Maximus Decimus
-
Posts
9,118 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Posts posted by Maximus Decimus
-
-
55 minutes ago, StandOffHalf said:
Same. I grew up with GB in the early 2000s.
I'm pretty sure I'm going to go in my 2006 GB kit.
After all, it's basically a continuation just not in name.
Oh apologies, Brian Carney.
-
3
-
-
5 hours ago, Dave T said:
Nice to see the fnas making the same old mistakes, getting all excited and thinking the Aussies are there for the taking this time.
The Ashes are definitely back!
Truer words have never been said.
I suspect many of the quotes above will be brought back up again by the middle of November.
Especially the ones about how they haven't scored more than 22, and can't possibly give us a huge beating.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, JonM said:
I think we're clinging to the fact that NZ beat them 30-0 in 2023 in a final and England have won series against Tonga & Samoa fairly comfortably in the last two years and those two teams are not too far behind the Aussies.
I'm still of the mindset that the Aussies are fundamentally different and when they take something truly seriously they are a level above.
Were Tonga and Samoa at their peak? Was it the same Samoa that beat us in the semi-final or were they missing a fair few of their stars?
We've also been here with NZ many times. We're competitive, we beat them as much as they beat us especially over here. NZ compete and even beat Aus sometimes.
We then get the odd win, another very close game against Aus and then they utterly destroy and humiliate us.
I don't think they'll destroy us in all 3 by any means, but that possibility, even of a 40/50+ win is always there.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Grimmy said:
You don't have to look too far back. 2002 NZ tour we lost game 1. Drew game 2. Won game 3. IIRC we got the win on the basis they felt they had to come and win it off us. If it had been points difference NZ would have won the series.
We were all happy enough at the time!
-
3 minutes ago, Worzel said:
My point is that if you hold England v Australia in Wigan, you're only aiming for rugby league fans. Whereas with games like this you need to reach out to a general sports audience, who demonstrably will come, and that stadium and location are key to that being realistic. During the tri- and four-nations era we largely decided not to bother trying to get them.
It was the 2003 Ashes when I got a ticket to Wigan on the day.
-
1 minute ago, Worzel said:
I can see us losing by 30 plus, yup, that happens in our sport even between sides where the result may be different a month later. But no England team is going down by 60.
There have been times that if they'd have wanted to they could have. It is only that factor that makes me discount the possibility.
-
2
-
-
20 minutes ago, Spidey said:
That is just nonsense
I have mixed feelings.
On the one hand it is a farce, on the other it basically guarantees a drawn series as we all know it will end up happening!
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:
I think people just look at the NRL and the players and assume that they will hammer us - the thing is, they can only play 17, and our best 17 aren't that far away from their best 17, which is why they are always close games.
Wasn't this true in 2004 or 2008?
I fear not playing them for 8 years has numbed people to the reality of playing the Aussies...
-
1 minute ago, Worzel said:
Aussies who don't follow English rugby always say this sort of thing.
Australia win 80% of the time, and win series 100% of the time, but it's very rarely anything other than close
Just by way of one random example, you whitewashed us in 2003, the record books make us look awful. But in each match it was 50:50 with 5 mins to go. Or even just the last time we met, in the World Cup Final, when only an ankle tap stood between us.
This is a bit selective I feel....
2003 was notorious because the Aussies had so many missing. It was actually used as proof of what I said before, about us having 1 team that could compete and their having 4/5.
There have been a few series where we won one but it wasn't that competitive really (94, 97, 01) and since then some big blow outs in some big games.
I would never write off the chance they could put a big score on us. I would have it about equal the chances we win on Saturday vs the chance we lose by 30 odd.
-
1
-
-
54 minutes ago, Damien said:
I think we need to remember that the 2013 semi was also a double header. Sure I don't expect loads to have been there watching Australia v Fiji but it wasn't just a simple standalone England game either.
It's also a semi-final so you're guaranteeing that the game means something.
Sadly, due to the Ashes not having been played for 22 years, this really has little extra recognition than a four nations game would have.
-
2 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:
Only 35 tickets available now in the lower bowl
Are people able to cancel? Might explain why ones become available.
-
28 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:
I still think we'll catch them cold at Wembley - Walsh and clearly to have shockers is my prediction (hope)
If they beat us in the last few minutes I think Ill have an actual meltdown
Listen, have faith. Lightening can't strike in the same place like 8 times can it?
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, FearTheVee said:
Buy early, choose anywhere.
That's not how I roll...
In answer to those disappointed with the possible figure, it was only 20 years ago that I was able to call up on the day to get tickets to an Ashes game at Wigan.
I'd argue the game was probably in a better place then as well.
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, philipw said:
They’ll only open them if the whole top tier is looking at selling out. It’s out of the to arc, so the last to be opened-a sensible approach but doesn’t help you I guess.
As I said, I totally get it. From a TV perspective it worked very well in 2013 too.
I also know I've left it late, I get that. I once got tickets on the day for an ashes test and knew beggars couldn't be choosers.
It's just a little frustrating to know that there are 35k odd tickets left, and I'm willing to pay but my options are pretty limited.
I'm not going to exaggerate the problem and make out like it's thousands, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it's put some people off who were only looking to consider it.
-
1
-
-
Annoyingly, we're still waiting on one of my brothers to finally book tickets.
I must say it's a bit frustrating that there are still probably 35k empty tickets but that all the options I can buy are sub-par should we say.
I've never been a fan of behind the posts, and much prefer to watch a game from the side, even if it is higher up. We were provisionally looking towards the front of 549/550 but they've now gone.
I totally get why they have to open up this way, but I'm basically restricted to behind the posts or more of a corner view. When 530-523 are going to be completely empty it is a little frustrating!
-
1 hour ago, Ethereal said:
Hopefully internal customer databases, analysis of customer interest/awareness, ad click-through rates etc, the pace of sale for Wembley compared to previous events and similar data we don't have access to.
From the same article "Jones also revealed that ticket sales are up 25 per cent on this time last year for the Super League Grand Final in October, leaving RL Commercial confident they can push for an attendance of 70,000 at that event"
(In the event grand final attendance only went up by <1k and hit 68,853).
So for the grand final at least it seems ticker buying shifted earlier than in previous years with smaller sales in the immediate run up to the event. It may be that similar things happened to Wembley tickets, with the tracking for both leading to RLCom overestimating final expedted figures.
(Or the numbers may all be fudged and rl commercial believes throwing out big targets and expectations for attendances improves crowd sizes even if they keep missing them).
I was surprised in the article when it said that they'd sold nearly 40k as of late August.
I still think my basic point applies about expectations being raised by the early sellouts. In reality, something like 58k is a good figure both currently and historically.
The RFL might have bigged it up to the point where it wasn't a particularly realistic figure. I'll be honest, when I saw the sellouts I thought Wembley would get a massive boost because there would be nowhere else for people to go to.
-
1
-
-
35 minutes ago, Ethereal said:
The reason people were talking about it a disappointment/underachievement is that was what was declared as the target by the people in charge of selling the tickets. They're being judged by the targets they themselves set.
RL Commercial chief Rhodri Jones - “But our target is 65,000 to 70,000, with a lot of marketing activity to start in September time"
Where do you think they got the idea for that target from?
The last big international games England have tried to hold outside of the heartlands have been:
Samoa (WC Semi) 40,489
Samoa - (WC Opener) St James 43,199
NZ - Anfield 26,234
Australia - Olympic stadium 35,569
NZ - Olympic stadium 44,393
Australia - (WC Opener) Millenium stadium 45,052
Australia - Wembley 42,344
You'd have to be mad to think purely off a target that the RFL set, that they'd suddenly be able to shift 70k. Literally, the last time they went to Wembley they got 42k.
The only reason anybody, including them, thought it was possible is because of the level of demand for the first 2 tests.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Spidey said:
What happens in this scenario? .
Game 1 24-12
Game 2 12-12
Game 3 12-24It might help to clear up something I've long wondered.
In 1990, we won the first test and were drawing the second very late into the game. People were celebrating as if we'd won the Ashes. Why was this?
Surely it would have only guaranteed a draw, which would be Australia retaining the Ashes?
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Damien said:
I don't think anyone got carried away and the vast majority were very realistic. Wembley with 90k seats was always going to be a hard sell. I daresay if Everton or Headingley was 90k seats they wouldn't have sold the same either.
I'm largely responding to those who are saying they are disappointed.
Based on the previous attempts to sell Aus-Eng at Wembley in the 4 Nations, the London semi-final in that last WC and even the WC opener in 2013, I'd have thought 50k would have been seen as a decent crowd.
The only reason people were talking about 70k, seems to be because of how quickly the other two sold out. Putting it bluntly, we've never sold out 50k for a RL event in Britain that quickly. Not even close.
Historically and even recently, there is no way that a high 50s crowd at Wembley could be seen as a disappointment or an underachievement. The only reason people can make this argument is because there have been no other tickets on sale for months.
-
2
-
-
20 minutes ago, Worzel said:
Yes, I hoped for more myself, and also think more was possible had we done a better job of marketing. But I think that by any measure if we set a new all-time Ashes attendance record in this country, we should recognise that's good progress and definitely celebrate it.
Very possibly, everybody just got a little carried away after Everton and Leeds. However, there were reasons for those two selling out so quickly.
Personally, I was gutted when I saw I'd missed out on Everton but it didn't really make me eager to go to Wembley. It's a much longer trip, and I don't particularly love Wembley and those big red seats if it isn't 100% full.
I'd never given it a second thought until my bro asked along with the added bonus of free train travel. The point I'm making is I think a lot of presumed scarcity would create unprecedented excitement for London, but this hasn't really happened.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, MattSantos said:
Oh crikey.
I'm looking at the sleeper train down.
Massive FOMO
Just think, we could finally beat them after 20 years and you wouldn't be there....
-
8 hours ago, Winston Smith said:
Being a Skins supporter, it seems I am destined to continue in my life of misery. Okay, I’ve been DC since 82, and boy didn’t we have some great years, 3 Superbowls. But since the last one, we’ve mainly been dire. Then we got a young rookie RG3, things looked up, but he was injury prone. Then we accept our lot, we never have hope, we accept that this is our lot.
Then we suddenly find the dream QB, JD5 makes us good, very good. We start to believe, our year is coming. But then this season, he’s turned out to be another RG3. Injured twice this season. Getting battered by the Cowgirls too, as if life should be allowed to kick you even more when you’re down.
Getting battered by the Cowgirls doesn't seem too bad...
Try being a Jets fan. After the Chargers (my childhood team) moved and became unappealing, I essentially had free pick over who I could support.
I chose the 32nd best team.
-
1
-
-
We haven't actually bought tickets yet as we're still trying to work out exactly who is going.
I have been looking today at where we fancy sitting. Does anybody know why 551-503 are greyed out? It seems hard to imagine that they are sold out. The only reason I say this is because this isn't how the RFL sell tickets for the CC final where they are spread across that top tier.
For a second I thought that maybe they've only released tickets for the front of the section but if you look at 550 they are selling tickets right towards the back.
-
4 minutes ago, gingerjon said:
The NFL is obviously literal about its laterals.
I've seen the play but not the decision - it did look forward?
Kind of. If it was in a live RL game, I think I'd be shouting forward.
It was just interesting that as it doesn't happen very often, I suspect their understanding is that it is based on the position of the ball relative to the field. Unless of course, that is what the rule is in American Football.
England v Australia 2025 - been to the UK!
in The General Rugby League Forum
Posted
It wasn't solely at you, there were plenty of people saying about the possibility of a drubbing.
I'm not going to justify an outlandish 60 point prediction (although never say never), but I certainly wouldn't discount the possibility of a 40 point margin at some point.
There is only so much form evidence that can be brought when it comes to Australia vs England, history tells us that. We can look at every previous game for 5 years but it doesn't mean anything.
The ultimate proof of this is 2004. 2 wins against a NZ team who'd drawn against Aus, 1 last minute defeat to Aus and another victory. 3 tests the previous year where we'd not lost a game by more than a try.
38-0 down at half-time. RL can be brutal but there is no way that GB would ever have been 38-0 up at half-time. It's also the manner of the scoring, it is in a clinical and quick way that is levels above us. And we've seen it so many times in the past.
I'm not being negative; I'm going and I'm absolutely hyped for it but I'm also daunted about what could happen.