Dave T

Which ones?

The Fandom category is quite a generous one, but if you add in utilisation which could easily be factored in under here and it gives a better reflection of crowds etc. If there was an anomaly with the Sky figs this year, you'd also expect Wigan to.be a full 5 and Toulouse to remain around 4.15 (in fact drop lower as SL crowds roll off). So there is a clear differentiator there. But if we added in utilisation, making it out of 6, then it would add even more of a differentiator.

We need to be careful about stating things are wrong or poor because they may not be exactly how we would do it. Weightings need to be carefully considered when deciding the scoring and there is also the point about keeping things as simple as possible, while allowing for as much flexibility to move and improve. It would be interesting to see every single metric set as a ranking system where possible, but then in reality this isn't necessarily a competition, it's about your own standards being the best they can.

There is no such thing as an A grade on fandom. Wigan have more fans, higher utilisation, higher digital numbers and would ordinarily have higher viewers (it's mentioned there is an anomaly this year). Their score would be different to London and Toulouse.

I'm not sure that different approach is a problem. Why is a differing approach across two measures a bad thing?

This is one of the things i don't like. It's pretty much so it's scored out of 20 points, with 15 the cutoff for A grade.

No, I can understand Nsemba, Thompson and maybe Walker, but there should be no messing around for the sake of it.

Lived in Edinburgh for 12 years and still couldn't direct you to it

Had an absolutely superb day watching that match at Meggatland, nice little venue and many, many beers were had.

Maybe they should organise more games then if they want squad rotation of any kind.

I get where you're coming from, but I don't agree. Isn't this all performative and always has been? New Zealand.com says this about the Haka: Traditionally, haka was a customary way to welcome visiting tribes, but it also served to invigorate warriors as they headed into battle. It was a show of physical prowess but also an embodiment of cultural pride, strength, and unity. I know it was a different dance, but I think the one the other day met the brief of that. it's absolutely performative, but I don't see that as a bad thing. In terms of managing these though, I think there is a level of control that's needed - you don't want, and can't really have contact every time, and these have been managed differently over the years, but ai think we are fine just now.

Indeed. And nothing has changed to bring it back.

I'm shocked.

Ah, I didn't see that. Which pundit was that?

I wasn't pointing out a mistake. I was highlighting that we have used England as the name in the past for the Ashes.

Its always interestibg to look back over history when talking about this. A google search for the 1946 RL Ashes in Australia shows a program with Australia v England on it, and the team photo from that tour shows them wearing the blue and red chevron that we recognise as the GB kit.

To be fair, I think the commentary was relevant to what was happening in the game. Did it have an English bias, sure, but it mirrored the chat on the thread, the Samoa team let themselves down for large parts of the first half and were frustrating. When they started to play a bit of Rugby and entertain, they did some good stuff and got the credit for that. But it's no surprise that the half time analysis was down on Samoa imo.

I thought that was a very bold schedule!

No.

Do you mean Etihad?

Yes, missed that one, it was 73k

This is one of those things we need to be careful of. The first game is often a cold start. That 41k for that World Cup opener was seen as a disaster at the time.

London has proven itself many times, particularly for games against the Aussies: 1990 - 54k (Wemb) 1994 - 57k (Wemb) 1995 - 41k and 66k (Wemb) 1997 - 41k (Wemb) 2000 - 34k (Twickenham) 2011 - 42k (Wemb) 2013 - 67k (Wemb v Kiwis) 2015 - 45k (Olymp v Kiwis) 2016 - 36k (Olymp) 2022 - 40k (Emirates v Samo) We do need to be cautious of a couple of those attendances. Crowds don't just turn up. If I was a betting man, I'd say 40-45k is our level in London for a standard Test match - but if we get anything wrong (playing Sunday, poor stadium choice etc) then it can easily drop. On the flipside - get things right, and we can see that there is some huge potential. Having two finals that are around 65k and an international that is 50k plus would be really positive, and hopefully start to change the narrative.