade Cooper.
“Now back to the rugby – nice sell out crowd of 7000 in Orange – well done. Rugby is clearly dying.” Rebelsbaby
That’s nice Rebelsbaby, but ti doesn’t negate the fact rugby union is dying.
1. The last two ANZAC Tests bewteen the Kangaroos and Kiwis have outrated the 8 or so Bledisloe Cup matches that have been held since 2008.
2. Rugby league’s NYC outrates the Super 14.
3. Rugby league draws high ratings on terrestrial television. The same cannot be said about the Wallabies.
4. The commercial terrestrial television networks don’t want the Super 14/15 because the public isn’t interested in it.
5. Crowds for all forms of rugby union are on the decline. So are television ratings.
6. The European rugby union clubs are killing the ARU by poaching its talent. The ARU cannot cope with this because they don’t have enough depth to replace the players they lose.
Justin said | January 31st 2010 @ 10:34pm | Report comment
How did the Altona Roosters win a premiership in 1989 if there “zero” clubs until the mid 2000s and also win the comp 4 straight years from 2003?
Justin said | January 31st 2010 @ 10:36pm | Report comment
Just present facts if you can… lets leave the hyperbole out.
Realist said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:42pm | Report comment
Justin,
You seem to know a fair bit about the VRL’s competitions. Can you please tell me how long its Melbourne-based competition has been around? The reason I ask is because I’m not very knowledgeable about it.
hutch said | January 31st 2010 @ 10:19pm | Report comment
the fact that there were 5 players from victoria in the aust schoolboys rugby union team shows the lack of depth in the juniors in australia, or the fact that maybe the team isnt all that hard to make.
if you want junior development, go and watch the storm’s sg ball and toyota cup teams, filled with victorians.
Justin said | January 31st 2010 @ 10:26pm | Report comment
By that logic could we not say he same about the Storms teams? Really quite a stupid comment.
Crashy said | January 31st 2010 @ 6:24am | Report comment
i would suggest that Melbourne Victory are doing well with no FTA so not sure how that can be used against the Rebels.
I think you guys dont know Melbourne as much as you say.
League’s prob is that it tries to take AFL on as a competitor and hence the Vic press ( rightly or wrongly) snub the Storm as a result.
As SF said above, Rugby will fill a niche nicely catering for the existing strong Mel / vic club and scholols rugby community, expat brits, saffas, kiwis and other Euros ( french, italians etc), interstaters and curious victorians. It will have a much wider base of supporters to appeal to but we can agree that it wont be filling the MCG on a regular basis nor appearing on the front page of their sports pages. The Age maybe, as the demographic suits.
A lot of my Victorian chums and colleagues tell me there is a lot of talk and excitement in some circles in Melbourne – true though that your average AFL supporter will not care much.
It will do well no doubt and watch the membership numbers – much like the Force’s this year. All you lovelies who are focusing on dwindling crowd supporters and TV ratings in 2009 will be reminded this year when the growth outstrips league. Of this I am certain my friends. ( The Shute shield outrated an AFL game in NSW in 2009 but you dont hear rah rahs carrying on about this do you!)
Realist said | January 31st 2010 @ 9:52pm | Report comment
“i would suggest that Melbourne Victory are doing well with no FTA so not sure how that can be used against the Rebels.”
They’re not competing with the AFL and NRL.
Norm said | January 31st 2010 @ 8:09am | Report comment
( The Shute shield outrated an AFL game in NSW in 2009 but you dont hear rah rahs carrying on about this do you!)…um maybe because it never happened (not that I care one way or the other), but on bahalf of Redb & Michael C can you tell us which specific games you’re talking about.
John Ryan said | January 31st 2010 @ 11:20am | Report comment
The Shute Shield is battling to outrate old cartoons,how ever back in the real world, I dont know what you expect of Rugby Union posters on this forum, apart from looking down their noses at League,they are not known as the leather patch brigade for nothing, its just the old class thing,its unfortunate as I worked for a bloke who was tied up with Eastwood and I went to the games but that was back in the 70s.
But on here class warfare still keeps going, so why worry,let them get on with the incestuous little world of Rugby Union which in OZ is kinda like the masons secret handshakes ect,but in reality wont trouble the real world in this country at all,same as they have not for quite a while
rugbyfuture said | January 31st 2010 @ 11:56am | Report comment
its only the leagueys who say its a class thing, theres a difference between hating a class and hating a bastardised game. you guys are the ones who are creating a socio economic barrier in your own mind. it seems its harder for leagueys to drop the blue collar attitude than the rugby blokes.my mum grew up in redfern housing commission and my dad was from a dockworkers family and i absolutely hate league, as does he, even though he played it. its the cultural look down rather than a socio economic one.
Realist said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:45pm | Report comment
rugbyfuture,
There’s a fine example of rugby union classism on this very thread!
“Using TSS as an example of GPS players playing league? Mate you picked a 2 bit bogan school from the Gold Coast? ( ie not Brisbane). Find me some examples from some proper GPS schools.” — Rebelsbaby
rugbyfuture said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:39pm | Report comment
yeh i didn’t quite get that either, but at the same time there are many more blue collar ruggers out there then you seem to think and there does seem to be a further resemblance of the class issue only on the league side. I’m unsure if he realised what southport was. there are alot of prejuidices left over from either side on class issues, but it seems to be sustained further by the old school league fraternity than the other ruggers. of course, we’re yet to see what will happen when us youth rise up to a more gracious age, but there is likely to be influence from the preachers of old school league than influence from the preachers of rugby, who tend to avoid issues on class. as i said, one day soon it will come down to the differenes in the game rather than the people, but these turbulent years in union have strengthened the strong traditions of the game, one aspect which is stronger than that of league, which happens to reflect on a traditionally higher class and tertiary school educated system. and this is a path which is becoming more and more popular in australian society.
sportfreak said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:13pm | Report comment
What in gods earth are you going on about with this tiresome class thing John Ryan?
I seem to recall playing against Dundas Valley, Merrylands, Blue Mountains or Liverpool in subbies rugby. Whilst they were clearly not uppercrust, they played hard rugby ( a little too hard in fact – hello that Blue mountains prop who kneed me in the face many moons ago) and gave us an sbsolute gobful on the sideline. ( ahh the good old days).
Maybe you should speak with them about being upper class or the West Harbour juniors down the road. Actually go and watch Balmain rugby play. Apart from replacing league as the preferred code in the suburb I would hardly call those boys upper class. Alcoholics yes, upper class no.
200,000 rugby players I would not call a little world if iI was you. Just watch how your seniors league participation numbers are doing or the world of country league is going.
You have a chip my friend and that is precisely what is keeping this state in the toilet. There is no nobility in poverty anymore old chum.
Realist said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:38pm | Report comment
According to the IRB’s website, there are 84,450 registered rugby union players in Australia. The ABS’s latest report on sport participation indicates most rugby union players do not play in unorganised competition. This means the 200,000 number you’re tossing around is utter nonsense.
Rugby union’s depth at the international level cannot be too great if an unskilled, mediocre team like the Wallabies sits in 3rd sport on the IRB rankings. If I were to receive a dollar every time a Wallabies’ player spilt the ball then I’d have enough money to buy the ARU!
Working Class Rugger said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:15am | Report comment
Realist
Sportfreak was a little off with his estimate of 200,000. It is more around the 150,000 mark at present in terms of week in week out participation. Count schools then you have around the 200,000 mark. But I tend to work off the first figure. As for the IRB. Well, they tend to not about 2 years behind on their numbers. According to them the USA only have 65,000
players while last years they finished the year with a touch over 91,000.
Realist said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:17pm | Report comment
Working Class Rugger,
Rugby union in Australia has gone backwards over the last 3 or so years. I reckon the total amount of people playing the game would have declined since the mid-2000’s.
Working Class Rugger said | February 3rd 2010 @ 11:18am | Report comment
Realist
I actually have taken that into account. In 2006 a little over 190,000 people (registered) played Rugby. Worst case scenario I have estimated it has dropped off to around 150,000. Though saying that there was for the first time in about 6 years growth in QLD and in non-traditional states the numbers have grown steadily for some time now.
John Ryan said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:31pm | Report comment
You condescending prat,I dont live in NSW and if RU has replaced RL in Balmain You are about as silly as your comments.
rugbyfuture said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:38pm | Report comment
just side note, because of the changing ideas of city living, balmain, drummoyne, rozelle and the surrounding suburbs are a bit more trendoid and expensive than most subrubs in sydney and it is actually more than likely that Rugby is the preffered rugby code in balmain. but the rest of his statement is true.
sportfreak said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:16pm | Report comment
True RF – I dont detest league because it is played by working class people. What annoys me is the fact that it is game played by dumb idiots idolised by equally dumb supporters.
Actually I dont detest it – I just prefer rugby. Now lets get back to discussing how well the Rebels are going to go.
Still can’t believe they scored Rod Macqueen…
sportfreak said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:21pm | Report comment
But realist – they are competing against 20/20, 1 day cricket, test cricket, tennis and all other summer sports.
Couldn’t care less about Australian soccer but your argument hardly makes sense.
I wouldnt get too cocky about NRL mate – The Roosters pulled a crowd of 2000 last year. Its all down hill from here you watch. Not that I care really but when yet another rugby post gets destroyed by the great unwashed it starts to grate.
Realist said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:27pm | Report comment
“But realist – they are competing against 20/20, 1 day cricket, test cricket, tennis and all other summer sports.
Couldn’t care less about Australian soccer but your argument hardly makes sense.” — sporkfreak
The A-League’s competitors — tennis and cricket — are a much smaller threat than the NRL and AFL: tennis is held over a very short period and cricket’s only real drawcard is the Twenty/20 Big Bash Cup and international matches.
The Australian-based tennis events were in each of the five major capital cities for a week, with the exception being Melbourne and Adealaide: Melbourne Kooyong Classic and Australian Open were held over 18 days; Adelaide’s World Team Tennis event was held over a few days. This means the bulk of A-Leagues team’s only had to compete with tennis for 7 or so days. The draw for the A-League could have been set up so the teams played away from home when a major tennis event was held in their city.
The Twenty/20 Big Bash tournament’s duration wasn’t long enough to dent the A-League’s crowds — at least not to the same degree as playing alongside the AFL and NRL seasons would have caused the A-League. The international matches are hardly a threat to the A-League because they are only held over a short period of time. Cricket Australia’s schedule shifts the Test’s and ODI’s from city to city, thus meaning the A-League teams are rarely going head-to-head with the Australian men’s cricket team.
If you still believe the cricket and tennis seasons are as threatening as the AFL and NRL seasons then please explain why Soccer Australia and FFA moved their season away from winter. It’s common knowledge that Soccer Australia/FFA moved its season to the summer because a) it’s the least crowded time of the year on the sports calendar b) they would struggle to receive much press coverage if they competed alongside the NRL and AFL seasons.
“I wouldnt get too cocky about NRL mate – The Roosters pulled a crowd of 2000 last year. Its all down hill from here you watch. Not that I care really but when yet another rugby post gets destroyed by the great unwashed it starts to grate.” — sportfreak
You’re saying the NRL is going downhill because the Roosters attracted a poor crowd last year? If so then that’s the most ludicrous thing I’ve ever heard. On what basis do you think the NRL is going to go downhill? What is the premiss of your argument?
Apart from the negative press the NRL received over its off-field player behaviour and loss of star players to rival codes, there isn’t a shred of evidence to suggest the NRL is going backwards. The popularity of the competition seems to be greater than ever. The game is penetrating into new markets and drawing more people to the grassroots game, too.
The scene in New Zealand is worrisome, but that’s irrevant to this point as we’re talking about rugby league in Australia. England seem to be developing a very strong squad that’ll be capable of winning the 2013 World Cup.
Norm said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:32pm | Report comment
-”The Roosters pulled a crowd of 2000 last year”…As the British poet William Shenstone said “A liar begins with making falsehood appear like truth, and ends with making truth itself appear like falsehood”.
King of the Gorganites said | February 2nd 2010 @ 12:25pm | Report comment
lets face the facts- league is a small (and shrinking) sport internationally.
Professional RL has moved out of the south of Wales.
Professional RL is just about dead it London. it needs to be propped up by the ESL.
RL is NZ has failed to grow over the last 15 years.
RL in Perth has stalled.
RL in France has become stagnant.
RL in england continues to loose his once strong heartlands. i note the pooor 4 nations crowds in the Nth of England.
RL is Russia is about to be taken wholly by RU.
There are few others countries that have any serious level of RL
Springs said | February 2nd 2010 @ 9:38pm | Report comment
King why did you even come back?! Stay on a break permanently if you are going to say the exact same things you said last year.
Pro RL has moved out of the South of Wales? Wrong! The South Wales Scorpions are playing in Co-Operative Championship 1 this year! Plus Pro Rl has recently moved IN to the North of Wales.
WA still has the largest junior base outside NSW/QLD, not to mention the WA Reds bid.
Where the hell did you get the France bit? France has been growing rapidly, pro team (a very good one I might add), a team bidding for inclusion in 2012, a growing Elite 1 comp, gowing participation rates, anything but stagnant.
Hmmm… 11 teams in North of England still? Union 2? Who are we losing it to? Soccer has always been biggest. Leeds, Hull, Wigan, Bradford, St Helens… etc, still all League towns.
Look at my list further up the page, over 50 countries playing some form of League. Please tell me when there was more…
rugbyfuture said | February 2nd 2010 @ 9:52pm | Report comment
well if south wales scorpions are considered a proper team there is definitely more than 2 union teams in mid-north of england. you got at least four or five – sale, leeds, doncaster, rotherham, newcastle (if that counts as heartland, not sure)
Springs said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:03pm | Report comment
Na rugbyfuture South Wales would not count as a top-class team, but it is nevertheless a pro team. Yeah if South Wales is counted then all the lower union teams are counted, but then League would have other 30 pro teams in the north.
rugbyfuture said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:18pm | Report comment
yeh i agree, just pointing out the fact that the lower union teams are there and there are atleast another 4 in the national division one competition and becomes greater numbers in terms of those areas as you go lower and lower until u reach national league 2. but those teams up the top their for union are all pro these days.
st the same time you have to admit that the crusaders and harlequins are pretty much destined failures, with threat linguring in the licence bidding process coming up, and gaining sub standard crowds. and moving to wrexham is perhaps a very good move, but to highlight the fact that wrexham is 10 kilometers from the heartland (like sydney cbd to burwood), with serious contension in that area from the gogg cymru rugby union club project which has been in motion for 7 years already.
Whilst the dragons are very good team and doing very well at promoting the game, they have been relying on foreign players for much of their tenure so far and have perpignan RC down the road, but brutus stadium sounds like its gonna get a good revamp. so i agree with you there.
theres also the rumours of the reduction of licences for the next round which is worrying for the expansion teams, especially with the RFL saying they want to go back to fully supporting the heartlands rather than looking outside.
Springs said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:51pm | Report comment
Something drastic has to be done to save Harlequins, their crowds are extremely poor. Crusaders however if they can get more local juniors (Scorpions will help), decent crowds, a decent season and better finances then with Noble and Harris’s help they could turn out alright.
Wrexham may be close to the heartlands but it is still in Wales. I don’t know why they chose a small town like Bridgend to host them anyway.
Catalans might look bad this year as i think the capacity of Gilbert Brutus is being lowered to 7,000 because of the revamp. The foreign players are getting less, I think their is only 7 in the squad, quite a few Australian players have had to play in the Elite 1 Championship. It’s a bit disappointing there is no longer many French players in the English teams, but oh well.
And the next round of licenses will have to see Salford dropped, a heartland team getting such poor crowds is terrible. Widnes will come up I would say, Leigh’s quality is too poor and Halifax is in the middle of 5 other teams. Toulouse, Harlequins, Crusaders and Wakefield will most likely battle it out for the last spot. I highly doubt the comp will go back to 12. The 14 teams will shape up.
rugbyfuture said | February 2nd 2010 @ 11:03pm | Report comment
but still, with crusaders, when they’re being bought by a fifth division football club, but i do agree that it is their best chance for realising their intentions of expansion.
catalans are moving to perpignan’s home ground while brutus is being expanded i thought i read, but that is quite huge so i dunno whether that will help or hinder.
I think they were saying that if widnes went up, crusaders would lose out because of its new proximity. and harlequins will be sustained in any way, its too improtant to rugby league in england if they want to succeed (you guys would lose out on the arguments here a bit
) im unsure of what the finances are like within the RFL, but it wouldn’t be too smart of them to reduce the licence numbers if they could help it.
Springs said | February 2nd 2010 @ 11:20pm | Report comment
Is Aimé Giral Perignan’s home ground? Cause catalans used that in their first season. Maybe with Crusaders moving away from South Wales where Union is so popular might be a good thing. Bridgend was terrible, very low crowds even for the internationals at the end of the season. Wales needs to start playing in Cardiff or Swansea like they used to.
I heard that the licence numbers might even be upgraded to 15 to accomodate Widnes plus the expansion teams in crusaders, Harlequins and Toulouse. I’m sure a lot of this could depend on the 2013 WC, or the World Cup could depend on it. We certainly do not need a financially struggling RFL running the World Cup.
rugbyfuture said | February 2nd 2010 @ 11:34pm | Report comment
yes, thats usa perpignan’s home ground.
the problem to me for crusaders is the fact thats Rugby is so strong in wales major areas, and with the culture that we experience here still prevailent, its like the shute shield in sydney expanding a team to newcastle, where there just isn’t enough going on for people to care about a sport which is looked down on. that licencing rumour is very interesting, i would agree it would probably depend on the rlwc. wasn’t toulouse kicked out of super league earlier?
Springs said | February 3rd 2010 @ 9:37am | Report comment
No the Paris St Germain team was kicked out of Super League, but hat was a poorly managed team. Toulouse bid for inclusion in 09,but are now in the Co-operative Championship.
King of the Gorganites said | February 3rd 2010 @ 9:26am | Report comment
so my poin about RL in south wales is true then.
from RL’s perspective they would want a team in south wales. instead they had to retreat to within a stone throw of leagues heartland.
im hearing from my sources that Harelquinns have 2 more years left in the ESL (max). that would be devasting if RL di not have a team in london
M1tch said | February 3rd 2010 @ 9:59am | Report comment
I cant see Quins getting shafted, they do alot of good work in junior rugby league, yes major issues with crowds but they must have a presence in the capitol
Springs said | February 3rd 2010 @ 12:00pm | Report comment
They have a team in South Wales. And South Wales (where all the pro union teams in the Magners League are based) is just a ’stones throw’ from South England, ‘union heartland’?
Harlequins will stay.
King of the Gorganites said | February 3rd 2010 @ 12:46pm | Report comment
“And South Wales (where all the pro union teams in the Magners League are based) is just a ’stones throw’ from South England, ‘union heartland’?”
Try saying that to a welshman.
King of the Gorganites said | February 3rd 2010 @ 12:49pm | Report comment
RU in england has successfully cracked into RL’s heartland (i.e Leeds and Sale (manchester). however, RL has failed to crack RU’s heartland (i.e south west england and south wales).
Springs said | February 3rd 2010 @ 3:17pm | Report comment
Haha, Leeds ’successful’? You’re joking mate. Leeds are about as successful as Harlequins. And what about South France? Is that not ‘union heartland’. And considering Leeds and Manchester are much bigger than any cities outside of London in the South of England i would say Union has had it considerably easier ‘cracking’ League’s heartland.
Working Class Rugger said | February 3rd 2010 @ 11:00pm | Report comment
Springs
If WA has the highest participation rates for League outside of NSW and QLD then thats not good news. I’ve had first hand experience regarding them and they are by no means spectacular.
The rapid growth of League in France is a little hyped. According to the French Sports Ministry there are only a tad over 10,000 participants nationwide. Thats the 09 figures by the way. The other 20,000 are those who participated in ‘clinics’. As for Toulouse in the Nat One. Well they should thank the RFL for making them a protected species as they finished 2nd last this past season and should have been relegated.
Yes, 11 RL teams in a tight bunch in the North of England. Not a great spread considering the two UK based teams outside of that area are seriously struggling. And correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t Rugby have 3 teams in the form of Newcastle, Leeds and Sale (Manchester area or am I wrong. Lancashire). Rugby National coverage is greater and increasing. Look at this years figures. More growth going up against the EPL. I suggest you look up Sport England 2009 report regarding participation. I think you’ll be surprised with the number of Rugby players in those areas. And that there has been a steady decline in participants in RL for over the age of 16 for a number of seasons now.
As for your 50 Nations. According to PlanetRL is more like 33. With several of those i.e. Argentina and Canada listed as not active. Just look at the IRB membership to see how many Rugby has. To qualify they need a set number of active clubs and to be ranked they need to play a minimum number of internationals.
Springs said | February 4th 2010 @ 10:04am | Report comment
Look at the list above WCR, it clearly states which countries have comps (around 30-35), which have national teams or clubs that play in international comps, and those that have played Rugby League in some form. I got all this from rugbyleagueplanet.
WA has the highest participation numbers, Northern Territory has higher participation rates per population, even beating NSW in that area. As for the rapid growth of League in France being ‘hyped’, it still has 34,000 participants. The clinics as you claim seem to not matter, as Union fans use school ‘come and try’ campaigns to include over 100,000 players in their numbers to prove Union is growing in Australia.
The 11 clubs in the North of England was in response to King saying that Rugby League was somehow losing its heartlands. Gateshead is the only pro League club near Newcastle. I know League is struggling outside of the North, but has it ever not been?
Working Class Rugger said | February 5th 2010 @ 2:33pm | Report comment
Springs
I suggest you look up the French Sports Ministry’s numbers on Rugby. They are broken into two catergories of participation. The first in registered participants the second for those who competed in a clinic. These figures cleary show that 34,000 do ont play League regularly. 10,000 do the other 24,000 have participated in at least one clinic.
Springs said | February 5th 2010 @ 10:13pm | Report comment
I understand what you said, but tell your union fans that the 190,000 or whatever people playing Union in australia is also false. They included all the ‘clinic’ numbers as well. As does AFL with ‘Auskick’. Including the ‘clinic’ numbers in Australia means League has well over 400,000 participants.
Sp said | February 2nd 2010 @ 2:03pm | Report comment
Yes my friends there are more people playing rugby in Balmain than league.
The national participation number is closer to 190k including schools where more than 5 games are played. Google ’sporting particpation numbers or similar.They dont include silly figures like auskick etc.
Again I dont prefer code wars but you guys are like flies on a steamer and wont disappear. What are you scared of?
Yes norm – you can copy. Well done!
Norm said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:03pm | Report comment
Here’s something else I copied for you from a book by English sports journalist Lynne Truss titled “Get Her Off The Pitch”.
“The final game I didn’t understand and didn’t enjoy much either was rugby…there was an insuperable obstacle to enjoyment in the case of rugby…Every few seconds the game would stop for one side or other to be penalised…The entire effing game is played for the benefit of its officiator…In 1999, of course, there was the rugby World Cup. I expected it to win me over, but it didn’t. I got quite bored, and I wasn’t the only one. It was generally thought to have been too drawn out, to lack drama, and to lack much decent offensive play…I don’t remember the details of a single match I saw – and I went to five, including the South Africa-Australia semi-final at Twickenham and the final…I felt that the rules of rugby would definitely benefit from simplification (how about having fewer players?)…”
rugbyfuture said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:21pm | Report comment
you guys really should stop pulling out that one, its a single statement which is quoted too many times to continue to hold credibility, otherwise we could pull out fitzsimmons, (and even i admit that would be stupid)
Norm said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:23pm | Report comment
Well if you blokes keep sticking your jaw out…
rugbyfuture said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:26pm | Report comment
…well if you blokes keep insulting us on our own threads and articles…
Norm said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:30pm | Report comment
Oh dear, that was a very ordinary comeback.
rugbyfuture said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:32pm | Report comment
opposed to you, who just doesnt respond to most of the other threads you’re included in.
sportfreak said | February 2nd 2010 @ 8:21pm | Report comment
we are catching up boys and girls oh yes we are.
please note for whatever reason the survey doesnt include players younger than 17.
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Previousproducts/4156.0.55.001Feature%20Article1May%202009?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=4156.0.55.001&issue=May%202009&num=&view=
The gap has been closing since the game went pro in the mid 90s and will certainly continue my friends.
All this great ‘publicity’ your game is generating is hardly converting to new players is it folks?
Realist said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:05pm | Report comment
The data from the aforementioned publication is from an outdated survey.
“This article presents results from the 2005-06 Multi-Purpose Household Survey (MPHS) relating to participation in and attendance at these football codes in Australia.”
Rugby union has gone backwards since 2005-06, whereas rugby league has grown rapidly.
Realist said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:18pm | Report comment
What was the sample size of the 2005-06 Multi-Purpose Household Survey?
Realist said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:35pm | Report comment
“All this great ‘publicity’ your game is generating is hardly converting to new players is it folks?”
Sorry mate, but you’re wrong.
—
“With the wonderful spectacle of the World Cup capping
off a great year, it is hoped that grassroots Rugby League
in Queensland will receive a further spin-off in a range of
areas, particularly at junior level. Registrations of junior
players and insured teams were already at a record
high for 2008, with junior player (Under-7 to Under-18)
registrations reaching 41,329, an increase of 791 on
2007. There were 2,455 insured junior teams which
marked an increase of 97 teams from the previous year.” Australian Rugby Football League 2008 Annual Report (Part 1). “Queensladn Rugby League Report”, Page 10
“The Victorian Rugby League junior and senior
competitions have both enjoyed significant growth during
the 2008 season. The junior competitions recorded a
22 per cent increase in player registrations in 2008 and
this growth can be attributed to the continued terrific work
undertaken by Development Officers who have established
excellent links within the primary and secondary school
systems.
The Senior competition bucked the national trend
achieving a 25% increase in registered participants in the
2008 season. This growth can be largely attributed to the
two new teams that entered the First Grade competition in
2008, however the commitment of the clubs in embracing
providing playing opportunities to women and older
males has also had a positive impact upon senior club
participation.
The Melbourne Storm Development Schools program
continued to deliver outstanding results in 2008. School
based Rugby League participation has increased 40
per cent from 19,807 participants in 2007 to 33,444
participants in 2008. The Development team has
conducted 58 Rugby League competitions in 2008 and
this is up from the 40 Rugby League competitions that
were held in 2007.” Australian Rugby Football League 2008 Annual Report (Part 1). “Victorian Rugby League Report”, Page 13
“The 2008 season had been an exciting year for the
Western Australian Rugby League. Overall participation
at school and club level has increased once again and
the development work done by our development staff has
been rewarded with increases in teams from both category
A and B Schools, both Primary and Secondary.” Australian Rugby Football League 2008 Annual Report (Part 1). Western Australia Rugby League Report”, Page 17
“The 2008 season was a very busy one for the development
unit. The Tier A and Tier B competitions were very successful
with record numbers in both Primary and Secondary
Schools. The Primary School competition commenced in
2007 with 6 schools and increased to 19 schools with
42 teams in 2008. The Secondary schools comprised 19
schools with 18 senior teams and 15 junior teams.
More teachers are completing coaching, refereeing and
strength and conditioning courses.” Australian Rugby Football League 2008 Annual Report (Part 1). South AustralianRugby League Report”, Page 19
Realist said | February 2nd 2010 @ 10:38pm | Report comment
“Strong growth at the grassroots level, the introduction
of successful new initiatives, elite level Rugby League’s
return to suburban venues and memorable celebrations
characterised a huge Centenary season for the New South
Wales Rugby League.” Australian Rugby Football League 2008 Annual Report (Part 1). “New South Wales Rugby League Report”, Page 8
sportfreak said | February 3rd 2010 @ 7:20pm | Report comment
you sound like the AFL propaganda machine realist.
Give a kid at primary school a kick of a sherrin and suddenly he is included in the participation numbers.
rugby is back in 2010 baby.
pls go back to mungo land
sportfreak said | February 3rd 2010 @ 7:34pm | Report comment
Here you go realist – some back at ya!
Total Rugby participation in Queensland passes 90,000
Tuesday, 15 December 2009
The success of Queensland Rugby’s “come and try” campaigns in schools across the state has boosted total player participation numbers in Queensland past 90,000 in 2009.
Club rugby and formal school competitions also experienced a lift in players numbers in 2009, although nothing like the 160 per cent boost in the “non-regular” competition category for schools which covers carnival-style, one or two day events. Non-regular schools participants jumped from 3,689 in 2008 to 9,615 in 2009.
The second “come and try” category – where QRU development officers run one-off “sampling programs” at schools – jumped by 70 per cent between 2008 and 2009, from 21,315 to 36,043.
“In the past Queensland Rugby has focused mainly on regular competition as the best form of participation, but we’ve been gradually widening the net and increasing our missionary efforts to give more kids a taste of the game and that’s really taken off this year,” said QRU Rugby Manager Anthony Connellan, who heads up the Rugby Development Department.
“These programs are very much club-focused: if a junior player enjoys the experience and wants to keep playing, the local junior club will reap the benefit.”
QRU Rugby Development staff plan to build further on the success of the sampling program in 2010, liaising closely with junior clubs to identify or target schools and particular age groups in their catchment in order to grow junior numbers. The sampling program will be bigger and better in 2010 and be badged “Rookies to Reds”.
From 68,081 in 2008, total numbers including all categories of participation jumped by 32.8 per cent to 90,451.
Regular competition numbers rose from 43,077 in 2008 to 44,793, however some of the 10 per cent rise in senior player numbers (8,857 to 9,793) was attributed to improved senior player registration systems in 2009.
Junior club numbers went up by 4.4 per cent (14,080 to 14,701), led by the Sunshine Coast (7.1 per cent), Cairns (8.2 per cent), Townsville (6 per cent) and Brisbane (4.7 per cent).
But the biggest junior success story was in Central Highlands, where a brand new competition attracted 294 junior players in its first year, thanks to the community support of Xstrata Coal.
“Central Highlands was new territory for us in 2009 and to go from next to nothing to almost 300 players in the space of a year was really rewarding for our regional Development Officer Rob Donaghue and for Xstrata Coal, who wanted to help contribute to the health and well-being of their local community,” Connellan said.
Realist said | February 4th 2010 @ 12:52pm | Report comment
Junior Club Members in Queensland
Rugby League: 41,329 (2008)
Rugby Union: 14,080 (2008)
Rugby League wins convincingly!
King of the Gorganites said | February 4th 2010 @ 1:05pm | Report comment
what about internationally?
name me 5 other parts of the world where RL dominates RU?