Loosely translated to: 'I was wrong'

Whatever profit it makes I'll just come back and say that's decent so I'm right whatever happens.

Taking a leaf out of your book.

HTH

Quote William Eve="William Eve"Take it up with Rodney Walker who you are accusing of being a liar. Can you provide any evidence to support that assertion of yours? I'm often accused of an anti-Super League agenda so why would it suit my agenda to talk up the SL-era rlwc2000 as doing a lot better than it really did? Are you still annoyed because I outed your agenda when you downplayed the success of the world cup in 1995?'" I have just provided three separate links which confirm it lost £700,000. Rodney Walker might have been misled about the forecasts, he might have been spinning the press - we will never know. He resigned shortly afterwards which is interesting (see links). You are embarrassing yourself a little here where a simple 'I got it wrong' about the 2000 RLWC would probably be the right thing to say. Here are just some more links to help you out (including the financial fall out) www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyl ... costs.html www.theguardian.com/sport/2001/n ... andywilson www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyl ... d-Cup.html

Quote William Eve="William Eve"Take it up with Rodney Walker who you are accusing of being a liar. Can you provide any evidence to support that assertion of yours? I'm often accused of an anti-Super League agenda so why would it suit my agenda to talk up the SL-era rlwc2000 as doing a lot better than it really did? Are you still annoyed because I outed your agenda when you downplayed the success of the world cup in 1995?'" I have just provided three separate links which confirm it lost £700,000. Rodney Walker might have been misled about the forecasts, he might have been spinning the press - we will never know. He resigned shortly afterwards which is interesting (see links). You are embarrassing yourself a little here where a simple 'I got it wrong' about the 2000 RLWC would probably be the right thing to say. Here are just some more links to help you out (including the financial fall out) www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyl ... costs.html www.theguardian.com/sport/2001/n ... andywilson www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyl ... d-Cup.html

Ok I'm going to be controversial here and say both William and Shoe Shine can be right. Williams article relates to international federation making a profit of £2million. Shoe shine relates to the RFL making a loss. Both of these can be correct. I know people like to think the WC and international Rugby and the RFL are the same but they are not. The RFL has to bid to get the WC. Their bid could have meant that the International Federation made a profit along with international TV rights. However locally the game in the UK could have suffered as they over bid and so made a loss themselves. I disagree with Williams assessment that this WC is going to be a failure. But, he has conceded that it will be the best attended, is likely to make a profit and his sticking point is purely the size of the profit and the average attendances not being the best ever. But as has been pointed out this would be difficult with more smaller games this time round. It's not like we can double the final, to match the increase in smaller games. But if you want to see a real negative post, about RL and the WC, from someone who did not even dive of the wrong end of the board. He missed the swimming pool completely. www.leaguefreak.com/the-2013-rug ... ster-1301/

Ok I'm going to be controversial here and say both William and Shoe Shine can be right. Williams article relates to international federation making a profit of £2million. Shoe shine relates to the RFL making a loss. Both of these can be correct. I know people like to think the WC and international Rugby and the RFL are the same but they are not. The RFL has to bid to get the WC. Their bid could have meant that the International Federation made a profit along with international TV rights. However locally the game in the UK could have suffered as they over bid and so made a loss themselves. I disagree with Williams assessment that this WC is going to be a failure. But, he has conceded that it will be the best attended, is likely to make a profit and his sticking point is purely the size of the profit and the average attendances not being the best ever. But as has been pointed out this would be difficult with more smaller games this time round. It's not like we can double the final, to match the increase in smaller games. But if you want to see a real negative post, about RL and the WC, from someone who did not even dive of the wrong end of the board. He missed the swimming pool completely. www.leaguefreak.com/the-2013-rug ... ster-1301/

Quote bewareshadows="bewareshadows"Ok I'm going to be controversial here and say both William and Shoe Shine can be right. Williams article relates to international federation making a profit of £2million. Shoe shine relates to the RFL making a loss. /'" Yeah one article a days after the end of the tournament against 10+ after final accounts have been completed and audited seems pretty balanced to me. He is just wrong and is squirming. Like was said before, let's see what healthy profits will be recorded for 2013 - after all the paperwork has been signed off. A few more related to the 2000 RLWC losses www.insidethegames.biz/sports/81 ... ld-cup-bid www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/spo ... ew-5501808 www.talkcycling.co.uk/2008/10/21 ... ld-cup-bid [i"Lewis, vice-chairman of the International Federation, maintains that the World Cup (2008) is on course to generate a profit - compared to a £700,000 loss in 2000 - and that the RFL remain keen to host the next tournament in 2013."[/i

Quote bewareshadows="bewareshadows"Ok I'm going to be controversial here and say both William and Shoe Shine can be right. Williams article relates to international federation making a profit of £2million. Shoe shine relates to the RFL making a loss. /'" Yeah one article a days after the end of the tournament against 10+ after final accounts have been completed and audited seems pretty balanced to me. He is just wrong and is squirming. Like was said before, let's see what healthy profits will be recorded for 2013 - after all the paperwork has been signed off. A few more related to the 2000 RLWC losses www.insidethegames.biz/sports/81 ... ld-cup-bid www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/spo ... ew-5501808 www.talkcycling.co.uk/2008/10/21 ... ld-cup-bid [i"Lewis, vice-chairman of the International Federation, maintains that the World Cup (2008) is on course to generate a profit - compared to a £700,000 loss in 2000 - and that the RFL remain keen to host the next tournament in 2013."[/i

Quote bewareshadows="bewareshadows"Ok I'm going to be controversial here and say both William and Shoe Shine can be right. Williams article relates to international federation making a profit of £2million. Shoe shine relates to the RFL making a loss. Both of these can be correct. I know people like to think the WC and international Rugby and the RFL are the same but they are not. The RFL has to bid to get the WC. Their bid could have meant that the International Federation made a profit along with international TV rights. However locally the game in the UK could have suffered as they over bid and so made a loss themselves.'" Well said. Differences in outlook and interpretation are usually where the interests of one party are strictly limited to issues and causes most directly related to them and their parochial circle, whilst other parties take a weltanschaaung approach by looking at the bigger picture for the game as a whole. Quote bewareshadows="bewareshadows"I disagree with Williams assessment that this WC is going to be a failure. But, he has conceded that it will be the best attended, is likely to make a profit and his sticking point is purely the size of the profit and the average attendances not being the best ever. But as has been pointed out this would be difficult with more smaller games this time round. It's not like we can double the final, to match the increase in smaller games.'" If 2000 made a profit, then 2013 surely will... the question is... how much? Half price tickets and lack of sponsorship ain't going to help. Other sources of income from the tournament have to be good in order to compensate. Quote bewareshadows="bewareshadows"But if you want to see a real negative post, about RL and the WC, from someone who did not even dive of the wrong end of the board. He missed the swimming pool completely. www.leaguefreak.com/the-2013-rug ... ster-1301/'" Ahh... League Freak Whether you agree with him or not, he deeply cares about the game of RL. Met up with him at the World Cup Final in Brisbane in 2008 for pre-drinks. There was a screw-up with ticket arrangements so I ended up swapping my ticket for his in order to accommodate a few other people in terms of sitting together. After the final, he couldn't remember the location of his Brisbane hotel so I ended up walking him back there as my knowledge of the Brisbane CBD was infinitely superior to his

Quote bewareshadows="bewareshadows"Ok I'm going to be controversial here and say both William and Shoe Shine can be right. Williams article relates to international federation making a profit of £2million. Shoe shine relates to the RFL making a loss. Both of these can be correct. I know people like to think the WC and international Rugby and the RFL are the same but they are not. The RFL has to bid to get the WC. Their bid could have meant that the International Federation made a profit along with international TV rights. However locally the game in the UK could have suffered as they over bid and so made a loss themselves.'" Well said. Differences in outlook and interpretation are usually where the interests of one party are strictly limited to issues and causes most directly related to them and their parochial circle, whilst other parties take a weltanschaaung approach by looking at the bigger picture for the game as a whole. Quote bewareshadows="bewareshadows"I disagree with Williams assessment that this WC is going to be a failure. But, he has conceded that it will be the best attended, is likely to make a profit and his sticking point is purely the size of the profit and the average attendances not being the best ever. But as has been pointed out this would be difficult with more smaller games this time round. It's not like we can double the final, to match the increase in smaller games.'" If 2000 made a profit, then 2013 surely will... the question is... how much? Half price tickets and lack of sponsorship ain't going to help. Other sources of income from the tournament have to be good in order to compensate. Quote bewareshadows="bewareshadows"But if you want to see a real negative post, about RL and the WC, from someone who did not even dive of the wrong end of the board. He missed the swimming pool completely. www.leaguefreak.com/the-2013-rug ... ster-1301/'" Ahh... League Freak Whether you agree with him or not, he deeply cares about the game of RL. Met up with him at the World Cup Final in Brisbane in 2008 for pre-drinks. There was a screw-up with ticket arrangements so I ended up swapping my ticket for his in order to accommodate a few other people in terms of sitting together. After the final, he couldn't remember the location of his Brisbane hotel so I ended up walking him back there as my knowledge of the Brisbane CBD was infinitely superior to his

William = League Freak ???

So does everyone on here. Pretty much everything he said in that sharticle it set to be proved wrong. He's a clueless moron and cares little about the game of rl outside the clique of the NRL.

League Freak I think took the last world cup and just ran with it. But his knowledge of the game in the UK seems to be somewhat floored. His assertion that only 3 clubs get big attendances. Leeds, Wigan and Saints.

He completely missed Hull, who have been getting better attendances than Saints for years until we redeveloped. Also the increases in recent years at Warrington and Bradford whilst not in their pomp are no slouches.

But I think the complete turn around in approach by the RL public and the non-RL public to this even compared to the last one is something he missed by a huge margin.

In terms of what profit is enough to be considered a success.

Well I would regard any profit in RL as a success as so few in sport can manage a profit.

A £1 profit is a success, but when you start asking about expectations, that actually changes people perspective.

If you take a man with nothing, he would regard a meal as a success.
If you take that same man with a job he would regard regular holidays and a nice car and house as a success.

In terms of RL. We just need to raise our profile.
Raise the publics interest in international RL.

I would regard a success if we can make a profit of over a Million quid, but more than that, if we can raise our public profile so that next time there is a 4 nations we can look at more games at the likes of Wembley etc rather than having to push to rely on the games heartlands.

I know people want to bring SL and the RFL into this, but for me it's a side issue. Get the international game up there and back on track and the club game will follow.

No, what I'm saying is that when someone is poor at their job, their critics have no obligation to point out the times they do occasionally acheive some basic requirement.

If a car wash mangled every 3rd car that went in, you'd be justified in calling it a useless car wash, and wouldn't be expected to also point out that it actually did a perfectly good job on two cars out of three.

Wow, patronising much?

You're the biggest hypocrite i've ever come across and my comprehension skills are fine, thanks.

How is it OK for you, someone who hasn't been to a SL match in 2 years, to waffle on about SL attendances, state of the game, one club supporters blah blah blah but someone who hasn't been to as many internationals as you in the last few years is somehow seen as an inferior fan who's opinion doesn't matter? You can't have it both ways surely.

Stick to slagging off the international game and the grass roots by all means but maybe next year you can leave the SL discussion to those who actively take part, follow & support it.

I'll look forward to not having to read your drivel on South Stander next year.

Cheers xxxxx

this is especially surprising, given that he claims to support them