Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

flyingking

Nigel Wood- London must improve

355 posts in this topic

But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done - and in fact is completely different to the point you originally made.

Fans weren't demanding a Grand Final, that seems to have gone well.

The topic was a regular topic of debate for years including the trade press

This intensified when the RFL decided to take the game in that direction even more so when it became part of the changes being made with the advent if super league

It might well be that a majority of fans were against: it's impossible to know

But in any event it didn't necessarily mean they they were right since people often react negatively to change or anything that goes against their own narrow self interest

That is why we have a governing body that works within a constitution to run the sport

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When we went full time pro teams in 96 should we in hindsight started again with new teams ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When we went full time pro teams in 96 should we in hindsight started again with new teams ?

:O

You may well be right up to a point!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you can't say what would have happened had we stuck with winter. That is the point. Not that winter is best - that it was never tried and no one was consulted. You just don't get it do you? I'm not saying go back to winter I'm using the example of the switch to summer - could there have been a bigger swtich? - of the way Rugby League treats its fans.

How is it any different than other, were Rugby Union fans consulted about the game going pro?

The point remains, firstly you can't call that a small rise in crowds and all you are doing is idly speculating (and I suspect implying) that we would have done better or just as good in winter. There is absolutely no reason to suggest that this would have been the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done - and in fact is completely different to the point you originally made.

Fans weren't demanding a Grand Final, that seems to have gone well.

This is exactly the point. IMO fans overwhemingly prefer Summer now which trumps any point that he is trying to make. If we had 'listened to the fans,' we would never have switched and therefore people would have missed out on something they ultimately prefer.

In my experience people that are in favour of referendums and the like only do so because they think it will vote in favour with what they would like to happen. Funnily enough you don't see Fundamentalist Muslims advocating for referenda on the implementation of Sharia law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is it any different than other, were Rugby Union fans consulted about the game going pro?

The point remains, firstly you can't call that a small rise in crowds and all you are doing is idly speculating (and I suspect implying) that we would have done better or just as good in winter. There is absolutely no reason to suggest that this would have been the case.

RU didnt have many fans before it went pro. However my guess is that there was a huge amount of debate at all levelsbefore it did

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RU didnt have many fans before it went pro. However my guess is that there was a huge amount of debate at all levelsbefore it did

There was no debate within British Rugby Union before the game was professionalised. Right up until the summer of 1995 professionalism remained a taboo subject within the Home Unions.

Rugby Union was professionalised by the Southern Hemisphere Unions to head off a threatened unofficial breakaway by the Kerry Packer funded World Rugby Corporation that was intending to sign up the World's leading Union players for an unofficial competition. The Southern Hemisphere Unions then professionalised their players by signing them up on contracts financed by a TV deal with Murdoch.

The IRB, the British Unions and the rest of the Rugby Union World were then presented with a fait accompli which they were then forced to accept in the immediate aftermath of the 1995 World Cup. Professionalism was a complete shock to the Home Unions who had had made no preparations and had been actively resisting it.

If you are interested there is a good Australian documentary called "Stealing Rugby".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRGxhZGZmqg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RU didnt have many fans before it went pro. However my guess is that there was a huge amount of debate at all levelsbefore it did

Probably, between shareholders or members who had a right to a say.

1. What qualifies you to an even say on our game?

2. In not giving the fans a say what injustice has occurred??

3. All polls nowadays are predicted before anyone even votes, what do you predict the fans of the game would have voted for if they had had a say?

4. How would you have voted 1996 if Lyndsay had given you two choices

a. Winter RL

b. Summer RL and a SKY contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RU didnt have many fans before it went pro. However my guess is that there was a huge amount of debate at all levelsbefore it did

the main public debate took place amongst the top players, in the form of interviews in the media about what it meant to them, and articles by union journos. Of course people discussed it.

Union then as now had a huge ammount of 'fans' that is why there there were an are a massive number of clubs in all sorts of areas running so many team at so many levels and why people turn out in huge numbers for internationals. It just didn't find expression in top club games. Harlequins for example was literally an exclusive club, you had to beinvited to become a member.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is it any different than other, were Rugby Union fans consulted about the game going pro?

The point remains, firstly you can't call that a small rise in crowds and all you are doing is idly speculating (and I suspect implying) that we would have done better or just as good in winter. There is absolutely no reason to suggest that this would have been the case.

But I never said that, I said we never found out how good the crowds would be in winter under SL. It was bulldozed through along with many other SL changes. As I said earlier, I and many of the friends I watch RL alongside were gobsmacked by many of the SL moves and summer rugby was one of the biggest surprises.

I was and am an avid reader of LE and I recall no demand in its letter columns for a change to summer - unlike the demand for a return to P&R about which there is at least one letter per week.

As for Union going pro the players had been advocating it for years - it was "the old farts" who were against it. And many of the old guard journos - I know for a fact that Clem Thomas who wrote for the Guardian was very much against pro Union - his attitude was if players want to make money out of playing rugby let them go and play RL - a view I very much agreed with! The World Cup was one catalyst in Union going honest - Super League was another IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But I never said that, I said we never found out how good the crowds would be in winter under SL. It was bulldozed through along with many other SL changes. As I said earlier, I and many of the friends I watch RL alongside were gobsmacked by many of the SL moves and summer rugby was one of the biggest surprises.

I was and am an avid reader of LE and I recall no demand in its letter columns for a change to summer - unlike the demand for a return to P&R about which there is at least one letter per week.

As for Union going pro the players had been advocating it for years - it was "the old farts" who were against it. And many of the old guard journos - I know for a fact that Clem Thomas who wrote for the Guardian was very much against pro Union - his attitude was if players want to make money out of playing rugby let them go and play RL - a view I very much agreed with! The World Cup was one catalyst in Union going honest - Super League was another IMO.

Back in 1995, Murdoch had just failed to get cricket exclusively for Sky. He needed a 'filler' for the summer and so bought the 'British' game. In order to get the move to summer through without any backlash several mergers were proposed which took everyone's mind off the change to a summer season.

And there you have it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back in 1995, Murdoch had just failed to get cricket exclusively for Sky. He needed a 'filler' for the summer and so bought the 'British' game. In order to get the move to summer through without any backlash several mergers were proposed which took everyone's mind off the change to a summer season.

And there you have it!

Are you sure? I thought he 'bought' the British game to help him in his bid to get hold of the pay TV rights for the Australian game. I'm willing to bow to greater knowledge, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But I never said that, I said we never found out how good the crowds would be in winter under SL. It was bulldozed through along with many other SL changes. As I said earlier, I and many of the friends I watch RL alongside were gobsmacked by many of the SL moves and summer rugby was one of the biggest surprises.

I was and am an avid reader of LE and I recall no demand in its letter columns for a change to summer - unlike the demand for a return to P&R about which there is at least one letter per week.

As for Union going pro the players had been advocating it for years - it was "the old farts" who were against it. And many of the old guard journos - I know for a fact that Clem Thomas who wrote for the Guardian was very much against pro Union - his attitude was if players want to make money out of playing rugby let them go and play RL - a view I very much agreed with! The World Cup was one catalyst in Union going honest - Super League was another IMO.

But you have implied that summer rugby could be one of the worst things to happen to the game. Idle speculation is idle speculation, you can't use it to dismiss a crowd increase of 80%.

The number of logical fallacies you continue to rack up is incredible. You cannot compare the reaction to the removal of something as important to many fans and clubs as P&R to people writing in asking to switch to summer.

A fairer comparison would be the number of letters calling for a return to winter rugby. Just out of interest (and I know the answer being a reader for 15 years) how often do we get letters on that subject?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you have implied that summer rugby could be one of the worst things to happen to the game. Idle speculation is idle speculation, you can't use it to dismiss a crowd increase of 80%.

The number of logical fallacies you continue to rack up is incredible. You cannot compare the reaction to the removal of something as important to many fans and clubs as P&R to people writing in asking to switch to summer.

A fairer comparison would be the number of letters calling for a return to winter rugby. Just out of interest (and I know the answer being a reader for 15 years) how often do we get letters on that subject?

No I said that Union had increased its club crowds enormously and played their game in the winter. Why had we just surrendered winter to them and soccer? Perhaps our crowds would have expanded by the same extent as theirs. Summer Rugby was sold to the fans on the promise that the game would get a higher profile because there were less distractions. All I did was point out that this was a spurious argument and that Union hadn't found playing in winter a problem. I said from the start that I could see points in favour of both winter and summer - but to repeat again RL never tried it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I said that Union had increased its club crowds enormously and played their game in the winter. Why had we just surrendered winter to them and soccer? Perhaps our crowds would have expanded by the same extent as theirs. Summer Rugby was sold to the fans on the promise that the game would get a higher profile because there were less distractions. All I did was point out that this was a spurious argument and that Union hadn't found playing in winter a problem. I said from the start that I could see points in favour of both winter and summer - but to repeat again RL never tried it.

Are you saying RL didn't try Winter?

If we didn't move to winter, the only real change in effect was a new shiny logo for the tournament.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you saying RL didn't try Winter?

If we didn't move to winter, the only real change in effect was a new shiny logo for the tournament.

I'm saying that fully pro Super League didn't try winter. Perhaps I should have made that clear, but I thought everyone was aware that RL was played in winter until 1996.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said we never found out how good the crowds would be in winter under SL.

Fair play to you Tro we didn't.

Mindst you some of the February and March crowds we are getting are awful.

Saints 5,300 - appalling!

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But I never said that, I said we never found out how good the crowds would be in winter under SL. It was bulldozed through along with many other SL changes. As I said earlier, I and many of the friends I watch RL alongside were gobsmacked by many of the SL moves and summer rugby was one of the biggest surprises.

I was and am an avid reader of LE and I recall no demand in its letter columns for a change to summer - unlike the demand for a return to P&R about which there is at least one letter per week.

As for Union going pro the players had been advocating it for years - it was "the old farts" who were against it. And many of the old guard journos - I know for a fact that Clem Thomas who wrote for the Guardian was very much against pro Union - his attitude was if players want to make money out of playing rugby let them go and play RL - a view I very much agreed with! The World Cup was one catalyst in Union going honest - Super League was another IMO.

well we have freak weather conditions where we are going into easter with classic winter weather. I hopeyou are enjoing your rugby.

Summer Rugby was high on the agenda and had been a topic resurrected regularly in the Rugby League media: usually when games were postpondandfixturs piled up, or when attendances were poor.

It was the same with Super League: from the late eighties onwards the biger clubs were working on breaking away and forming theior own Super League, even without a SKY deal. This would have meant more big games, less subsidising of the smaller clubs by boosting the smaller clubs' attendances whilst having lower attendances when these clubs were the visitors.

Clem Thomas was either;

lying

naive

or livin in a dreamworld.

Here's why. veiled professionalism had been allowed, or turned a blind eye to in Wales since the English Northern clubs formed the Northern Union. It was politically expedient when the game was in a state offlux. the England team had already been captaind by a professional on the firs tour down under. In Thomas' own lifetime professionalism was open in France and South Africa, nd turned a blind eye to in Australia and New Zealand.

Rugby League wasn't and isn't a purely professional sport: so Thomas was showing his ignorance.

If you want a modern example of professionalism in modern Welsh Union read Allan Bateman's autobiography in which he describes taking a pay cut by joining Warrington: the attraction as in almost all such cases being the huge signing on fee.

Why would yo agree with the dishonesty and hypicrisy of shamateurism?

Union's following was already there when it went honsetly professional. It had aand has massive supprt: it just didn't until the miod 90s find expression in attending big club games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rugby League wasn't and isn't a purely professional sport: so Thomas was showing his ignorance.

How so?

He didn't claim that it was a purely professional sport. He just said you could get paid to play rugby in rugby league.

I also don't think this equates to ignoring boot money either. No doubts he had an opinion about that too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How so?

He didn't claim that it was a purely professional sport. He just said you could get paid to play rugby in rugby league.

I also don't think this equates to ignoring boot money either. No doubts he had an opinion about that too.

I see what you mean

My comments related to the fact that according to the quote he equated rugby league with professionalism which was not the case and that he equated union with amateurism which wasn't the case either

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see what you mean

My comments related to the fact that according to the quote he equated rugby league with professionalism which was not the case and that he equated union with amateurism which wasn't the case either

I think it is more a case of a lot of unionites thought that there was nothing wrong with professional rugby just that it wasn't "the union way". He might well have wished any lad "going north" good luck but don't come back to our club as a player.

Obviously 99% of RL is amateur and unionites generally don't realise this. He probably wasn't an exception but he didn't actually state it as fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is more a case of a lot of unionites thought that there was nothing wrong with professional rugby just that it wasn't "the union way". He might well have wished any lad "going north" good luck but don't come back to our club as a player.

Obviously 99% of RL is amateur and unionites generally don't realise this. He probably wasn't an exception but he didn't actually state it as fact.

sounds reasonable to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clem Thomas was either;

lying

naive

or livin in a dreamworld.

There you go again with the insults. Fortuntately Clem's dead so can't sue. Everyone knows that Union was covertly pro in Wales, perhaps not so much in the other home nations,but you could get yourself a nice sinecure on the back of an international cap. I seem to recall John Scott, an Englishman who played for Cardiff signing for one of the top French Union sides and finding himself running a bar in - was Brive? The big attraction for Union players signing for League was the tax free "compensation for loss of amateur status" they got.

I've no doubt top players in the UK were looking at Australia, NZ and SA where they knew their contemporaries were getting big bucks from the scarcely veiled professional Unions there. Wasn't it Campese who was the highest paid Union player in the world?

Clem Thomas and others like him wanted to maintain the status quo because presumably they feared that if Union went openly pro many of the top clubs wouldn't be able to sustain the cost. Certainly in Wales it appears he was right and to a lesser extent in England - as I posted earlier its not that long since Orrell dominated Union. The Underwoods, Les Cusworth, Brian Barley, and Mike Harrison all turned out for Wakefield in the fairly recent past. Neither club exsists today.

To get back to the point, continuing to play in winter was never tried. It's true we have freak weather at the moment, it's also true that under either regime we'd be playing at the moment. Last year at this time it was 20 degrees. The same could be said for Autumn 2011 - one of the mildest on record but the regular season was over. In May 1979 the week of the CC Final, I had a week off work, to paint the outside of my house and to go to Wembley - it snowed. As I posted originally - I don't see the big advantage of the switch. I don't advocate a switch back, although playing the GF at Old Trafford on a balmy May evening does sound more attractive than last October in the p i s s i n g rain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I said that Union had increased its club crowds enormously and played their game in the winter. Why had we just surrendered winter to them and soccer? Perhaps our crowds would have expanded by the same extent as theirs. Summer Rugby was sold to the fans on the promise that the game would get a higher profile because there were less distractions. All I did was point out that this was a spurious argument and that Union hadn't found playing in winter a problem. I said from the start that I could see points in favour of both winter and summer - but to repeat again RL never tried it.

You actually said you couldn't see any advantages of playing in summer.

I think the reasons for Union's growth have been more explained to you since and it is incredibly unlikely we would have followed their growth with what would have been a rebadging exercise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You actually said you couldn't see any advantages of playing in summer.

I think the reasons for Union's growth have been more explained to you since and it is incredibly unlikely we would have followed their growth with what would have been a rebadging exercise.

Well if I said that I should have said I can't see how the advantages of playing in summer outweigh the advantages of playing in winter - in other words I can't see the reason for the headlong rush to play in summer without any consideration for the fans' feelings on the matter. There didn't appear to be any great groundswell of demand for the switch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.