Tre cool, you prejudged 82,000 people on the few that you know, that's quite a sweeping statement and generalisation in itself. And I have asked you but you still haven't answered, if RL fans are as passionate as you claim, how come our international attendances have been generally very poor for a number of years?
was watching an nfl doco. on one of their teams and they used the term bomb to describe those long high passes from quaterback to running back and i think gibson took that idea, realized you cant throw the ball forward in RL and adapted it to a "bomb" kick we have
eels fan wrote:
You poor poor obsessed fat ex vichyballin potato thieving stoaway.
Yes, that's exactly what McGeechan's saying. No, really it is.
Tackling in Union has a slightly different objective to League. It's an opportunity to compete for the ball and win possession, either by turning the ball carrier so he's facing the wrong way or standing him up in a "choke" tackle and preventing the ball getting to ground, thereby winning your side the put-in at the scrum.
Simply smashing someone as hard as you can - assuming it's done legally, using the arms rather than as a shoulder charge - and taking him to the floor isn't always the most effective tackling technique in Union. If Burgess runs around a Union pitch just lining people up to smash them, he's not necessarily going to be doing the best possible job for his team.
Given his record, I'm going to go with McGeechan and my interpretation rather than yours, if that's ok?
Don't talk daft. It is obvious to any one eyed bitter moron that the 4 time lions coach and grand slam winning coach doesn't know what he's on about. Slamming Sam is your man....even playing in the front row
Tre cool, you prejudged 82,000 people on the few that you know, that's quite a sweeping statement and generalisation in itself. And I have asked you but you still haven't answered, if RL fans are as passionate as you claim, how come our international attendances have been generally very poor for a number of years?
No I didn't I made a statement of opinion based on my extensive knowledge of rugby union culture. Do you disagree that the vast majority of England fans in a Twickenham crowd couldn't name all of their elite club league head coaches? That was my point. Do you disagree with it?
I also had already explained that the main reason for their big international crowds are historical and cultural, so I didn't need to answer your question.
RL international crowds are on par with our active club fan base, ru's are far far higher.
was watching an nfl doco. on one of their teams and they used the term bomb to describe those long high passes from quaterback to running back and i think gibson took that idea, realized you cant throw the ball forward in RL and adapted it to a "bomb" kick we have
eels fan wrote:
You poor poor obsessed fat ex vichyballin potato thieving stoaway.
No I didn't I made a statement of opinion based on my extensive knowledge of rugby union culture. Do you disagree that the vast majority of England fans in a Twickenham crowd couldn't name all of their elite club league head coaches? That was my point. Do you disagree with it?
I also had already explained that the main reason for their big international crowds are historical and cultural, so I didn't need to answer your question.
RL international crowds are on par with our active club fan base, ru's are far far higher.
66,000 fans attend 6 aviva games at the weekend on average, 72,000,attend SL games. 82,000 will attend the opening of an envelope at twickenham paying £60 each but it takes double headers to get close to the SL average or it's normally about 36,000 paying £15 a pop.
Not disagreeing with you that many union international fans are not über fans but I think even the most narrow minded league fan would take 82,000 ax murderers paying £60 at a stand alone RL international.....decrying union for it is just being bitter
Talking of Union's fallen glitterati now trying to scrimp a crust from media work and pretending they understand Rugby League, it seems Clive Woodward is waxing lyrical about Sam Burgess. And quite rightly so.
Talking of Union's fallen glitterati now trying to scrimp a crust from media work and pretending they understand Rugby League, it seems Clive Woodward is waxing lyrical about Sam Burgess. And quite rightly so.
Much of the arguments/debate on this thread (actually, on this board) are futile. Everyone seems to be in agreement that league is the better product but falls way behind on exposure, international set up and attendances, well I'd rather have the former (substance over style). League will never get the same exposure as RU much in the same way that football will always dwarf union and badminton will never even get a look in! Leagues aim should be and will be to maximise its potential and.appeal though not to compare with union where the above is concerned, culture and history will always keep league behind union In this regard no matter how good a job the NGB do.
was watching an nfl doco. on one of their teams and they used the term bomb to describe those long high passes from quaterback to running back and i think gibson took that idea, realized you cant throw the ball forward in RL and adapted it to a "bomb" kick we have
eels fan wrote:
You poor poor obsessed fat ex vichyballin potato thieving stoaway.
Much of the arguments/debate on this thread (actually, on this board) are futile. Everyone seems to be in agreement that league is the better product but falls way behind on exposure, international set up and attendances,
At last
Seth wrote:
well I'd rather have the former (substance over style).
Oh Bugger...and you were doing so well.
Seth wrote:
League will never get the same exposure as RU much in the same way that football will always dwarf union and badminton will never even get a look in! Leagues aim should be and will be to maximise its potential and.appeal though not to compare with union where the above is concerned, culture and history will always keep league behind union
Not that I disagree, but "accepting our lot/knowing our place" isn't for me. I'd rather up the effort in trying to attract the public's attention by being far more clever and organised than we have in the past. I know I bang on about it, but we really do undersell ourselves at times......rather than bitch on about the vichy government 70+ years ago, look ahead and try to build the game. Personally, rather than Wembley or the Olympic stadium for the Kiwis opening game next year, I'd have it at Arsenal and offer their members a really good deal....showcase the game to a new audience.
Seth wrote:
In this regard no matter how good a job the NGB do.
Much of the arguments/debate on this thread (actually, on this board) are futile. Everyone seems to be in agreement that league is the better product but falls way behind on exposure, international set up and attendances,
At last
Seth wrote:
well I'd rather have the former (substance over style).
Oh Bugger...and you were doing so well.
Seth wrote:
League will never get the same exposure as RU much in the same way that football will always dwarf union and badminton will never even get a look in! Leagues aim should be and will be to maximise its potential and.appeal though not to compare with union where the above is concerned, culture and history will always keep league behind union
Not that I disagree, but "accepting our lot/knowing our place" isn't for me. I'd rather up the effort in trying to attract the public's attention by being far more clever and organised than we have in the past. I know I bang on about it, but we really do undersell ourselves at times......rather than bitch on about the vichy government 70+ years ago, look ahead and try to build the game. Personally, rather than Wembley or the Olympic stadium for the Kiwis opening game next year, I'd have it at Arsenal and offer their members a really good deal....showcase the game to a new audience.
Seth wrote:
In this regard no matter how good a job the NGB do.
Not that I disagree, but "accepting our lot/knowing our place" isn't for me. I'd rather up the effort in trying to attract the public's attention by being far more clever and organised than we have in the past. I know I bang on about it, but we really do undersell ourselves at times......rather than bitch on about the vichy government 70+ years ago, look ahead and try to build the game. Personally, rather than Wembley or the Olympic stadium for the Kiwis opening game next year, I'd have it at Arsenal and offer their members a really good deal....showcase the game to a new audience.
I would rather have a product on the field that entertained me than union with pomp and ceremony but a turgid product on the whole.
I work in sport development, well recognised acronym National Governing Body (ie RFL, RFU, FA, LTA...).
gutterfax wrote:
At last
Oh Bugger...and you were doing so well.
Not that I disagree, but "accepting our lot/knowing our place" isn't for me. I'd rather up the effort in trying to attract the public's attention by being far more clever and organised than we have in the past. I know I bang on about it, but we really do undersell ourselves at times......rather than bitch on about the vichy government 70+ years ago, look ahead and try to build the game. Personally, rather than Wembley or the Olympic stadium for the Kiwis opening game next year, I'd have it at Arsenal and offer their members a really good deal....showcase the game to a new audience.
I'm not saying 'we' shouldn't grow and maximise the game, be innovative and smarter but some external factors will always exist and comparing attendances with union is futile given the catchment of both sports and the cultural (media) influence. Instead compare growth year on year, and going by that principle the international game is improving.
was watching an nfl doco. on one of their teams and they used the term bomb to describe those long high passes from quaterback to running back and i think gibson took that idea, realized you cant throw the ball forward in RL and adapted it to a "bomb" kick we have
eels fan wrote:
You poor poor obsessed fat ex vichyballin potato thieving stoaway.
I would rather have a product on the field that entertained me than union with pomp and ceremony but a turgid product on the whole.
I agree that we have the better product, but that's not to say we can't strive to attract more fans to the game. It has got to the stage now where the RFL are flogging cheap tickets to next years finals and magic weekend under the guise of "early bird".,"black Friday" and now "xmas bargains". No doubt we'll have a "january sale" and "easter offers" next year too as well as last minute offers......stacking it high and selling it cheap isn't marketing, it's devaluing the product to the extent where your average RL fan is happy to leave it until the last minute, safe in the knowledge that nobody pays full price anymore.
If we devalue the product and if you take into account that 11 of the 12 teams are in one locale, then it gives the media perfect excuse to treat us as badly as they seem to. A ticket for a tenner to see Castleford v Wakefield is hardly NATIONAL news.
Seth wrote:
I work in sport development, well recognised acronym National Governing Body (ie RFL, RFU, FA, LTA...).
I have to say I'd never heard it used before and I've done work for a few NGB's over here. Maybe it's the culture of acronyms that seems to be growing....I remember a contract I had working with Primary Care Trusts in the UK back in 2008/9.....the first thing they sent me was a spreadsheet with about 400 acronyms.....the first meeting I attended I swear nobody spoke English....just acronyms
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: karetaker, reffy and 97 guests
REPLY
Please note using apple style emoji's can result in posting failures.
Use the FULL EDITOR to better format content or upload images, be notified of replies etc...