Wellsy13 wrote:
Then how noble of you to go around continuously pointing out the flaws of the RFL with nothing to offer back. Just imagine if you talked to everyone like that. Or if everyone talked to you like that all the time. What a cr*p world we'd live in.
I call it as I see it.....and at present, there is a lot of bullshit and very little substance to the press releases of RLWC 2013.
Wellsy13 wrote:
One of the Aussie games are in Ireland, a development area, against a development side. A chance for then to support their team in a big game. It has already sold more tickets than any other Ireland RL international ever, although that doesn't matter to you because you count people not there rather than people there. 5k in London or 5k in Ireland? What's the difference?
I can assure you that Australia v Ireland in London would have generated more interest and fans than the game in Limerick will.
Wellsy13 wrote:
The PNG games are in Hull because of the Hull connection. Good use of knowledge. Again, why London? You can't expect the expats to fill out 4 internationals against lower teams when they can't do so for a game against themselves.
Not sure what attendances you're expecting for Australia v Fiji and Ireland or NZ v PNG and Samoa, but you'd have seen better crowds in London.
Wellsy13 wrote:
Your solution is worse than what is happening.
How so? Have the ticket sales for Ireland and Fiji v the Aussies and NZ v samoa/PNG been announced yet?
Wellsy13 wrote:
How would you change that? If you can't, stop bloody moaning about it.
The RFL need to engage the media straight on......but they continue to seem almost embarrassed to blow their own trumpets. As it is, other than the BBC games and the England results, the rest of the tournament will be buried beneath other sports.
Wellsy13 wrote:
But then you'd have moaned that we've sold a pathetic 25k for our headline international and opening game.
You'd also have stopped over 20k people being able to see the game live at the ground.
Better to have 2 packed out stadiums on national FTA than what Cardiff will look like for Wales v Italy.
Wellsy13 wrote:
I guarantee there will be more people at the Wales v Italy at MS than there would be anywhere else. But you count empty seats. Where would you have had it? And would you have likely moaned about it anyway?
Above you asked what I'd do about the media.....to start with, I'd create demand for tickets by picking reasonable venues. 75,000 for the 2 opening games and 90,000 for the semi-finals will be lucky to deliver half full stadiums....if it appears the public can't be arsed attending, then why will the media write about it?
Wellsy13 wrote:
Then you'd have killed the final. What an absolutely awful idea. Why would you need such a proposal? The final is selling well. The group games have more tickets sold now than your suggestions would have allowed. Overall, the RLWC under your proposal would have reached far few people and generated a lot more negative publicity.
If they had made 300,000 tickets available for this tournament, it would have now been a sell out and every game would have had packed houses. Reports of full houses and passionate fans do more good for the game than Australia murdering another team at Wembley stadium in front of 20,000 fans, with the majority of the crowd for the earlier semi-final on the train home...
Wellsy13 wrote:
You'd have had a real reason to moan if this happened!
2 million quid profit and hald empty stadiums will not boost the game in the UK....
Wellsy13 wrote:
They'd have had to have confirmed with broadcasters about kick off times to be able to do that. Much harder in this country with PL. something you'd have no control over.
Regardless of the actual games, a "savings scheme" type of arrangement with 2013 ST's would have been a good move.....wait til you here the lists of excuses regarding the economy when the walk up fans fail to arrive.
Wellsy13 wrote:
What'd be worse? All on Sky, or big games on BBC and the smaller games (the ones you say no one would be interested in) on Premier Sports?
SKY and the BBC combined.....as it is, the agreement with Premier is all that was left open after messing SKY about.
Wellsy13 wrote:
Why would it? Only someone looking hard to moan about something would pull out such a traditional whinge.
For RL to survive as a viable professional sport in the UK it needs to be seen as a National Sport.......this world cup will do nothing to make this happen.
Wellsy13 wrote:
But when it happens for Italy RU it doesn't matter?
Course it does.........but then again, Italy v Wales in Union is watched by 75,000 paying fans in a packed stadium....let's see how Cardiff looks by 5pm shall we?
Wellsy13 wrote:
And before you talk about national switching as some kind of rebuttal, would it have made a difference had he never chosen Aussie RL?! You'd have still made such a negative whingy comment.
My stance on eligibility in RL is well documented....it's a farce.
Wellsy13 wrote:
Once you accept that you're just a massive whinger with nothing to offer, you can begin to change!
No I'm not.....I am a realist who sees so many contradictions in the planning of this RLWC......the Gnoll for one Wales game, Cardiff for another
If England beat Australia in the first game, then their QF being in Wrexham
Limerick and Bristol being selected as venues with little if any long term benefit resulting?
This RLWC will make a profit based on the revenue made from selling the hosting rights to towns and the TV deal, but the games appeal to the general public has been sacrificed IMHO.
Wellsy13 wrote:
55k>25k
20k>10k
Only pessimists count empty seats.
Sports fans, with no affiliation to anything other than their soccer team will be tuned to SKY and will not hear a word about the RLWC other than maybe on their news bulletins. These News Bulletins will show packed soccer stadiums and Twickenham with 82,000 inside before switching to the tries from Italy v Wales in front of 20,000 at best in a 75,000 seater stadium....
Tickets at a tenner each or perception that there is a demand/interest in the game?
Wellsy13 wrote:
And 55k would see most of the top tier closed, meaning it would still be packed in the lower tiers.
I repeat....why play in a 75,000 or 90,000 seat stadium unless you intend to sell every seat? Empty seats gives the perception that the game doesn't have enough fans and that there's no demand.....create a demand by having fans whine that they couldn't get a ticket to an England v Australia game......it's how the other code have built the demand for tickets to internationals....by creating a demand
Wellsy13 wrote:
Who says Wales would sell 10k for a game against Italy anyway?!
That would involve MARKETING as opposed to taking the easy double header route.
Marketing RL is not easy at the best of times, but when you offer cheap ST's and discounted last minute offers, fans start to expect a bargain. Once you market by discounting, it becomes very very very difficult to get people to purchase without discounting.
Exhibit A. Give away naming rights to SL and what happens next time you try to sell them?
The RFL and organisers of this RLWC seem content to applaud themselves for mediocrity.....it seems some fans are happy to join them.......but even more fans seem even happier to sit at home and watch the games rather than attend.
_zps67e534e4.jpg)
