Toby Chopra

"Instead, it is believed any return will come in the form of improved commercial deals." So the same as the IMG partnership? Except IMG are actually a global sports marketing and media agency, so at least bring something to the table. What do new "investors" bring if it's not money? I thought stemming multimillion pound losses was at the root of all the recent upheaval, according to Martyn. Or is it handing over control of Superleague to the NRL just to save the £38,000 paid each to IMG? Sounds like too many owners still believing there's some sort of magic bullet, rather than a multi year process.

I believe there will be shuttle buses from Lime St on Everton gamedays, so I'm hoping for the same for the Ashes given even more of us will be coming from the centre.

Oh dear. On the plus side it does seem that hardly any tickets had been sold in the blocks that were converted, so not too many disadvantaged, but it's just a mindless move. The fact that almost all existing lower tier Cat 4 seats had gone isn't a reason to create more, it's a sign to hold your nerve and push people into higher categories.

Re London, neither of those options are Superleague viable so it doesn't matter what it looks like. In general, a club would want its average crowd at 80-ish% of capacity, so there's room for growth, with the biggest games selling out quickly with a scramble for tickets creating a buzz. If you're leaving fans locked out every week, your stadium isn't big enough. That's why many football teams have expanded capacity in recent years. Other than Hudds, I don't feel stadium size is a huge issue in the current Superleague.

Not all problems are the same. There's a big difference between Wigan not quite filling the DW and Hudds barely making a dent at the JS.

That Dolphins average is amazing for such a young club in NRL terms. I don't really understand Brisbane RL fandom but you can see why people argue for Brisbane III, and with those potential crowds who could say no?

I wish them well, the game certainly needs a prominent London club to help it project itself to wider audiences. But the one thing they still don't seem to have is any money and without that all the rest of it is neither here nor there. I remain of the view that you can't succeed in London without the investment to frontload a decent full time team, and then you lock that in with pathways and audience growth. But you can't organically grow your way to success in that market from a standing start.

The back half of the upper tier is miles away from the action, they're basically the nosebleed seats that get Wembley's capacity upto 90k mark from 70k-odd. I'd always choose to pay more for any closer seat given the chance, so I don't have a problem with them offering them now for £20. I know we have a chequered history on such things, but on this occasion no one's being short-changed.

Beeb has done a good story on McGifford too, the battle of the former athletes is a nice sub-plot. And good publicity for women's league showing it's has a viable pathway for athletes from other sports. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/articles/cgkdpzgj2kmo

That was the Catalan final, right? So also special circumstances. As I said to Dave, if we can stay above 60, I favour sticking with Wembley and seeing what we can do to improve the attractiveness of the event.

Ah, good to know an accurate figure, I was just trying to do it by eye! As long as we keep it above 60k I'm in the "keep it a Wembley camp."

If the ticket websites are accurate, it looks like we're going to fall a bit short. Mid to high fifties, unless a bunch of people make a last minute decision to go. Payday this coming Friday? (Is that still a thing?)

I do like the theatre analogy, it explains the issue well.

Eddie mate I just can't agree with any of this. Rugby league's popularity has been fluctuating up and down around the same level for the best part of 20 years, whereas the women's football boom only began in earnest after the Euros in 2022. And if anything our viewing figures and crowds have gone UP since 2022. We also have our own section on the BBC website, multiple live games a year on terrestrial, two live games a week on Sky and now our own broadcast platform. Women's football doesn't even have all of that yet. There's no invisible hand holding us down, people know we're there, many even acknowledge the skills and showmanship on offer, but they just don't connect with RL enough to make it a regular part of their sporting lives. In my view women's football is growing quickly because A/ it's football B/it's nationwide C/ it holds regular World Cups and Euros which England do well in and D/it's now tightly entwined with the Premier League. Given all those things are the most popular sporting properties in Britain, it's hardly surprising it's growing. The opportunity for us it to look at those things copy them where possible. That is: hold international tournaments/major series, focus on our biggest, most high profile club brands, and go into overdrive telling accessible and human stories about our players. We're actually - fingers crossed - going in the right direction on all of these, and if we succeed, we'll see interest grow regardless of what any other sport is doing.

You're moving the goalposts there a bit. I don't know when you started watching RL but Martyn's article is about comparing now with the dawn of SL 30 years ago. And as far as crowds go they're higher now than in 1995 - total attendance around 2 million across the three RFL divisions last season, compared to about 1.6m across the two (larger) divisions in 1994-5. That's definitely progress.