Stadia we should use for the 2013 World Cup

[ParisSurtout]

Richard Lewis has said that most of the 2013 World Cup events weill be held in the northern heartlands.

I have no problem with that, so long as there are important games held at Wembley and in France.

But we must also restrict the venues in the north to those grounds which are modern and have a decent crowd capacity.

Let me propose the following list, which rewards those clubs which have a modern stadium. It should be a stadium with a capacity of at least 15,000, though at least 20,000 for all matches involving England, Australia, and New Zealand. This precludes Halliwell Jones, and the smaller stadia in out of the way places like Leigh, favored by the arch lowballer of rugby league, Nigel Wood.

I am sure that if this event is marketed properly you could be expecting crowds of 12,000-15,000 even for minor nation contests, like Lebanon vs USA.

Pool games:

DW Wigan,

St Helens,

Barton Salford,

Galpharm, Huddersfield

KC Hull

Headingley Leeds

Millenium Cardiff (for games involving Wales)

Ernest Wallon Toulouse (for games involving France)

Semi finals:

Old Trafford (for a match not involving England, Wales or France)

Wembley (if England is involved)

Charlety Paris (if France is involved against Australia or New Zealand)

Millenium, Cardiff (for a game involving Wales but not England)

Final:

Wembley

The controversial part of this plan is that I am suggesting Wembley for a semi-final if England plays Australia, New Zealand, Wales or France (which is almost certain). This event however should attract a huge crowd, because of the contestants, and because it involves England in a sudden death.

Should England lose a Wembley semi-final, there will still be a large core of people who attended the England semi-final, whose appetites will have been excited for the Wembley final in which England does not compete. It will therefore have boosted the final crowd over what it would have been had England played and lost its semi-final in the north of England.

The fact is that there is a huge soft core market for great sporting events located in London and the south. We saw that in the massive attendances for international rugby league at Wembley in 1990, 1992 and 1994. Many tens of thousands of them will attend a Wembley semi-final and final if it is marketed properly. If England is not playing, the crowd will simply be anti-Australia. Expect 30,000 London and southern England fans, and 30,000 northern England fans to want to attend a well publicised Wembley Final if it is a game that does not involve England. Expect a sellout (72,00 RFL ticket allocation plus 18,000 Wembley members) if England is involved.

Edited August 24, 2010 by ParisSurtout

[roughyedspud]

the RLWC final,or any other RL game for that matter aside from the challenge cup final, would'nt be included in the club wembley package...

What events will a Club Wembley Seat Licence entitle me to see?

You will receive one ticket per licensed seat for the following matches* **:

All England senior home games

The FA Cup Final

Both FA Cup Semi Finals

The FA Community Shield

The Football League Cup Final and

The Rugby League Challenge Cup Final

* Club Wembley International seat licence holders receive tickets for all England senior home games only.

** excludes bid events

[1976PMJwires]

Don't worry about France and semi finals

Part of the post i did enjoy.............. for once.

[Saint Toppy]

Pool games:

Headingley Leeds

Shedingly shouldn't be used, 3 sides of the stadium are utter ######, and given the time of year the WC will be played there's a pretty good chance anyone stood at the western end will get pi$$ wet through.

[Mumby Magic]

Richard Lewis has said that most of the 2013 World Cup events weill be held in the northern heartlands.

I have no problem with that, so long as there are important games held at Wembley and in France.

But we must also restrict the venues in the north to those grounds which are modern and have a decent crowd capacity.

Let me propose the following list, which rewards those clubs which have a modern stadium. It should be a stadium with a capacity of at least 15,000, though at least 20,000 for all matches involving England, Australia, and New Zealand. This precludes Halliwell Jones, and the smaller stadia in out of the way places like Leigh, favored by the arch lowballer of rugby league, Nigel Wood.

I am sure that if this event is marketed properly you could be expecting crowds of 12,000-15,000 even for minor nation contests, like Lebanon vs USA.

Pool games:

DW Wigan,

St Helens,

Barton Salford,

Galpharm, Huddersfield

KC Hull

Headingley Leeds

Millenium Cardiff (for games involving Wales)

Ernest Wallon Toulouse (for games involving France)

Semi finals:

Old Trafford (for a match not involving England, Wales or France)

Wembley (if England is involved)

Charlety Paris (if France is involved against Australia or New Zealand)

Millenium, Cardiff (for a game involving Wales but not England)

Final:

Wembley

The controversial part of this plan is that I am suggesting Wembley for a semi-final if England plays Australia, New Zealand, Wales or France (which is almost certain). This event however should attract a huge crowd, because of the contestants, and because it involves England in a sudden death.

Should England lose a Wembley semi-final, there will still be a large core of people who attended the England semi-final, whose appetites will have been excited for the Wembley final in which England does not compete. It will therefore have boosted the final crowd over what it would have been had England played and lost its semi-final in the north of England.

The fact is that there is a huge soft core market for great sporting events located in London and the south. We saw that in the massive attendances for international rugby league at Wembley in 1990, 1992 and 1994. Many tens of thousands of them will attend a Wembley semi-final and final if it is marketed properly. If England is not playing, the crowd will simply be anti-Australia. Expect 30,000 London and southern England fans, and 30,000 northern England fans to want to attend a well publicised Wembley Final if it is a game that does not involve England. Expect a sellout (72,00 RFL ticket allocation plus 18,000 Wembley members) if England is involved.

Paris, crikey a sensible post from you, wothin reason!! Agree with Pool games but Old Trafford will be the final I assume and I think Charlety is over egging it for a semi if France get there. Besides the stadia will have to be announced before hand.

[Dave T]

Not a lot wrong with your proposals, but whilst we need to be ambitious, we also need to be careful. Taking a game like Lebanon v USA and getting 4k at the DW Stadium for example would be a PR disaster.

It is also far too easy for people to say 'get the marketing right'. What exactly does that mean?

I think a thread on how the RFL, the clubs, and the fans can publicise and market the tournament would be more relevant that just naming a load of big grounds.

[Derwent]

I am sure that if this event is marketed properly you could be expecting crowds of 12,000-15,000 even for minor nation contests, like Lebanon vs USA.

Why could you expect crowds of that size ?

In the 2008 RLWC, a total of 11 out of 18 games (61%) didn't attract crowds of that size. If they couldn't do it in Oz then why would it happen here ?

Are you saying that the ARL didn't market the event properly ?

[RP London]

i'd try and get bramall lane involved to be honest..

i also wouldnt take a game to france outside the pool stages.. becuase if france arent in.. which is just as likely.. then its an expenisve trip and hard to organise potentially on short notice for those basing themselves in the UK for the tournament. at least with a pool stage you know well in advance.

[HappyDave]

Seeing as England are the host nation surely holding any games in Wales or France would make us a laughing stock? Has the likes of Footy, RU, the Olympics, or an other sport (apart from the Tour de France which may have a stage in another Country? Belgium? Or is that another Tour?) held a game/event outside of the host nation?

Edited August 24, 2010 by HappyDave

[West Country Eagle]

i'd try and get bramall lane involved to be honest..

Yes! Sheffield United are very keen - ditto Sheffield City Council's events unit and the Eagles.

Stadiums are being invited to bid for matches - bids have to be in later this year. The venues will be announced in June 2011. The plan is for tickets to go on sale next summer.

[yanto]

Seeing as England are the host nation surely holding any games in Wales or France would make us a laughing stock? Has the likes of Footy, RU, the Olympics, or an other sport (apart from the Tour de France which may have a stage in another Country? Belgium? Or is that another Tour?) held a game/event outside of the host nation?

1999 RU world cup was hosted by Wales but games played in Ireland (North and Republic),Scotland,England and even France.

In total 18 stadiums where used from Galashiels (6,000 capacity) to Staad France (80,000).

Only three Welsh grounds where used,Millennium,Wrexham and Llanelli.

2007 RU world cup was hosted by France but had games in Scotland and Wales.

Regarding your cycle racing

BOTH the Tour de France and the Tour of Italy started in Holland this year.One in Amsterdam and one in Rotterdam.

Tour de France also went through Belgium.

[MR51CUK]

Millenium Cardiff (for games involving Wales)

Why not keep Wales games up North at the Racecourse? If we get the kop stand sorted that would be 15k surely it's better to have 15k and a full stadium than 15k rattling around in the Millenium?

[HappyDave]

Fair enough. I didn't realise that, but I think we should be trying to keep the RLWC in the host nation. Even if the RFL have to grovel to the FA/Barcleys (?) Premiership/Premiership footy teams with nice medium size grounds as they'll probably be bigger & better than the newly built SL grounds, rather than bids on some occasions?

I definitely thing the quarter finals should be played in decent venues (say 25,000+? What's Brammel Lane's capacity?) and obviously we need good venues (like the City of Machester Stadium or Old Trafford?) for the semi's & definitely Wembley for the Final

Edited August 24, 2010 by HappyDave

[West Country Eagle]

Why not keep Wales games up North at the Racecourse? If we get the kop stand sorted that would be 15k surely it's better to have 15k and a full stadium than 15k rattling around in the Millenium?

I'd agree on that score.

One game in South Wales would be good though

[1976PMJwires]

I'd agree on that score.

One game in South Wales would be good though

[Wellsy4HullFC]

Richard Lewis has said that most of the 2013 World Cup events weill be held in the northern heartlands.

I have no problem with that, so long as there are important games held at Wembley and in France.

But we must also restrict the venues in the north to those grounds which are modern and have a decent crowd capacity.

Let me propose the following list, which rewards those clubs which have a modern stadium. It should be a stadium with a capacity of at least 15,000, though at least 20,000 for all matches involving England, Australia, and New Zealand. This precludes Halliwell Jones, and the smaller stadia in out of the way places like Leigh, favored by the arch lowballer of rugby league, Nigel Wood.

I am sure that if this event is marketed properly you could be expecting crowds of 12,000-15,000 even for minor nation contests, like Lebanon vs USA.

Pool games:

DW Wigan,

St Helens,

Barton Salford,

Galpharm, Huddersfield

KC Hull

Headingley Leeds

Millenium Cardiff (for games involving Wales)

Ernest Wallon Toulouse (for games involving France)

Semi finals:

Old Trafford (for a match not involving England, Wales or France)

Wembley (if England is involved)

Charlety Paris (if France is involved against Australia or New Zealand)

Millenium, Cardiff (for a game involving Wales but not England)

Final:

Wembley

The controversial part of this plan is that I am suggesting Wembley for a semi-final if England plays Australia, New Zealand, Wales or France (which is almost certain). This event however should attract a huge crowd, because of the contestants, and because it involves England in a sudden death.

Should England lose a Wembley semi-final, there will still be a large core of people who attended the England semi-final, whose appetites will have been excited for the Wembley final in which England does not compete. It will therefore have boosted the final crowd over what it would have been had England played and lost its semi-final in the north of England.

The fact is that there is a huge soft core market for great sporting events located in London and the south. We saw that in the massive attendances for international rugby league at Wembley in 1990, 1992 and 1994. Many tens of thousands of them will attend a Wembley semi-final and final if it is marketed properly. If England is not playing, the crowd will simply be anti-Australia. Expect 30,000 London and southern England fans, and 30,000 northern England fans to want to attend a well publicised Wembley Final if it is a game that does not involve England. Expect a sellout (72,00 RFL ticket allocation plus 18,000 Wembley members) if England is involved.

1. The UK are the host nation. The Sports Minister has been pushing our tournament, so I think it would be bad to host games outside of the UK after finally getting support from the Government. They want this to be our decadeof sport.

2. You can't have four semi-final venues just incase someone like France or Wales makes it. It's ridiculous. We need to be selling tickets as early as possible (which for once I'm glad to hear we are doing). You can't do that if you wait until less than a week before to pick the venue!

3. The games need to be held up north apart from the odd big game and possibly Aus/NZ games. Wales can have home games as well, but I'd probably avoid Scotland and Ireland as they haven't really supported international RL well in the past crowd-wise.

4. The stadia you have named are too big for the smaller nations. We struggled to get 10k crowds over in Aus. But you think we can get 12-15k over here? Not likely. And not really that bright an idea.

[East Coast Tiger]

Wales are in the WC and depending on the format will play at least two pool games. One at Wrexham and one down south would make sense.

France will also get at least two pool games so a game in Toulouse and another in Perpignan would make sense. If they get a third maybe try Paris, but even then another southern venue would probably get a better crowd. France might even host another game in that pool to save travel.

The most important thing is thinking about where certain teams will draw. Autsralia and NZ could both draw decent crowds in London at The Stoop, Loftus Road etc. Ireland should draw a decent crowd in the north west for example. So don't make Australia play in Hull or Gateshead like in 2000.

And forget Reading or Oxford or Gloucester or Nottingham or Edinburgh any other random non-RL places. Any expansion venues should be limited to London, Wales and maybe Paris. And in the north choose approproate sized venues that are easy to get to.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

I'd like to see what format we use before specifically picking certain venues. If England are in a super group or not would completely change the type of venues we use IMO.

[jim_57]

I'm not sure If France will get games, but I suppose if it's just there with gaurenteed bigger crowds then they'll use French venues. Not going to go into great detail but I'd like certain areas to have "adopted" developing nation teams, play lower drawing games at 10-15k heartland venues. It is essential to start with England V Australia at Wembley and play all other big games at 20k+ stadiums. A good mix is required IMO, a few games to "non-heartland" areas but most in the areas we know will draw a crowd.

Atleast 3 games in Wales and France, 1 at most in Scotland & Ireland and the rest in England.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

I'm not sure If France will get games, but I suppose if it's just there with gaurenteed bigger crowds then they'll use French venues. Not going to go into great detail but I'd like certain areas to have "adopted" developing nation teams, play lower drawing games at 10-15k heartland venues. It is essential to start with England V Australia at Wembley and play all other big games at 20k+ stadiums. A good mix is required IMO, a few games to "non-heartland" areas but most in the areas we know will draw a crowd.

Atleast 3 games in Wales and France, 1 at most in Scotland & Ireland and the rest in England.

Like I say, I don't think there will be games in France as they've specifically said that the host nation is the UK, rather than co-host or whatever.

I like the idea behind having certain nations being adopted by an area, for example Ireland being adopted by say Warrington (Carney connection), Tonga by Hull (Manu, Moa, Lauaki), etc. in order to get support from that area and develop a small connection.

[ParisSurtout]

Why could you expect crowds of that size ?

In the 2008 RLWC, a total of 11 out of 18 games (61%) didn't attract crowds of that size. If they couldn't do it in Oz then why would it happen here ?

Are you saying that the ARL didn't market the event properly ?

Yes. There was insufficient publicity, despite the record of Australia previously being beaten by New Zealand in Tri Nations being a good marketing tool.

If you want to know what I regard as proper marketing, see the way the Australian Rugby Union marketed their World Cup in 2003. It was a brilliant job. Unfortunately the CEO of the ARL was and is a man named Geoff Carr, who lacks the intelligence and the will necessary to do the job even half as well as the ARU did. The 2008 rugby league World Cup was given a second rate promotion, and they counted on Queensland (where rugby league is a more powerful and unchallenged sport than in NSW), to carry the burden with limited marketing expenditures.

[ParisSurtout]

Since there is unlikely to be a quarter final round of eight, (given that there are only fourteen nations who will be playing) I would imagine that the pool system is going to be structured in a way to ensure that Australia, New Zealand and England all make the semi-finals.

The real contest of the pool system will be for fourth place.

Thus, if the assumption of some on here is correct, and that no semi-final games will be held outside the UK, and assuming also that England is almost guaranteed a semi-final spot, then my original argument about the virtues of using Wembley for a semi-final remains a sound one. It will guarantee a bigger crowd for the Wembley final than if the England semi-final was only held in the north. The England semi-final should preferably at 2.30 or 3 pm on a Saturday.

The other semi-final that does not involve England should be held at Old Trafford on a Sunday afternoon, the day after the Wembley semi-final --- subject to the RFL's willingness to spend money promoting it all over England.

Edited August 24, 2010 by ParisSurtout

[Wellsy4HullFC]

Thus, if the assumption of some on here is coreect, and that no semi-final games will be held outside the UK, then if England is almost guaranteed a semi-final spot, then my argument about the virtues of using Wembley for a semi-final remains a sound one. Preferably at 2.30 or 3 pm on a Saturday.

The other semi-final that does not involve England should be held at Old Trafford on a Sunday afternoon, the day after the Wembley semi-final --- subject to the RFL's willingness to spend money promoting it all over England.

I think it is ridiculous to suggest that we could get anywhere near a decent crowd at Old Trafford for a game not involving England. Even if it was the World Cup Final that England COULD be playing at. To think we'd get a crowd even the third of the size of Old Trafford with the public knowing full well England WON'T be in it because they'll be in the semi final is very very poor judgement.

[RP London]

Since there is unlikely to be a quarter final round of eight, (given that there are only fourteen nations who will be playing) I would imagine that the pool system is going to be structured in a way to ensure that Australia, New Zealand and England all make the semi-finals.

The real contest of the pool system will be for fourth place.

Thus, if the assumption of some on here is correct, and that no semi-final games will be held outside the UK, and assuming also that England is almost guaranteed a semi-final spot, then my original argument about the virtues of using Wembley for a semi-final remains a sound one. It will guarantee a bigger crowd for the Wembley final than if the England semi-fianl was only held in the north. The England semi-final should preferably at 2.30 or 3 pm on a Saturday.

The other semi-final that does not involve England should be held at Old Trafford on a Sunday afternoon, the day after the Wembley semi-final --- subject to the RFL's willingness to spend money promoting it all over England.

you cannot say the semi involve england gets wembley though as the venues and timetable has to be nailed down before the tournament kicks off

[Wellsy4HullFC]

you cannot say the semi involve england gets wembley though as the venues and timetable has to be nailed down before the tournament kicks off

Depends how the format is.

If the format is 4 groups, with the top of each group going into the semi-finals, then you could guarantee England would be in a certain semi-final venue.

This is why I wouldn't suggest using certain stadia at certain points until the format is announced (other than the final being a must at Wembley).