Jump to content
Total Rugby League Fans Forum

RL does what Sky says

Coach
  • Content Count

    113
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

80 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yes, the only reason we went to summer rugby was because Sky wanted a team game to show during that time of year in order to sell their dishes ... and that probably wouldn't have happened if 20-20 cricket had been started by then. It was also only because Sky wanted it (or rather their Australian RL producer wanted it) that we now have an end-of-season play-off to decide the champions. Yes, that was OK when there was only1 division and not everybody played each other - as when Oldham won it in 1957 and as they have in Australia - but the RFL abandoned that idea when they split into two divisions so that the team finishing top of the league were champions. Yet nowadays a team could easily win every league game of the season plus their play-off matches and then not become champions because they lose the final by one point. ... ridiculous. In fact, we might as well call our game "Aussie Rules" because they're the ones who make them all. I am just concerned with what might happen to RL if Sky ever decide it's not worth pursuing ... it's already often shown on one of their lesser sports' channels when they feel something else more important is on at the same time.
  2. Good point. Agree about the venue although I don't think many people outside RL would really know about the significance of both an RL match being played at Manor Park nor why this particular game is special. What about asking the RFL fixture planners to always ensure Oldham have a home game on Good Friday afternoon (and ensure the Standard Cup Final is always Good Friday morning - which has not been the case during some recent years) and then giving every spectator at the Standard Cup a voucher to get a £5 discount on their entry to watch Oldham in the afternoon ? It just might attract a few more spectators, both to Manor Park in the morning and then to Whitebank in the afternoon.
  3. Obviously there will be reasons why not but couldn't it have been a double-header at Whitebank with the Standard Cup Final at 11am and Oldham v Hunslet at 3pm (ie over 2 hours between the end of one game and the start of the other) with a chance to earn revenue from having the "catering" facilities open for longer than usual. Regarding how much to charge spectators ... entry to the Standard Cup was £5, so why not charge that to anyone coming in before 11.45am (ie half time of the final) and then the usual entry fee afterwards ? OK, some people will stay to watch both games for just a fiver but between the two games many would then spend extra money over the bar, etc that the club would not usually receive.
  4. Below is a comment I made, as part of a wider subject about amateur teams not having as much interest in various competitions as in past years. This was a reply in the "Community RL" section of this forum to a post asking why the BARLA National Cup does not have the same impact as it used to. I therefore also referred to the Standard Cup ... -------------------------- It's not just the BARLA National Cup that has seen its former prestige be diminished, it's happened to several amateur competitions and, in my opinion, is mainly due to having too many games to play during the season, which can include national, county, regional and local league matches. Therefore something has got to give and clubs have to make sacrifices to satisfy their own priorities. For example, at local league level; just a few years ago the Oldham Amateur League's Standard Cup Final, which was always played at Watersheddings (thats another story !) at 11am on Good Friday morning, regularly attracted attendances of at least 4,000 - and, just like Wembley, people used to go to the game irrespective of who was involved. Thesedays, however, due to other commitments, the Standard Cup is no longer a priority for many of the local clubs and, like the BARLA National Cup, a club's first-choice team does not always make an appearance. Indeed, of this year's finalists, one won their semi-final against their opposition's reserve team and the other went through when their opponents withdrew The final itself is now played on the Oldham Rugby Union ground and attracts a fraction of its former crowds. Although still at Easter time, the date and time of the final are not always the same and therefore spectators have got out of the habit of just turning up for the game. This year's final, Mayfield v Saddleworth, is actually on Good Friday morning (11.45am) ------------------------------------------------ For the record, the 2019 Standard Cup Final saw Saddleworth beat Mayfield 32-20 with a crowd of about 700 in attendance.
  5. Answer ... don't get involves in melees. If the players hadn't been involved then they wouldn't have been sent from the field ! Why is it that when an incident occurs between two players that everyone else has to run in ? OK, some might say they are backing up their teammate but it is quite often those that run in who cause more trouble and themselves get sent off ... as per against Hunslet.
  6. If that is true then OK but therefore let them use that income to support their ambitions instead of expecting a professional club to pay them to be full time players.
  7. It's not just the BARLA National Cup that has seen its former prestige be diminished, it's happened to several amateur competitions and, in my opinion, is mainly due to having too many games to play during the season, which can include national, county, regional and local league matches. Therefore something has got to give and clubs have to make sacrifices to satisfy their own priorities. For example, at local league level; just a few years ago the Oldham Amateur League's Standard Cup Final, which was always played at Watersheddings (thats another story !) at 11am on Good Friday morning, regularly attracted attendances of at least 4,000 - and, just like Wembley, people used to go to the game irrespective of who was involved. Thesedays, however, due to other commitments, the Standard Cup is no longer a priority for many of the local clubs and, like the BARLA National Cup, a club's first-choice team does not always make an appearance. Indeed, of this year's finalists, one won their semi-final against their opposition's reserve team and the other went through when their opponents withdrew The final itself is now played on the Oldham Rugby Union ground and attracts a fraction of its former crowds. Although still at Easter time, the date and time of the final are not always the same and therefore spectators have got out of the habit of just turning up for the game. This year's final, Mayfield v Saddleworth, is actually on Good Friday morning (11.45am).
  8. That is exactly the point I was making. It isn't that I am against having womens' teams but the fact is that - due to the current politically-correct era we are living in - many are now expecting the same treatment as their male counterparts even though they don't provide both the same quality of service nor bring in the same amount of income to their clubs due to them not attracting the same number of fans to their games. They are just amateur teams and yes they should be treated equally - but to the same degee as other amateur teams throughout the country. Would any professional club just adopt one of their local mens' amateur teams and decide to make them full-time? No - so why do it just because the team happens to be female ? (I now wait for the "you're just a woman hater" replies)
  9. So, who was really to blame for this site going off air for a while ? Wigan ?, the RFU ?, Workington losing to London Skolars ?, etc, etc ? They say you never miss the water until the well runs dry ... so me thinks it was a clever ploy by John so that on it's return we can all show how much we appreciate the work he does. He's never been so popular !
  10. John, we all have differences of opinions on a wide variety of topics throughout this forum - that is what keeps it alive - but I am sure we will all agree, irrespective of which clubs we are interested in, that you do excellent work which we all thank you for.
  11. Yet again you are putting your own spin on the the situation to suit a point of view instead of actually reading what is being written. Being paid or unpaid for playing is of no relevance to the issue at hand - that is a matter for the clubs they play for and is of no consequence as to the organisation of the event. These women - and indeed men who play for amateur teams - themselves choose to do so. However an actual difference is that many amateur womens' teams are "sponsored " by professional clubs (ie being provided with facilities, kit, refreshments, etc) whereas mens' amateur teams have to raise their own funds to be able to supply such facilities. So, yes, these women might not be paid "cash in hand" but they are receiving certain benefits not available to their male amateur counterparts. Indeed a professional club would not be allowed to sponsor a mens' amateur team in such a way. I would certainly agree with your comment of ..."they not only play for their clubs putting their bodies on the line in equal measure to their professional male counterparts, they also train with as much dedication ..." However, although dedication is certainly a worthwhile attribute that does not mean they have an equal measure of talent nor attract an equal measure of interest from the paying public OK, a point could be raised - and which I would agree with - that these are the best of the womens' players and are therefore given such enhanced benefits. However, I would also return to the fact that they still do not provide the same income for their clubs as the mens' teams and should therefore not expect similar benefits to them. Why is Super League given more publicity than League One and the players paid more ? Because it attracts more interest and also generates more money for the clubs. Similarly why should any competition which is not going to attract a great deal of attention nor income be given the same billing as the main event ? As I said before, I am certainly not against womens' (or wheelchair) rugby but I will yet again point to the lack of interest in it as shown by the zero number of posts on this forum for the past five months.
  12. As often happens, people don't actually read what has previously been written before giving their answer to which they put their own spin on it. I did NOT say "all the money should be reserved exclusively for the men's game". Of course some money should be spent on the other aspects of the game but I was simply making a point as to the amount spent, as you say, in proportion to the interest shown for those sections of it. As for the question of "How do you know the cost of providing such accessibility isn't in proportion? " Yes, I don't have any exact figures but, as I have previously pointed out, the RFL website for the 2021 World Cup gives equal billing to the the events, from which it is possibly safe to assume that amount of funds used to provide such publicity was also of an equal measure. Yet will those events really attract similar numbers ? Of course, we won't know until the competitions take place, but I am sure we can all have a fair guess as to the percentages. By all means there should be a womens' (and wheelchair) World Cup but surely it should be tailored to reflect the overall interest in that form of the game and not promoted as though it has the same public attraction as the main event. I also assume that those who strongly disagree with my view will themselves be in attendances at several of the womens' and wheelchair World Cup games.
  13. I totally agree with the first part of the above comment. However, surely the cost of providing such accessibility has to be in proportion to the number of those wishing to take advantage of that service. Would you spend thousands of pounds if only one person shows an interest ? Of course that is an extreme point, but where do you draw the line ? And I see, yet again, that because someone puts a point of view which is against the current trend of political correctness (ie: my questioning the actual interest in the womens' game - which I did due to the obvious lack of comments on this forum) then people reply with personal derogatory remarks (ie: "able-bodied blokes who like arguing on the internet"). Be an "able-bodied bloke" makes no difference to the point I raised, while I am not "arguing" on the internet but just putting forward a comment based on fact (ie: the lack of posts on the womens' section of this forum).
  14. For example see the 2021 RL World Cup website. The headline is "One game together" and gives the same publicity to the womens' and wheelchair events as it does to the main tournament as though they attract equal interest by supporters. They do not ! As for the amount of money ... Yes, I can't give you exact figures but there are obvious costs (ie wages, time, materials) incurred by those whose job it is to give such promotion to it. Yet what percentage of return for those costs will be achieved in comparison to the mens' event ? I suspect very little, if any at all. It's not that I am against such competitions (anything to promote RL is a good thing) but is it worth so much being done on it ? As I said before, I think the lack of comments in the womens' section of this forum shows the real amount of interest there is in the game from otherwise passionate followers of RL.
  15. Nothing to talk about for 5 months ? People continue to post about other topics on this forum even when it is close-season and no matches are being played, so why nothing on here even when so much publicity is currently being given by the RFL about the womens' World Cup ? My local amateur team draws far more crowds than a womens' game yet they don't get as much publicity. I've nothing against women playing RL and have actually attended such games. However, is there really enough interest to keep spending money on promoting it as much as is done ? Again it appears it's another matter of political correctness gone too far the other way.
×
×
  • Create New...