Oh dear....it seems you have no concept of adult sporting preferences and are a remnant of the never lamented "self appointed defenders of the RL faith"
1. What exactly is your definition of a Union Troll? After the wag in you has replied "you", why not give that question some thought in the context of my posts on this forum, rather than your personal feelings towards the bigger, more popular and better run code of Rugby.
2. On the subject of Union being a Bigger, more popular and better Run code of Rugby, please try to limit your reference to a domestic TV deal and 3 midweek games that nobody outside of Australia watches to a minimum. In return, I won't point out that the autumn RU international series in England, Wales, France and Ireland this year will attract far greater numbers of fans and general media interest than the RLWC across the board.
3. I always post essays......you and to a greater extent the other "self appointed defenders of the RL faith" who are no longer with us on these boards have no chance of getting me in a Tizz (whatever Tizz is?).
4. I deal in reality.....your attempts to turn this into a debate about me and Union show you for the narrow minded poster that you are....your hatred of another sport is insane at worst, deluded at best, but it helps you cloud the topic under debate...the 11.5% drop in SL attendances and the 15.5% drop in CC crowds. You were happy toad French Union to the debate, but ignored the Amlin and Pro-12 Union comps that didn't suit your argument.
Lastly, as for painting RL in a worse state than it really is, let's examine the facts across the Northern hemisphere shall we?
Sky TV are paying a the RFL/SL a fraction of the money that BT has paid for other sports...soccer in the
Barclays Premiership,
Blue Square Conference and FA Cup, Rugby with the
Aviva premiership with £152m over 4 years. I believe that works out at £38m a year....or double what SKY pay for the SL for less games.
Lastly, on the topic of TV deals...SKY weren't bothered about the RLWC.....so the majority of that comp will be available on access TV or in Rileys snooker halls
Premier Sports lost their flagship soccer content to BT.....6,500 subscribers??? 6,500 as a crowd at a game in SL gets lambasted on these boards
Then there's the sponsors...or as they are referred to by the RFL, PARTNERS: Basically, there was little if any interest in the naming rights of the premier RL comp in the NH......so bits were syphoned off for minimal income to foxy bingo et al....£4.25 million a year is the current AVIVA deal, whilst the Dutch brewer Heineken estimates it has pumped £100,000,000 into Union in the last 20 years.
Tetley" were announced as CC sponsors with no reference to amounts...a worrying trend given prior delight at releasing financial figures.
Crowds are down. You will debate with me about increased prices, but the fact remains that crowds are down across the board (Leeds accepted). The majority of clubs are not on a secure financial footing (nothing new in PRO team sports) and the league is looking to reduce the number of clubs to try and offer another route to stability. HKR and London Broncos are to lose their benefactors at the end of this season, Salford new owner is in reality looking to short term success to build crowds...a method that has never worked in the short term (Melbourne are up 33% since 1998.....33% on the back of a few GF's etc....33% for Salford will have them still under 5k).
Clubs like Huddersfield are 100% reliant on their benefactor and it can't be good business practice to rely on the health of one man. Leeds and Wigan are showing the rest how it is done, but there is still ingrained an attitude for immediate gratification in League....I believe the good Dr at Salford sees himself as a sort of Abramovich of the north
The RFL seem content to continue to reward failure....the exiles id a broken concept, last autumns internationals were a farce (1,500 in Wales???) and the RLWC ticket sales are never announced without spin, smoke and mirrors and a fair amount of truth bending. The previous RLWC in Britain had a £1,000,000 naming rights sponsor...this one has an official hire car supplier and an official hotel partner......hardly good news central is it?
On the pitch, the game continues to be streets ahead of all other team sports on offer in the UK, but it is off the park that the woes are dragging the sport backwards.
If all goes the way most expect it to, by 2015 RL in Britain will be yet again an M62 hobby with a French team from the south west of France. Sky will be 3 years into their current 5 year deal and will be hard pressed to convince advertisers as to their "mythical" southern audience. The English media, for whatever reason, will report negative stories about RL and the demise of London (a totally different topic BTW) will be pounced upon and reported as proof that League is a northern pastime.
there are some Rugby League fans who will be happy once GB have managed to beat the Aussies in a series or a World cup, but in reality, the sport has a fragile framework holding it up professionally with little or no "plan B" if SKY were to walk away...the 100% reliance on the TV partnership is a horrific way to run a professional sports business, but increasingly, with each passing year, the revenue stream comes from SKY first with everything else tagged on. Take away TV coverage of RL and you run the risk of a return to semi-professional RL....and no chance of GB beating Australia in a series (unless the team is crammed with NRL based players)
