Apparently:



1987 New Zealand 230 million

1991 UK and France 1.4 billion

1995 South Africa 2.3 billion

1999 UK and France 3.1 billion

2003 Australia 3.4 billion

2007 France 4.2 billion



I think there's more than a hint of this going on:



[urlhttp://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/why-fifas-claim-of-one-billion-tv-viewers-was-a-quarter-right-438302.html[/url

I'm not mocking anything.



If you read the article you'll see that it's the Union supporters that are fed up with stop/start nature of the game.

I've been here several times before. The top 20 most populace countries in the world (c4.5b) have barely heard of yawnion & the majority of their population wont even have access to a TV.

Regardless of what theGuardian says, you were quite clearly mocking the dwindling crowds at RU games.



I will remind you of these when the six nations is back on.

Please do, half filled stadiums et all.

Aye right.

England v New Zealand (3,000 short of a sell out)

Ireland vs South Africa (15,000 short of a sell out)

Wales vs Australia (21,000 short of a sell out)



After 30 years of impressive growth we are now seeing a decline in the gates and this just isn't the three games mentioned above but every International union side.

The supporters won't pay to watch ***** 3-3, 6-6, 15-9 or 21-18 games that have no tries.

Friendlies, not 6 Nations.

By and large, I look extremely enviously at the crowds they get in the RU premiership. This thread feels absolutely contrary to fact.

Contrary to fact or perception?



I would agree that a loss making 38k att at Wembley looks far better than a loss making 7k at Watford. Or 5k at Newcastle. Or 4k at Carnegie.



But all the above figures are better than 18k at Wigan, 17k at Leeds and even 10k at Odsal, right?

Fact and perception.





Hi tigertot, so have I bud

, my favourite quote was from the US media expert who revealed that the ruwc figures were based on viewing figures from more countries then actualy exsist but whose inhabitants, you'll be shocked to learn, were all union mad.

Thats one of the barmiest things I've read on here in ages. You compare some of the higher supported clubs in superleague with some lower ones ones in Union. Whats the point in that? Its rather like a Leicester RU fan proudly listing their average gate and comparing them with Salford to prove League is on its .



Quote Leicester, Northampton and Quins crowds and then see. Carnegie are Quins RL, Newcastle are Salford and Wasps are Hull KR.

RL used to get attendances of 40-50k+ for games against the Aussies in the late 80s and early 90s. There's no chance of that now. Does that mean our game is dying? Er no.



So why apply the same thinking to union?

Spreading the RL Gospel www.loverugbyleague.com/news_481 ... radar.html I do like some of the names I'm sure TT could apply those variations to our RL Team names over here?

Spreading the RL Gospel www.loverugbyleague.com/news_481 ... radar.html I do like some of the names I'm sure TT could apply those variations to our RL Team names over here?

Eng v NZ - played in a stadium that holds 82000. Total then (using your figures) 79000

Ire v SA - played in a stadium that holds 50000. Total - 35000

Wales vs Australia - played in a stadium that holds 74500. Total - 53500



For friendly matches as has been stated. Incidentally, none of these were anywhere near half-filled stadiums.



Just stop making yourself look bitter and foolish.

Really? More barmy than the fella on the VT who really, really believes that the RFL wants weak clubs in the Championships



You posted the following:





So to attendences at which union premiership clubs are you eluding?



Riiight, so that'll be the stronger clubs then. Barmy indeed.



But not as barmy as believing that the loss making union premiership 'event' games are an indicator of the popularity of the club game in England. Saracens in particular have taken a hit financially and attendence wise; They expected a bump in attendences at Watford. It didnt happen.

Strip away the event games and the attendences between the two sports are actually pretty similar.





Heh, heh, I dont remember Salford being forced to sell their ground to Northern Rock (just weeks before it went down) in order to stave off bankruptcy and still ending up 4 million in debt.

I think the Carnegie - London comparision is very apt tho. Its interesting that union believe (generally) that 3 - 5k attendences in Leeds are ok and help the perception of a growing national sport. We on the other hand..