Jump to content

How popular is rugby league


gnidir

Recommended Posts

I don't post a lot these days, but I've been mulling over a few things lately.

I believe that rugby league in the UK is becoming more and more insular, especially as they are unable to run an exciting top level comp.

That said, being a fan of franchising or licensing, whatever you want to call it, we still seem to lean on the safe option. Leigh in Superleague as an example of our ever decreasing circle of influence.

So why isn't rugby league a popular sport in the public domain?

I think that we have the 'product' on field, but we struggle for attention in the media.

I started doing a bit or research, mainly based on me buying the Crusaders (right after I win the lottery), and noticed a few things.

Whilst we have some of the best sport viewing figures on TV, we don't I've the crowds, and the RFL don't have the ability to bring in the corporate sponsors.

I wondered why, and this posts my question.

If we could get 1% of the local population to turn up and support out clubs, what would the game look like?

And secondly, why can't our clubs get that 1%?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Good question, the geek kicked in, 53000 people in Leigh, what does the stadium hold? Are there closet alright hers in Wigan? Haha

The bit that has me thinking really, is how big can each club be? Realistically, Wigan and Leigh will be forced to fight for the indifferent fan, is that good for the game?

Toronto has 2.5 million people, so if they do it right, could they realistically dominate professional rugby league ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The answer to the question "Is rugby league becoming more insular" is apparently "look at Leigh".

Something for everyone there.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will scream this from the rooftops until I die:

 

Sport is parochial.  It is about rivalries.  Most people support the team they support because they live there or have some connection to it.  It is so, infuriatingly naïve to believe that someone from Nottingham, Cardiff, Devon, Edinburgh is going to give a toss about Wigan v Saints or the Hull derby.  There will be some exceptions, and indeed many who watch the sport can see how good it is - there just isn't the reason for them to invest in it long term.  Rugby league needs to realise that when it made a break in 1895 it created both the best sport in the world AND completely isolated itself, certainly from a UK perspective.

 

I love rugby league; its challenge is how to make itself relevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this country it's the media who tell the people what/who is popular, hence why talentless people like Robbie Williams and Cheryl Cole become famous (until the media decide to turn on them anyway). Until Rugby League gets a fair crack from the media it doesn't stand a chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this country it's the media who tell the people what/who is popular, hence why talentless people like Robbie Williams and Cheryl Cole become famous (until the media decide to turn on them anyway), rather than the people telling the media. Until Rugby League gets a fair crack from the media it doesn't stand a chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So why isn't rugby league a popular sport in the public domain?

I think that we have the 'product' on field, but we struggle for attention in the media.

I'm not a RL follower but I do watch the major finals (the finish at the recent Challenge Cup final was fantastic). Im going to try to answer your question from my own perspective. When you say 'product' do you just mean the actual rules of the game itself and the speed with which it is played? (as opposed to RU). This is not to everyone's liking btw. It can look hectic, direct, with straight up hits and then the pause for PTB and the process starts again. Like everything in life things are not to everyones taste.

Other aspects of the 'product' are the rivalries (hatred/needle between opponents), the stadiums where the games are played (the arena that provides the backdrop to the contest...what would grab your attention more, gladiators fighting in a field or the Colliseum?), the sell out attendances (in any walk of life when folk see a big crowd gather they become intrigued.."what's happening here then"), the importance of the game (what's at stake?).

What rivalries are there in RL?

What are the stadiums like that provide the backdrop?

What are attendances like?

What is at stake in each game?

I don't get the impression that there is much needle between teams (and if there is it doesn't show). RL has a community feel about it where everyone looks out for each other. Neutrals attending Challenge Cup finals for example. A Man United vs Chelsea FA Cup final would have Liverpool fans heading out to the beach for the day. I read the reason that the RL community does this is it feels the need to stick together in order to survive (in contrast Everton fans would be happy if Liverpool never existed and are still gutted the club didn't pay the rent in 1892 which resulted in them being kicked out of Anfield and Liverpool being created). While the community feel and camaraderie in RL is great positive on the one hand, the lack of real hostility/fierce rivalry is a negative. Look at any sports event around the world and the build up is all about drumming up a hatred. People that don't even follow a sport tune in. RL misses out on this aspect.

Playing games in small stadiums, and sparsely attended. When you flick through the channels you see it. You see blocks of empty seats and you immediately think "nothing major happening here". The US networks only screen live NFL games that are sold out (teams also provide unsold tickets to local community groups to fill up stadia). Perception is key. If it looks big you become intrigued.

What's at stake? By adding even more games RL is watering down the product. Every second means less (did the fella that said the opposite have a straight face when he said it?). RL doesn't have the depth of teams to add more fixtures. Two games of home and away, then play offs and final. Don't lessen the significance of each result or complicate the format that any would be neutral wouldnt understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this country it's the media who tell the people what/who is popular, hence why talentless people like Robbie Williams and Cheryl Cole become famous (until the media decide to turn on them anyway). Until Rugby League gets a fair crack from the media it doesn't stand a chance.

The media will report on whatever makes news. RL doesn't provide the stories to do this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will scream this from the rooftops until I die:

 

Sport is parochial.  It is about rivalries.  Most people support the team they support because they live there or have some connection to it.  It is so, infuriatingly naïve to believe that someone from Nottingham, Cardiff, Devon, Edinburgh is going to give a toss about Wigan v Saints or the Hull derby.  There will be some exceptions, and indeed many who watch the sport can see how good it is - there just isn't the reason for them to invest in it long term.  Rugby league needs to realise that when it made a break in 1895 it created both the best sport in the world AND completely isolated itself, certainly from a UK perspective.

 

I love rugby league; its challenge is how to make itself relevant.

Sport is about rivalries, and that's something RL lacks. Look at Scottish football...largely ignored by the English media for about 90% of the season, sports followers in England could barely name half of the teams in the Scottish top division, wouldn't be able to name a dozen players in the entire league....and yet, because of one fixture, the most fierce rivalry in British football, it remains relevant. That one fixture attracts people from all over the world.

Your point about parochial is much more true in regards to RL. Football has followers throughout. I've seen more Barcelona shirts in New York City than New York Giants shirts. You go to any Premier League fixture and you will be surrounded by out of towners (me being one at Anfield). RL needs to address issues with the product (that ive mentioned in detail) to entice fans from outside, hence it relies on the community feel. In the past most sports teams were parochial (people travelled less, no WWW for people in Singapore to see the latest Messi goal) and just relied on the local community. The times they have a longed since changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a RL follower but I do watch the major finals (the finish at the recent Challenge Cup final was fantastic). Im going to try to answer your question from my own perspective. When you say 'product' do you just mean the actual rules of the game itself and the speed with which it is played? (as opposed to RU). This is not to everyone's liking btw. It can look hectic, direct, with straight up hits and then the pause for PTB and the process starts again. Like everything in life things are not to everyones taste.

Other aspects of the 'product' are the rivalries (hatred/needle between opponents), the stadiums where the games are played (the arena that provides the backdrop to the contest...what would grab your attention more, gladiators fighting in a field or the Colliseum?), the sell out attendances (in any walk of life when folk see a big crowd gather they become intrigued.."what's happening here then"), the importance of the game (what's at stake?).

What rivalries are there in RL?

What are the stadiums like that provide the backdrop?

What are attendances like?

What is at stake in each game?

I don't get the impression that there is much needle between teams (and if there is it doesn't show). RL has a community feel about it where everyone looks out for each other. Neutrals attending Challenge Cup finals for example. A Man United vs Chelsea FA Cup final would have Liverpool fans heading out to the beach for the day. I read the reason that the RL community does this is it feels the need to stick together in order to survive (in contrast Everton fans would be happy if Liverpool never existed and are still gutted the club didn't pay the rent in 1892 which resulted in them being kicked out of Anfield and Liverpool being created). While the community feel and camaraderie in RL is great positive on the one hand, the lack of real hostility/fierce rivalry is a negative. Look at any sports event around the world and the build up is all about drumming up a hatred. People that don't even follow a sport tune in. RL misses out on this aspect.

Playing games in small stadiums, and sparsely attended. When you flick through the channels you see it. You see blocks of empty seats and you immediately think "nothing major happening here". The US networks only screen live NFL games that are sold out (teams also provide unsold tickets to local community groups to fill up stadia). Perception is key. If it looks big you become intrigued.

What's at stake? By adding even more games RL is watering down the product. Every second means less (did the fella that said the opposite have a straight face when he said it?). RL doesn't have the depth of teams to add more fixtures. Two games of home and away, then play offs and final. Don't lessen the significance of each result or complicate the format that any would be neutral wouldnt understand.

 

There is a community feel, but there's also plenty of needle.  Wigan/Saints, the Hull teams.  'Fax/Bradford. Wire/Widnes/Wigan. My own team's local rivals Cas.  We rarely play them now, but it doesn't stop the Fev fans chanting "we hate Cas" at every game.

“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's also about making sure people actually know that rugby league exists! In my experience, the vast majority of the public don't.

People that follow sport know RL exists. When flicking through the Sky Sports channels does the screen go black when showing a SL game? There is what 7 million people in Yorkshire/Lancashire? So when the regional news comes on does it suddenly cut off when the RL reports come on?

The vast majority of the public do not follow sport (on a weekly basis). They are the ones that tune in during a national event (FIFA World Cup and Olympics) and jump on the bandwagon for those few weeks. Sports fans are the target audience.

I think the biggest thing RL needs to do is to focus on growing the home nations. Looking at its direct competitor, if RU didn't have the six nations it would be no more prominent than RL. Yes the odd game with NZ would provide some interest, but it's the home nations that sports fans are most famailiar. At club level Union is no bigger than RL...however it does get some benefit from international stories that link to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't subscribe to the idea that people don't know what RL is. What RL is, is operating in a very competitive market, it's a doppelganger of RU and no real international presence beyond an annual competition.

 

I think it's doing quite well in the circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sport is about rivalries, and that's something RL lacks. Look at Scottish football...largely ignored by the English media for about 90% of the season, sports followers in England could barely name half of the teams in the Scottish top division, wouldn't be able to name a dozen players in the entire league....and yet, because of one fixture, the most fierce rivalry in British football, it remains relevant. That one fixture attracts people from all over the world.

Your point about parochial is much more true in regards to RL. Football has followers throughout. I've seen more Barcelona shirts in New York City than New York Giants shirts. You go to any Premier League fixture and you will be surrounded by out of towners (me being one at Anfield). RL needs to address issues with the product (that ive mentioned in detail) to entice fans from outside, hence it relies on the community feel. In the past most sports teams were parochial (people travelled less, no WWW for people in Singapore to see the latest Messi goal) and just relied on the local community. The times they have a longed since changed.

RL in no way shape or form lacks rivalries. It is frankly impossible for the game not to throw up local rivals in every round. I can't begin to imagine how you have come to that conclusion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It isnt necessarily about people not knowing it exists (although that is an issue), it is that Rugby League just isnt relevant to the vast majority of the population.

They didnt play it at school or have players coaching them.

They didnt have their dads or grandads taking them as kids.

They didnt go along with their mates to watch their local team.

They didnt play junior rugby for the local club.

They didnt read about it in their local paper.

They didnt drink in the local clubhouse.

They didnt play it at college or uni.

They didnt discuss it with their work colleagues.

And so on.

The above are all ways that people from towns in the heartland interact with RL or become aware of it.

People from outside if the areas have very few touch points - maybe watching on Sky, attending an England game.

We shouldnt underestimate how irrelevant RL is to most people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RL in no way shape or form lacks rivalries. It is frankly impossible for the game not to throw up local rivals in every round. I can't begin to imagine how you have come to that conclusion.

There isn't the same needle between teams as is the case in many other sports. What stories have St Helen's vs Wigan thrown up? The community feel of RL prohibits hostility to the level of other sports. As I said Scottish football is ignored for 90% plus of the time but Celtic vs Rangers draws people in and makes their league relevant. But for that rivalry the league wouldn't register in England (or the rest of the world).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's also about making sure people actually know that rugby league exists! In my experience, the vast majority of the public don't.

What's worse is that in my experience, the vast majority of the sporting public do know it exists, but are just not interested. Mind you , consistent annual success against Aus an NZ might change that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's usually a pointless exercise to be categorical and make judgements about why people partake or watch sports....usually everyone just ends up going around in circles.

It comes down to individual tastes doesn't it?

I like horse related sports...racing, showjumping, eventing...

Does it bother me if you're not interested? Not in the least...

Does it bother me that you may like fishing, golf or snooker? Not in the least...

Some sports lend themselves to being mainstream, fashionable to follow, others are not mainstream but have their aficionados: greyhound racing, showjumping, hockey, swimming and diving, fencing, cross country running....

Rugby league and union are indistinguishable to the general public with no particular interest...so therefore it could be argued that league is a national sport, under the umbrella of RUGBY...considered on the whole much the same as soccer and cricket are recognised in the UK.

Play or watch whatever you like, whatever floats your boat, stop pondering what other people like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For us to become 'more popular' we need to focus on current areas of strength first and foremost and if it's going to expand to 'new areas' it needs to be focussed and strategically planned.  I feel we fall in between these two needs and never quite manage either hence standing still (gaining in some areas and losing in other). 

 

Locking out many traditional 'heartland' clubs from the elite comp. has lost us 1000s of fans in my opinion which I think may start trickling back with the new system and the chance to at least play the top sides in the middle 8s.   The sense of unfairness caused by badly planned, badly funded franchises which have ultimately failed has caused a lot of damage.  If you're going to expand make sure it works because if it doesn't you have no expansion and you'll lose existing fans in the process.

 

If I was the RFL id be playing a lot more 'event' type club games in Liverpool and Manchester and trying to drive interest in the heavily populated north of England, it's going to be easier to expand there where people know where Warrington, Wigan, St Helens, Wakefield etc. are.  People in the south where I live find it hard to associate with a sport played in towns they've never heard of or been to.  There's huge swathes of the north of England that could be tapped into and we fail badly at this.  We seem desperate for the approval of the rest of England/UK, but what's wrong with being more popular in an area with around 10 million people? That's a lot of potential and more people than live in all of NZ or Scotland or Wales etc.  The wider public are more likely to respect us if we accept who we are and are proud of it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's usually a pointless exercise to be categorical and make judgements about why people partake or watch sports....usually everyone just ends up going around in circles.

It comes down to individual tastes doesn't it?

I like horse related sports...racing, showjumping, eventing...

Does it bother me if you're not interested? Not in the least...

Does it bother me that you may like fishing, golf or snooker? Not in the least...

Some sports lend themselves to being mainstream, fashionable to follow, others are not mainstream but have their aficionados: greyhound racing, showjumping, hockey, swimming and diving, fencing, cross country running....

Rugby league and union are indistinguishable to the general public with no particular interest...so therefore it could be argued that league is a national sport, under the umbrella of RUGBY...considered on the whole much the same as soccer and cricket are recognised in the UK.

Play or watch whatever you like, whatever floats your boat, stop pondering what other people like.

You are right.  People like what they like.  But if you are running a sporting body or a club it is incumbent on you to keep the sport/club afloat and so an analysis of what sports people like and why and then trying to cater for them is essential and it would be a derogation of your duties if you didn't try. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.