Is it just a matter of time before Rugby League in the UK dies
#1
Posted 05 November 2012 - 11:39 PM
#2
Posted 05 November 2012 - 11:44 PM
#3
Posted 05 November 2012 - 11:52 PM
#4
Posted 05 November 2012 - 11:53 PM
"The SMC's principal responsibility is to remain neutral"
#5
Posted 05 November 2012 - 11:55 PM
It can buy you beer and that's a bit like happiness in a glass!
"I like pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals."
Sir Winston Churchill
Some folks are wise and some are otherwise!
Tobias Smollett
"I distrust camels, and anyone else who can go a week without a drink."
Joe E Lewis
"Look at the ffing state of that"!
My mate on the Avenue last Friday whilst pointing to a scantily clad young lady and spitting a mouthful of beer out!
#6
Posted 05 November 2012 - 11:57 PM
#7
Posted 06 November 2012 - 12:09 AM
We are happy to debate with other RL fans.
Which may be why you've not managed much of a debate.
"The SMC's principal responsibility is to remain neutral"
#8
Posted 06 November 2012 - 12:11 AM
Yes. If global terrorism doesn't get us, we avoid the dinosaur-killer asteroid, and we continue to play on through the apocalypse, then we've only got about 5 billion years until the sun destroys itself (and us). So, unless humankind finds a way of migrating to other star systems, I'd say that rugby league has had it long-term.
#9
Posted 06 November 2012 - 12:16 AM
#10
Posted 06 November 2012 - 02:25 AM
But I don't think it will die because it's evolved to become a form of entertainment, pre or post-football filler for a bland TV channel.
Irrelevant, yes, but if you go along wanting to be entertained then you might be - even if it's only by cheerleaders, pre-match singers or - if you can actually bear to stay in your seat - "big hits". But everything is decided long before the season starts. New signings, who goes in what division, who plays who in the Cup (if you have the misfortune to be in the Northern Rail), rule changes that apply only if you're in one division, who won't be going up or down, tedious play-offs.
If you want genuine competition and actually care what happens to your club then there are more rewarding pastimes.
#11
Posted 06 November 2012 - 03:54 AM
There has to be more Tomkins/Watkins/Sculthorpe's out there and the challenge is for SL clubs to find them, bring them through and create the next lot of superstars.
If they picked up by NRL clubs then so be it because in theory it should strengthen the National team which will bring it's own benefits to SL.
But the sun is eclipsed by the moon
#12
Posted 06 November 2012 - 07:24 AM
If you want genuine competition and actually care what happens to your club then there are more rewarding pastimes.
Go on then, what?
Push away the thief trying to steal your gift, the fighter is the one whose feet are swift.
#13
Posted 06 November 2012 - 07:43 AM
Everyone is entitled to their opinions but compared to 1995 we have a few teams that can win the main trophies, we do actually have more decent players (albeit with perhaps the same number of world class players) and our clubs are not any less stable financially despite being in a massive economic slump.
We do still have the most miserable of fans and amusingly inept leaders at times, although the Australian Commisssion and formerly Richard Lewis are/have been very positive in my opinion. And the game is played in loads more countries and counties, has much better and safer stadia, and is about to hold its most successful World Cup ever.
Not all is rosy, but I am pleased to say the game is at least as healthy as it was 17 years ago and won't go under if me and plenty of others have anything to do about it.
Edited by Mushy, 06 November 2012 - 07:43 AM.
#14
Posted 06 November 2012 - 07:44 AM
Then the game is doomed if people can't even debate the issues !!!!
It was at it's lowest ebb 1970
Fully pro league, best players getting NRL spots, expansive world cup and international game, Union stopped their apartheid living & let living, healthy TV audiences, game played all over now, game often preferred to union in old union strongholds game strong in armed services and universities, game played in schools nationwide, biggest crowds since 1950's etc etc etc etc etc.......
#15
Posted 06 November 2012 - 07:45 AM
Photographs;
Wigan v St Helens
Huddersfield v Wigan
Wigan v Warrington
Salford v Wigan
Older Rugby Matches
Football Photos
Futsal Photos
My website
#16
Posted 06 November 2012 - 07:46 AM
We do still have the most amusingly inept leaders...
So why did RL climb so high since it's lowest point 1970?
Oxley, Lyndsay and Lewis were far from inept??
#17
Posted 06 November 2012 - 07:52 AM
Go on then, what?
I think the OP is fishing but I personally think CWID is right. RL is more razmataz than a sport with little competition and low level drama over the season. The drama is for about 1 game so the marketing is on full blast but from a weedy pipe.
If you compare even with football, this week we get the 2nd round draw for the FA cup. The drama and excitement is whether a non league side can meet a Premier league team in the 3rd round. There was an interview on 5live with the Harrogate Town coach and the Hastings Town coach who drew each other. It was intriguing enough for me to consider attending the game. Not because of the 3rd round reward but because the tie seems so evenly matched played out by dedicated sportsman.
#18
Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:12 AM
#19
Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:22 AM
#20
Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:25 AM
You're in a minority on here, pal!I quite like Rugby League me. Anybody else?
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users




This topic is locked








