Re: typical RL : Tue May 03, 2011 3:52 pm  

tigerman49 wrote:

The big difference is the UEFA is a separate competition and less than 50% of the teams are eligible for it whereas 100% of the RL teamshave to make the trips that to me indicates a vast difference. Also taking into account how much money has been thrown at Harlequins and the Crusaders can you say that this justifies them being in the Super League when they cannot survive on their own attendances and before you say give them a chance the Harlequins have had 30 years to make it work and as we all know it never will.

It's not exactly a lot of trips.

How much money has been thrown at Harlequins and Crusaders? Who by? When?

Re: typical RL : Wed May 04, 2011 12:29 pm  

The game has always been about a competitive game of rugby league played in front of both home and away supporters. This is not a flexible statement that will change with time!

If the geography of teams restricts an away following.....well the geography ain't right for the game. The RFL must be bonkers if they expect that even the loyalist of fans can afford or justify the expense of traveling in their hundred's if not thousands week in week out. Either that or they don't care about the reality of the game as long as it fits with their ideal model.

We are not football, in any way or form. Hence comparrisons to the Champions League are about as far fetched as the tooth fairy. The money involved in RL is not even that which it was in football 40 years ago, and we don't and never will, have the World wide following which football commands.

Spreading the game might look good on a map, but empty seats don't look good on the TV or at the game. Yet the RFL's action confirm that they continue to negate the importance of having visiting fans, it will be the downfall of the game. Banter, singing, chanting is part of what gives a game it's atmosphere. Without this atmosphere....well you might as well save your increasingly hard to earn money and stay at home and cheer and shout at the TV with friends .....or use your £20 on beer and to go to the pub and enjoy the game in a pub atmosphere.

We all know as loyal home and away supporters, both supporters and teams feed off the buz and atmosphere at the game. It's the very same buz that makes us addicted to the game!! It's the very same buz that keeps us coming back, and enthuses our friends socially and at work to come to a game to see what it's all about. It certainly isn't seeing empty stadiums on tv that makes newcomers want to be a part of the game.

Simply put home and away supporters = buz = growing numbers,

NO visiting supporters = a game that your not bothered about missing = falling numbers!

Re: typical RL : Wed May 04, 2011 1:38 pm  

the_grobs wrote:

The game has always been about a competitive game of rugby league played in front of both home and away supporters. This is not a flexible statement that will change with time!

If the geography of teams restricts an away following.....well the geography ain't right for the game. The RFL must be bonkers if they expect that even the loyalist of fans can afford or justify the expense of traveling in their hundred's if not thousands week in week out. Either that or they don't care about the reality of the game as long as it fits with their ideal model.

We are not football, in any way or form. Hence comparrisons to the Champions League are about as far fetched as the tooth fairy. The money involved in RL is not even that which it was in football 40 years ago, and we don't and never will, have the World wide following which football commands.

Spreading the game might look good on a map, but empty seats don't look good on the TV or at the game. Yet the RFL's action confirm that they continue to negate the importance of having visiting fans, it will be the downfall of the game. Banter, singing, chanting is part of what gives a game it's atmosphere. Without this atmosphere....well you might as well save your increasingly hard to earn money and stay at home and cheer and shout at the TV with friends .....or use your £20 on beer and to go to the pub and enjoy the game in a pub atmosphere.

We all know as loyal home and away supporters, both supporters and teams feed off the buz and atmosphere at the game. It's the very same buz that makes us addicted to the game!! It's the very same buz that keeps us coming back, and enthuses our friends socially and at work to come to a game to see what it's all about. It certainly isn't seeing empty stadiums on tv that makes newcomers want to be a part of the game.

Simply put home and away supporters = buz = growing numbers,

NO visiting supporters = a game that your not bothered about missing = falling numbers!

This reminds me of Woolworths "we have always done it this way so why change"

Oh dear !!

Re: typical RL : Wed May 04, 2011 2:11 pm  

binks wrote:

This reminds me of Woolworths "we have always done it this way so why change"

Oh dear !!

Keep it as a local game for local people because that's worked so well so far, none of these jumped up taffs, frogs and cockneys etc. etc. (repeat 'til fade)

Re: typical RL : Wed May 04, 2011 2:20 pm  

binks wrote:

This reminds me of Woolworths "we have always done it this way so why change"

Oh dear !!

And your counter constructive point of view is............Woolworths!!!

Just tell me who and how it is going to be paid for and if Joe Public enjoys playing 'spot the visiting supporter'.

Re: typical RL : Wed May 04, 2011 3:36 pm  

My point is! if we just stood still like we have over the last decade Union will ( and other sports) get further ahead, or with sustainable growth develop the game take it further and increase our customer base while adapting to the changing world we live in.

We really need to get out of the "its our sport int pit village's"

Point 2 , please dont be under the impression we fund the sport because that belongs to Sky Yes they pay for it, do you really think Probiz would sponsor us without the Sky Deal??

Re: typical RL : Wed May 04, 2011 3:40 pm  

ParanoidAndroid wrote:

Keep it as a local game for local people because that's worked so well so far, none of these jumped up taffs, frogs and cockneys etc. etc. (repeat 'til fade)

I really hope thats sarcasm, if not im embarrassed for you !!

Re: typical RL : Wed May 04, 2011 5:24 pm  

Believe me I know that we live in Sky's pocket. It's just the use of the words 'sustainable' for growth development that I don't agree with. I think it is more a case of 'subsidised'!

I just think that the more we continue to climb deeper into SKY's pocket by spreading the game, as only they want....the harder it will be to climb back of their pocket if they ditch us. It's a matter of risk and reward. Each year we see the RFL bend more rules to suit SKY's game plan and our clubs climb deeper into financial debt/risk to try and chase the reward of SKY money (in what ever form).

My point earlier being that the game needs both sets of fans at the game, for the game to be at it's best. Without this I can't see the game being sufficiently attractive to entice new fans to the game, to fill these new stadiums.

Seriously when many look through the list of home fixtures for their season tickets. If there are games that they are prepared for whatever to miss, they are the ones where there is minimal visiting supporters. The reason being that there is no atmosphere. So is that feeling about any particular game constructive for 'sustained' growth?

Re: typical RL : Wed May 04, 2011 7:32 pm  

Fact is without the Sky money that is boosted by the less supported clubs and the money that the national exposer generates , we simply would lose more players to OZ/Union and then you would be having a go at the RFL for doing nothing to stem the flow ??

And you overlooked a response to my question about Probiz

Re: typical RL : Wed May 04, 2011 8:06 pm  

People seem to forget that there was life before SKY. There were sell out crowds before SKY, and there many attendance records set that 15 years on with SKY have not come any where near being toppled. The fact is that the RFL have allowed their world to revolve around SKY, and they are now in so deep its hard to know who sets the rules of our game SKY or the RFL. Well we actually do know.....its clearly SKY.

In regards to your Probiz question. It's a bit of an unreal situational question to ask. Just take a look around our ground, they have Probiz written on anything that could catch a camera shot now. Would any sponsor go to such extent without the expectation of their name appearing on TV to the many SKY viewers? But again, Probiz are not the first company to sponsor the club nor will they be the last. Sponsoring a club, as far cheaper than Paying directly for SKY advertising, and gets a lot more air-time and exposure. All credit to CP's marketing skills to capture the interests of Probiz and some sponsorship with it.

If I recall correctly the thread started in regards to a Paddy team getting into SL. My response was in regards to visiting fans, or lack of them and I'm still awaiting your response to the importance of home and away fans to create an atmosphere at a game? You've swerved round the topic so far, are visiting fans important to the game or not? A simple 'yes' or 'no' will do!!