Exiled Wiganer

I am surprised at the certainty with which some are discounting this. The Prime Minister of PNG has himself made the point that whether the population is 10,000,000, 13,000,000 or 17,000,000 they need more support. Now, that suggests to me that the figure may be far higher than the 9,000,000 usually quoted. I make this point to draw out the huge market for our game. PNG so often seems to be an afterthought, or faintly patronised, but this is a country with many millions of current and future players. I would go further and suggest that league could play its part in what we hope will be the development of this country over the years and decades to come.

It’s a UN report.

I was reading an article today about PNG. They have realised that it has about double the number of people in it than previous figures had suggested. About 17,000,000. From a league perspective, I have long argued that our sport is the biggest game in the South Pacific in terms of population reach, and this brought it home to me just how big the league loving world is over there. They are making slow but sure progress as a nation, but every year is better than the last. I have no doubt that they will, within a decade be a league superpower in teh men’s game, and, in time, the women’s game. While we are already seeing the former, the positive influence of the Orchids on PNG society cannot be over stated. They have a wonderful style of play, and a deep passion for the greatest game. The Big Game just got Bigger!

I don’t want to labour the point, but game benefited and will benefit hugely from this World Cup financially. The break even comment is essentially about a super profit.

It’s hugely improved from where we were, and improving all the time. I would draw out a couple of things: France has its own league, and some recognition of the huge playing numbers in PNG should be made whenever looking at the state of the game.

The author doesn’t understand the finances around these World Cups. They mistake a failure to make a super profit as a loss. Moreover, they ignore the massive grass roots investment across the game over here that came with the tournaments. It will be the most financially rewarding World Cup for the game we have ever had by a massive distance. Assuming they are not a troll, but are a journalist (though maybe they’re just an amateur blogging) their failure to understand what Dutton means by “break even” is hopeless and completely undermines everything else. As for crowds, that has been touched upon in these parts, so I won’t revisit that. As for the format, I have an open mind. I don’t decide these things, but I would not object to a 8/10/12 team men’s tournament with emerging nations playing in parallel. But I am conscious that it’s not necessarily a decision for the fans, as opposed to the IRL who have oversight over its dozens and dozens of members. On this, again showing what a dreadful article this is, lumping Wales with Ireland and Scotland is mind numbingly dim. Finally, no mention of there being 3 tournaments. You can’t consider the project properly without understanding it was 3 tournaments in one. Which increased the massive grass roots investment. Or should I say you would be stupid to do so, but as noted above we are dealing with an author unable to understand what they’re writing about.

I suspect he is happy for him.

God - you’re still infesting the site? We need vichies on here like Leigh needs a train station.

What on earth? Australia have a wonderful pack of forwards. They never stop. I thought England looked better close to the line in this WC, though we did bomb too many chances in the semi. Who this Jones?

It’s hard to think of a more ridiculous term than “super rugby” for a u—- fatties kick contest.

You know less than nothing. We have the richest co owner in the sport.

I was talking to a West Country contact today, and he was enthusing about the wheelchair tournament… it’s reach has been extraordinary. How about having France - England games in all 3 disciplines? That would be something someone should be able to sell. Who wouldn’t want to see those 2 in a wheelchair rematch?

Why would athletes want to play u—-? That makes no sense. Aside from that, I agree.

Taking each nation in turn, we face 4 challenges that I see, aside from a structural one which is, especially using the NRL rules, our game is too unforgiving when there is a mismatch in quality (especially compared with football): - the SH nations can play among themselves, building on the improvements across the board with Tonga, Samoa, PNG and Fiji (and the player pathways). This requires the NRL to allow players to play internationals. Surely they won’t stop them??? The challenge here is a simple one: how can we persuade one of the 4 top teams to play in England??/ - the emerging European nations have an established amateur structure, supported by the IRL and ERL. The main outliers here are Wales, whose performances were a highlight of the World Cup. How can they grow? It would help if they could call on all of their heritage players: eg Knowles was an asset for England, but we could have lived without him, and Wales would really have benefited from his playing for them. If we could find a way to help push them forward, that would be great. It seems very hard to see, but the upsides are so great, and the downside risk (see above) of the SH pulling up the drawbridge makes a competitive Wales all the more important. Maybe we could give salary cap exemptions for Wales union players? - we need France to be better. They are around 8th/9th, but that level does not allow for competitive matches against the big 5. We would all be so so much better if there was a strong French team. Maybe, we look again at protecting Toulouse, the residency eligibility rules, and apply a union cap exemption; and - we need any of the big 4 teams to play England in England in the next 2 years. Surely that can be achieved??? If I were based in the SH, I would be thrilled at the state of the world game, with potentially some version of the Oceania Cup giving fantastic games week after week in the post season international window. Separate from the triumph that is SoO. Honestly, I fear for the NH game, while at the same time I believe that, if the SH nations carry us these next few years, we can kick on and strengthen the game up here. Triumph or disaster - which will it be?

If I have read it correctly, they’re saying that there was 3 times the revenue. If true that’s some achievement.

England could have a great home series against any of the other top 5 teams. It was suggested to Samoa’s coach after the final that they might come back again, That might have had no basis in fact, but I would be happy to watch them again over here. It’s potentially horrific for NH league. It’s no so much that the NRL doesn’t need us, it’s that we need them, but no one seems interested.

And hence one answer to the question “how many attended the women’s final” could be 67k, and the aggregate women’s World Cup figure could include that, eg in an overall made up figure of 130k. But it would be wrong to argue that 550k attended the men’s and women’s world cups. Figures can be slippery! how about this as a made up fact: far more people watched Samoa play than any non big 3 team in any tournament…

It may already have been mentioned but Jon Dutton acknowledged that the men’s tournament failed to reach its targets in his BBC interview. He did highlight that we had doubled the TV figures compared with 2013 (I appreciate that an increase would be inevitable given the number of games shown but nevertheless some of the figures have been none too shabby). He was also enthusiastic by the way the women’s and wheelchair games had gone. I would give him some credit for acknowledging the shortfall.

It was made up by me completely. Thanks for acknowledging my original thought. Though it did come with a caveat that I hadn’t checked it. The “problem” this runs into is how to count double headers, but having been at pretty much all of the matches in question, I am happy enough with the NZ figure looked at any which way. The Australia figure is a lot more doubtful as 10s of thousands left before they started and there weren’t many left by the end. And - I hesitate to write this in case it’s considered to be a made up stat - how many watched the women’s final?

I am slightly confused, though, when your figures above had both semis with 67k watching. Did anyone watch yesterday women’s final? Or did 60 odd k?

I divided the semi by 2, which I thought was the accepted convention. If we do adopt that approach then the 2021 women’s tournament attracted huge (world record?) crowds. Which makes the 2021 overall total much higher. That’s brilliant news for 2021’s figures!

I have not done the legwork on this, to my shame, but I wonder whether more people watched Samoa live (175k plus?) in this World Cup than any other team in any other World Cup…

Thanks. Well, sadly, when I hear Yeo I will still think of yoghurt.

(Was it Tom Trbojevic?)

Well, you were lucky, because it was the only thing being discussed where I was sitting, and on the long journey home. I have heard it mentioned repeatedly, whenever the Aussies play. There are 2 groups that are unlikely to be bothered, however. Those who know their Campbells as well as their Batemans, and those casual watchers for whom they’re a bunch of great athletes going about their business. And we want as many of those as we can. Having double checked, I made the initial point, I made it clear that this was a personal gripe. I can’t compare Wayne Pearce with the current Aussie loose forward, when, honestly I am not sure who played “13” for them.