Rugby league's profile increasing on French television

I will spell it out as discretely and succinctly as I can Emric.As it appears obvious your knowledge of rl in France is rather limited.Yes you are wrong, because once the war ended ru was the offical rugby code.They got the goodies so to speak from that moment on.. Rugby league in France prior to Dec41 was going ganbusters,when the decision in December 1941 to ban the game was instituted by the Vichy Govt, with prodding by some ru officials. The code lost everything,to suggest the event did not have a long term effect when @ they had no assets B)The french ru supposedly amateur was paying money to players right up to 95,and securing the best rl young talent because the game was not recognised and c) the rl was in no position to grow the grassroots game to any extent because the code was not officially recognised,missing out on schoool PT teachers,facilities etc. I will quote you part of the actual French Govt findings investigated by the Commission into Sport under Vichy under Marie-Georges Buffet Page 34-35translated(Ironic only 50 copies made for the 183 page report. "The condemnation of rugby league is in fact essentially the steps taken by leaders of the French Federation of Rugby fvirent that in the circumstances of the moment an opportunity to get rid of rugby league". The finger pointing was directed at one code,and it wasn't rugby league. The two officals involved were Col Joseph(Jep) Pascot who was director of sports in the Vichy govt ministry and who played a part in the FFR.. A report into sport for the Vichy govt was prepared by Dr Paul Voivenel,hon pres of the fFR,a close assoc of senior figures in the Vichy regime. To ignore the findings of a govt,to ignore historians that have done a hell of a lot of groundwork,is to be in denial. I have stated the admin was also responsible at times,just as any code's admin can make incompetent decisions.Just like the ARU under Flower. But I put it to you,if rugby league had not been banned in that country in 46,they would be a damn side stronger and bigger than they are today. If perchance you believe my summation is BS,I humbly suggest you can find searchable evidence by visiting the Documentation Center France-Europe-Monde in Paris. I am yet to read or hear an acknowledgement by any ru fan condemning French ru officials for what they did.It would appear almost from a cynicla observer"tacit approval".

CC Rugby League has had over 100 years of professionalism to dominate Rugby Union. The true reason it hasn't is because in South Africa, New Zealand, and United Kingdom people were not interested in switching to the 13 man code. League was big in France in the 1950's right through to the 1980's the first rugby league world cup was held in France in my memory services me correct and they almost won it. Correct me if I'm wrong but hadn't the Vichi government collapsed by the end of 1945 and yet League remained strong in France right up until the late 1970's, early 1980's? How the hell is all of this Rugby Unions faults. League had all the advantages they openly paid their players, they could offer hundreds of thousands of dollars per year to the best players if not millions. Leagues going on and on about its all Rugby Unions fault have been part of the problem for League - for a sport which always had a eye on the future, it always lived in tangible moments of the past

The English are more than capable of beating the current NSW team. Both sides are pretty similar -- decent foward packs with average backlines -- although NSW are a bit stronger on the wing while the English have the best forward pack in the world, better than Australia and New Zealand. The only weakness in the English forward pack is their dummy half, although Sinfield has done a good job there. Tomkins is a freakish talent. He has the potential to rival Slater as the best fullback in the game. I'd like to see England or Great Britain play a 3 Test match series against New Zealand during State of Origin.

Rugby league has always been a professional sport. Its modus operandi was to reward its athletes. The RFU chose to be amateur because it was run by a bunch of fatcats who wanted to keep all of the money to themselves. Don't blame rugby league for the RFU's incompetence and refusal to get with the times. The RFU was given all sorts of entitlements from the British military and private schools under the pretence that it was an amateur sport. Rugby union made under-the-table payments to their best players to keep them in the game. The British military introduced the sport to some countries around the world, free of charge. Rugby league was barred from the British military until the 1990s. Private schools in England, New Zealand, Brisbane and Sydney have favoured the game since the 1900s. Private schools still bar rugby league. Vichy is the most disgraceful incident in the history of all sports. Any self-respecting rugby union fan would feel a great sense of shame for the injustice that the FFR and Vichy heaped upon the FFR 13. Rugby union supporters on this site still continue to dismiss the incident. That makes them almost as bad as the criminals from the Vichy era. Take away the militant support that 6 private schools in Brisbane and Sydney give rugby union and it would crumble.

"Crowds are already up by 29 per cent in 2011, with an average attendance of 29,436 watching the Reds win seven of their eight home games in their charge to top of the competition standings. A 50,000-strong crowd for Saturday's clash with the Blues would give the Reds a season average of 31,723 eclipsing the current mark of NRL giants the Broncos, who are attracting 30,932 per game." http://m.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/reds-crowds-set-to-overtake-broncos-20110628-1gp5p.html Maths isn't my strong suit, but if my calculations are correct, then the Reds average for 2010 was 20,900. The Broncos average for 2011 turned out to be 33,209. Their average for 2010 was 35,032. The last time their average was down around the Reds' 2010 average was in 2002 (20,131). http://stats.rleague.com/rl/crowds/brisbane.html The Lions were averaging around 30,000 during their successful period. Does that mean Aussie rules was huge in Brisbane? The participation rate for Aussie rules in Brisbane isn't that high. Same goes for rugby union. If you don't count the few GPS schools that force it down the students throat, then very few people are playing it. Rugby league has way more registered players in Brisbane. Unlike rugby union, the junior competitions are propped up by GPS school teams. Take away the GPS school teams and the junior union competitions would shrink in size.

Big Kev, More accurately, the Reds get 30 000 a game when they are winning. Their long term average is more like about 19k

mate visit NZ, or SA or Wales and see your concept of class war in RU is a load of BS. Dont show your ignorance.

The stance RU took after years and years of RL poaching its best players no?

Mate you are dreaming. The Reds get 30,000 a game. Rugby is huge in Brissy

I wish one of the mods would explain the reason for their bias.

The premiership clubs in the North are doing poorly, but the grassroots of RU in the North is still very strong. The academy sides are pumping out top quality players they are just moving to the richer clubs in the south. Similar thing happens with RL players developed in Sydney's West. Lots of good players but they're not going to Parra or Penrith and those teams are doing poorly.

41-46 yes the commission findings spelt it out.Post war the French govt first, second and third and at times bad rl admin. No one comes out a cleanskin.

So you blame Rugby Union for what happened in France? in 1945, and then again in France in the 1970's?

Maximus, In the north of England RU is dying. Even UK conservative spreadsheats have had article on the demise of RU in the North. In the South and West of the UK it is going great but alot of this is because of corporate financial assistance. The South and West of England has more RU players than the southern hemisphere combined and yet the RU still cant develop a top side and still buys RL players to bolster its poor international record. However, once you get past Sheffield no one cares about RU, it is all football and RL and RL has successfully expanded into London, North Wales and Bristol. Now go have fun with that.

At least in Paris they didn't sprinkle glass on the field Maximus. The code would be lucky to own gates,as they lost the lot.Or to be precise had their assets purloined with the support of.....read the Commmissions findings.

Well no Maximus.Until such time as rugby league is legally not entitiled to include rugby in its name,it is legally entitiled to fight for the right to do so,when it is denied.Which is exactly what happened in France. There are in fact two codes of rugby.They are differentiated by one being union and one league One can argue that soccer is the only code entitiled ti use the name football ,yet we have various codes using football in their moniker. We know who took over the corpoarte ownership in 41 and for the next 50 years or so..

Matt S Fair dinkum u are deluded - your last para says it all Rooney and many EPL stars follow RL - they also probably follow cricket, RU,NFL etc...