Jump to content
Total Rugby League Fans Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

805 Excellent

Member Profile

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

4,487 profile views
  1. Saints have been easily the best team to-date. Never-the-less they do make a fair number of unforced errors (their expansive and fast play can lead to that) early on plus capitalize on opposition errors (defensively they apply huge pressure to opposition). Key (as in most RL big games) is for Warrington is to be conservative, guard the ball minimizing errors and make the most of Saints frequent errors before they "play them themselves in". May not lead to an expansive exciting end to end game that many carve for... but would get them to winning the game.
  2. yep, but you still get that even if no relegation given the discussion above... certainly if a big play on being the club with the wooden spoon.... and the incoming banter associated. Maybe if not relegated the pain is not so intense... but I guess the argument is whether having relegation increases attendance in addition to watching for the passion, enjoyment and thrill, etc. Although it increases wider interest.
  3. netball super league.. to add another... to also give you another chuckle.. although netball is very successful growing sport at the moment.
  4. I agree with regards to the qualitative difference between clubs... The low salary cap means that teams may be more equal on average due to that restriction. Whereas their is a huge difference between clubs.
  5. Yep I read it wrong....sorry I'll make sure I get enough sleep before studying things
  6. yep, seems odd to me that a team can lose x2 game out of three and yet win that 3rd game and go to the final. A 33% win ratio gets you to the grand final. A 50% win ratio and your the grand final winners. The team that finishes top (Saints) need at least a 50% win ratio to get to the final. Yet 2nd and 3rd only need a 33%... Seems crazy to me...
  7. Nope I haven't said their is not a need to have a healthy wider public and media interest, feeding through to more commercial revenues. Never-the -less on a personal view unless its the team I support I don't care who wins SL. I may on the day decide to prefer one team or another for whatever nebulous reason that may come in my head. Generally I don't give a hoot who wins. My comment is purely and to repeat on why the main attendees of a game view a game. If its expected to be a good spectacle in its own right then people would attend. If they are not then it says something about the spectacle. Thats not to say more media hype around the game that may put a some more on the gate... but if the majority don't think the spectacle is worth watching and hence paying irrespective of league positions then what does it say about our average game.
  8. not saying they wouldn't be. nor that it doesn't add additional interest. I'm saying or trying to say on the narrow point of attending or watching an individual game that the spectacle in itself (the nature of the sport entertainment value) should be why you want to attend. If not it says a lot of whether people think the game/sport is exciting or good entertainment. If it take's relegation or promotion (or whatever ) to be the major factor or whatever to encourage the majority to attend then it doesn't imo say much for our sport.
  9. aah yes I agree, I guess I didn't explain myself well. I was assuming teams in a league are more or less of similar abilities and hence why they are in the same league, I was trying to say that the game should be worth watching irrespective of relegation/promotion positions. Of course some years you have a run-away team like Saints, but then they themselves are worth watching whomever they are playing. That not to say that their isn't more general and media interest in relegation and league winning aspects.
  10. Media interest as well as general fan interest will be a lot more - not saying this wouldn't be. I was talking purely from the narrower aspect of attending the game to watch a game as entertainment as distinct from wider awareness and interest generated by wider public/fan base - of course this is good from a wider sport perspective.
  11. With the play-off system it doesn't make a big difference, yep maybe a slight advantage if you believe playing at home makes a huge difference. But even if 2nd team lose they get to play at home in next game as would 3rd team. Both get a 2nd bite if they lose against lead leaders, as would lead leaders if they lost that game.
  12. If watching RL is as good as some suggest whether their is something to play for from a league competition perspective shouldn't matter. If the entertainment is good enough it should excite sufficient interest in watching. If it depends upon what a club/team position is playing for then it don't say a lot about RL entertainment. Thats not to say their may well be a few less, but if significant then obviously the entertainment level must be poor. Myself I watch a game of rugby league because I enjoy watching, the higher the level of Rugby the more expectation as to the level of excitement.
  13. problem will be Sky, they will want to show each of the relegation games...
  14. on that basis Leeds are in serious trouble as their form is: WWLL, WWLL, WWLL, WWL Thus a win for London against Leeds puts London on 20 points.... Then to be safe Leeds need to beat either Salford or Warrington and I have doubts about their mental toughness and hence form goes out the window...
  15. Yep, Headingley Stadium surrounding area has a lot of options... Salvo's or Bryans use to be my preferred options depending upon type of food I fancied. Other grounds don't have such a good choice, especially if thinking about independents rather than big chains... As for Huddersfield, my missus never stops reminding me how bad the choice is in the ground when I delighted her in an expensive "sausage roll". She now insists on hospitality.... although I'm more a meat and potato pie man myself... its how I grade the food in-stadium
  • Create New...