You have obviously not read this board much before. It that one of your pigeons ting on your head ? How appropriate!

What we can't see is what the whippet is doing up his leg.....lol

What has he said that's wrong? Maybe he is trolling, but you can't deny the truth of it. It depresses me that we can't get the ground more than a quarter full.

Each sport has differing appeal so why compare RU with RL(I understand there are similarities) Chelsea get 40000 at their games and Guildford Flames Ice hockey 300. So what is it you are saying?



Every team wants full houses inclusive of Man Utd but it just isnt that easy

The club have taken the decision that in the absence of a new investor we are now run on a shoestring and we have staked the future of RL in London on bringing through youngsters and being reliant on future years of academy talent being good enough to sustain a winning team in years to come. Its a calculated risk and probably the sensible option - but for us to succeed as a financial entity the team needs to be winning games. We're never going to attract new fans if we get thirty point tubbings every week. Success on the field should mean more people through the door - or at least I assume that's where the club's management are coming from.

For the record, Guildford get far more than that. I have been known to watch Telford Tigers and even the Guildford v Telford games, a financial mis-match along the lines of us v Wire and usually about as competitive, pull in around the thousand mark. If Guildford stay at the top their games in the run in will be all but sell outs.

They're Harlequins, we're Harlequins. Understand the differences and the arguments, but, as I wrote, our failure to attract decent levels of support depresses me. It's a good job that DH

is made of sterner stuff.

Well hello Barry McKenzie.

You couldn't be further from the truth.

Just don't f^&king feed it!

It is the demographic of the crowd that is fascinating - at least half of them have no idea what is going on on the pitch a/ due to ignorance and the complexity of the game and b/ because they are not watching it. Plenty of Mums and Kids all shivering to death and you think why not come in the summer to warmth and a simpler game!

... and judging by the highlights (sic) on ITV last night, less atmosphere from a sell-out crowd (14k?) than L&L generate among a 3K. During one passage of play I dropped a pin and shattered my eardrum.

All it says to me is that a huge amount of people are ****ing idiots.

I still find it puzzling the attitude of some RL fans to the other code. I am a sports fan.....I draw the line at soccer which I feel is one of the biggest con jobs ever...paying over 90 quid to watch a 0-0 draw has to be a sign of early stage dementia.....but I can quite happily watch Union. It is not as exciting as League and I have to say, the way the rules are being constantly changed shows that the IRB can see this, but I still feel that it is a sport worth watching on TV.



As for the marketing of the game.........Rugby League could do a lot worse than learn from what the RFU/IRB have achieved since professionalism.......what was an "old school tie" game has grown to such an extent that replica England Union Shirts can probably be found in the majority of wardrobes across the country......something the RFL can only dream of.

The fact that the RUWC will be available on ITV (well, I think it is) this year shows that the RFU/IRB see the benefit of free to air TV......

The Rugby Union World Cup is required to be on terrestrial TV

....DON'T CARE WHY IT IS....IT IS! That's the point......even here in NZ you will need to be a sky subscriber for all but the AB's games which have to be free to air.......and even then, Sky's free to air channel show them........

The fact that ITV will show the England games Live will mean that at the end of 2011.....Rugby Union games will feature in the top 10 watched programmes of the year......with Millions watching. RL needs to look long and hard at itself and its aspirations to be a national sport....it needs SKY to share the coverage of the RLWC or at least show it on a free to air channel. If they unscrambled one of their channels for the duration it would increase viewing figures, ad revenue and potentially interest in the game.

One of the biggest differences between the England RL team and the England RU team is that the Union side actually show up for their world cup tournaments and usually do pretty well.



And in a country where the oval ball game will always play second fiddle to the round ball game that goes a long way in attracting support.

Anything that England "do well' in will be lauded by the country at the moment......and if England RL can get anywhere near the RLWC final it will be a big thing......

I don't think that is a particularly significant factor. Despite being a relatively recent introduction the RUWC is much more credible as an tournament. I agree England have a good record but I am not convinced that better GB or England performances in the RLWC would have generated that much more interest.



The format and scheduling of the RLWC has been inconsistent as the organisers struggle to make the concept interesting enough to even the Australians.

To ad to the RL/RU discussion;



I started Secondary School in 2003 and the buzz surrounding England RU getting to the Quarter Finals and then Semi's was clear to see throughout my school year. Boys who were fans of Football teams suddenly got interested in the game, presumably because of the success the RU team were having on the pitch, unlike the Football team in the 2002 World Cup. If England would have been knocked out in the Quarter Finals then the interest would probably have ended in many boys. A lot of those boys are still playing RU seven years on and a few have represented Essex, so success looks to be the key.



The problem with the 2008 World Cup and 2010 Four Nations is the time difference in Australia and Britain. Most England games were Saturday mornings (our time) and many teenagers spend Saturday's lying in bed till 12-1 o'clock. England did reach the Semi's like there Union counterparts, but I think the fact that the RU team won is a major factor. Also, the games should be on terrestrial tele. The next RLWC is a massive one for the English game, if worked correctly the game could kick on. For example, England meet New Zealand in the Semi's at the DW Stadium and it kicks off at 6pm on Saturday night and is shown live on BBC, then it gives youngsters and anyone else a good time to watch the game. Kids can go upstairs and watch it in their room if Mum wants to watch rubbish TV or Dad and Lad can watch it and get an interest in the game.

where do you think the 2003 RUWC was held ?? The problem is that the RLWC is a non event.

It is.

Touchy GF? I was simply pointing out that it isn't the IRB seeing any benefit - it's not a choice.

You could equally say the RFL have seen the benefit of free to air by showing the Challenge Cup on BBC - which also has significant viewing numbers.

SLY TV tried to get into the 6 nations via the back door a few years ago....The RFU negotiaded a deal seperately from the other home nations....the IRB "sorted" that problem out. They see the benefit of FTA TV.......the RUWC was never on the protected list of old....but it was placed on it once it came into being because (a) the BBC thought they would win the rights and (b) because the IRB wanted it so.

The IRB benefit because it is another competition other than the 6 nations that gets people up at 6am to watch ENGLAND play in a comp.......if they don't have SKY it doesn't matter...it's on FTA. The more people who watch it...know about it...are more likely to buy a replica shirt with a rose on the right tit....all of these things help the IRB because they help the game in general.





The CC gets 4 or 5 games a year....the 6 nations gets 3 games a weekend for 5 weeks....if the BBC stopped showing the 6 nations the championship itself would start to struggle for crowds IMO.



FTA is key.....Murdoch has spent Billions on soccer to get it where it is, yet the BBC get very good audience figures for 30 games of Union every year for very little cash outlay.



If SL was on FTA TV I believe that the game would double its audience and attendances within 3 years.......but without the 1.2 million each, the clubs wouldn't survive. SKY TV is the Crack Cocaine of RL.....in my opinion.

You make some good points there GF,especially the monies we receive from Sky.

I think the other factor though is the way the media treat our game compared to union.

Let's be honest we have never been given a fair crack of the whip and it will be interesting to see the media coverage when the World Cup starts in 2013,but I am not holding my breath.