Try our Fantastic 5-Issue Bundle Offer! For just £18, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get: The Play-offs Issue - pictured (out 12 Sept) – Covering the climax of the Super League & Championship seasons The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final excitement from both sides of the world plus Four Nations preview The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.
Something else that has to be considered is sport. With Scotland not in the EU how will that affect Scottiish players in the football leagues?. Under EU rules you are only allowed a certain number of non EU players.
Because in the whole Scottish independence debate that is the most important issue.
My feeling is that they are being terribly pompous about using a ballot system when the prices are that high. Exactly who is going to put themselves in a ballot for £80 tickets at Elland Road? The tour package prices are absolutely outrageous.
I can see lots of empty seats in sponsors areas and package tour allocations. No couple is going £3k on a London break to watch the SFs.
Do you want to put a fiver on that?
I will pay five pounds to the charity of your choice if there are significant numbers of empty seats at the semi finals, I would suggest you pay five pounds to the charity of my choice if there aren't.
I'd suggest we get someone trustworthy like Gingerjon or CKN to judge the significance of the number of empty seats.
Articles like this make me wonder if there are any comparable RL articles which will simply explain why RL made the changes it did and dispel any argument that comes from RU that retro fit being left with the flaws as something that was well considered.
Could you clarify that? I'm with you up to retro fit
Why don't you post the word - can't you spell it? I've got an even better word for you!
There was no irony in your previous post, just more insults, and a similar lack of self-awareness as that displayed by TT. By the way, I am actually concerned about TT, I think he's gone postal! Has someone in Rugby (apart from me) done something to upset him so badly that it has tipped him over the edge?
Could you spell out your position in Rugby?
Where do you play or administer the game or have you appointed yourself as an arbiter of what is acceptable?
A massive red Ducati eh? You must have a full on micro-penis!
Great post BTW - you say you don't want to get involved but you post anyway and directly insult two Rugby fans. WTF! That's like the Japanese saying they want no involvement in the war and then bombing Pearl Harbour. As Del Boy would say, what a plonker.
PS - I hope the spelling is up to scratch. Oh, and is "specious" your word of the week?
I've got a good word for you
Irony is wasted on you isn't it. Even when it's as blunt and obvious as in my earlier post.
This whole 'stepping up' stuff is a bit tiresome, isn't it?
The two sports have somewhat different strength and fitness requirements, in terms of aerobic/anaerobic and what muscles you use and all that, but to play either at the top level, you've got to be pretty darn fit.
Skills, tactical awareness, and so on, are a different matter, but I can't really see how it can be considered a 'step up' to go in either direction anymore, with the exception of a few of the oversized props you see trundling around perhaps.
I think TT is using the phrase in an amusing turnaround as the former regular of this parish Paley used to use the same turn of phrase to describe cross code converts in the other direction. How we all smiled.
It's not amazing. It's a solid fact that your behaviour can determine your political stance. Conservatives do tend to talk a lot, or waffle, whereas, those from the left of centre tend to waffle or talk a lot. Those in the middle usually get confused into choosing the wrong lot to side with.
I think you'll find the right wing political ideology is based on Man's exploitation of Man. The left wing ideology is based on the exact opposite.
All this talk by union fans about popularity being a direct measure of the quality of a sport is somewhat strange. By their own measure, and by implication, they are demonstrating that union, and of course rugby, is completely inferior to association football both in this country and internationally. I would obviously disagree, but it would be good to hear how our union friends reconcile this little paradigm that they have created. So, a couple of questions to the union posters::
Do you believe that union is better than League simply based on the premise that it generally has more fans internationally?
If yes, do you accept that, by extension, association football is far and away superior to union?
If no to the last question, do you then accept that the is vaccuous?
If no to the last question, do you accept that you obviously don't know what you are talking about?
As a footnote, I recall a couple of years ago a union hack in Australia wrote an article explaining that declining attendances in Australian union somehow actually proved that it was better than League!
oooh, touched a nerve there I see.
No need to get so chippy, no one has said Union is "better" than League, I contend that Union is more popular than League by measurement of numbers playing and watching it regularly across the world. This makes Association Football more popular as a participation and spectator sport and fishing more popular as a participation sport.
I prefer one code of Rugby over the other and both codes over Association football.
Do you accept that your argument was specious?
PS there's only 1 "C" in vacuous. If you're going to try and appear clever it helps if you can spell correctly.