Chris22

We would have to have a very loose definition of Lancashire as very few top players were born in Lancashire. Personally, it wouldn't appeal to me in the same way that an England game would.

Whilst Brentford looks a nice enough stadium, is there anything at all to indicate any interest in the club wanting to host a rugby league match, mid-Premier League season?

A mixed bag in terms of attendances for this series, in my view. What we have seen is that matches against the likes of Tonga do not have the same appeal to heartlands crowds as matches against New Zealand and Australia, or World Cup matches. But, it was largely in keeping with other non-RLWC matches against Tier 2 nations. With us expected to face Samoa, it will be interesting to see what lessons are learned. This series seems to be at least in the pipeline far earlier than the Tonga series this year. Leeds tends to draw strong international crowds, probably the strongest of the heartlands, so I think a first test at Headingley would be a good starting point. Next year, I'd like to see a test at a non-heartland venue. Coventry attracted a 21,000 crowd for England v Scotland in 2016 and a relatively strong crowd at the World Cup last year, so that would be one option. I think there's reason to think a smaller London venue would do equally as well (if not better) than Saints or Huddersfield this year, so I wouldn't be averse to London hosting the non-heartland test. Finding a suitable, available and willing venue may prove tricky though. As for the third test, I'd stay out of West Yorkshire given that Leeds is already hosting. Maybe Hull?

At Saints, I would expect Noah Stephens to make his debut at some point this year. He seems to be quite a highly rated prop. Probably won't be a breakthrough year for him but one to watch in years to come.

English rugby league fans often seem embarrassed by success. We took on a team full of NRL and Super League players and, yes, Tonga didn't play well today but we did what we needed to do. We should be proud of having one of the best international teams. It's one reason that I think a more novice crowd for these matches would be more appreciative of success, especially in two close matches like the ones we have seen.

Good to see Wane as classless as ever.

I don't think it is hindsight to say that playing matches in both Huddersfield and Leeds was unwise, especially within 7 days of each other. I can't say I'm surprised by attendances between 11,000 and 13,000. Leeds tends to get stronger international crowds, so probably 15,000 next week. If we play Samoa next year, I think we could be confident of getting crowds at least equal to these in places such as London or Coventry. And we would have the benefit of playing in front of a different crowd. I know it's not quite as simple as sticking a pin in a map and saying let's play there but hopefully more time to plan this time and we can show growth in 2024, against an opponent of comparable repute.

So Newcastle, who barely even exist, are better set for Super League than London. Wakefield get the chance at more points by winning the Championship and 1895 Cup, by comparison to Castleford and Leigh. London's relegation is all but confirmed before the season starts. This is why sport should be played on a field, not a spreadsheet.

Ambition is welcome but without realism it can never be achieved. We would all love these matches played all over the UK, more frequently before packed stadiums. And we could cast the net wider. But to do that we need money. To hire stadiums, to negotiate bigger sponsorship deals. We also need cooperation from the NRL, which is often limited. We had a prime BBC1 slot on Sunday and viewing figures weren't great. We do need ambition, yes, but running before we can walk does not just hold the sport back, it contracts it.

There is in my view a huge difference between a World Cup and a test series. It's anecdotal, but at England v France last year, I was sat near people who were rugby union fans. At St Helens, I heard a lot of Welsh accents. At the final, I was near a family who travelled from Bournemouth. I think the pull of a World Cup is far wider than simply a 3 match series against a small Pacific Island, especially to new audiences.

I agree to an extent with the first sentence. I've said before it's not as simple as we think getting a venue in London mid Premier League season and costs more. And we have less disposable cash after the World Cup lost money last year. But I would be disappointed if we don't play a test against Samoa in London next year.

Saying we would have got 20K at Wigan when there is nothing to suggest that we would have is a fine example of this. I think we suffer from delusions about quite how popular our sport is. That's why the World Cup last year was a failure. We thought we could price it as a premium event when there was no demand for it. We were ambitious as you suggest we should be. What happened? We made a financial loss and can count ourselves lucky that Government funding prevented a real disaster.

I'll keep repeating it, there is no history in this country of an England match drawing 20K consistently for non World Cup matches against Tier 2 nations. I understand people may find that disappointing but I do not understand why people are surprised. We need these events to appeal to people who may not conventionally attend. Tonga is a nation few have heard of outside of rugby circles. They are a new force in the international game and I do think it will take time to build that awareness. If the Samoa series happens next year, we should then be aiming for better than this. We have effectively had to start again due to Australian intransigence and no end of season international rugby in the UK from the end of 2018 to the end of 2022.

Very enjoyable test match today. It is such a huge benefit to the international game that it is no longer just three nations who can be competitive at the top level. With a match under their belts, a Tonga win next week would not be a surprise at all. Lewis was the stand out for me, a brilliant debut. Loved his interview at the end, good on him for being willing to show how much it meant. I didn't particularly like Shaun Wane's faux-perfectionism when discussing Lewis' performance, which I thought showed poor man management. Welsby and McMeeken were also very good. That game could have gone either way and sets us up for another couple of decent tests. The best test series build as they go through and today laid a very solid foundation.

Thought I'd put this in here rather than the match thread. If I was a new fan today, I'd have been distinctly unimpressed. Firstly, several turnstiles were not scanning barcodes on tickets causing congestion and a kick off delay. The RFL also sold seats that did not exist, not realising that the rows towards the back of the stand were of differing lengths. Thankfully, not an issue as it didn't sell out. Several of the stadium bars were closed. Those that were open ran out of soft drinks and snacks by 30 minutes and water by half time. I don't know if its Saints to blame or the RFL. Though I must say I've never seen such issues with kiosks at a Saints match in the 10+ years the stadium has now been open. We need to be far better than this.

If you buy online now, you have to collect at the ticket office tomorrow I think.

I agree that we should be aiming for growth. There is the issue that we are asking the same fans to fork out time after time. Season tickets, away trips, Magic Weekend, cup finals, play offs, internationals. I understand why most are aimed at the same folk and slightly frustrating that the one aspect that is appealing to a wider audience, internationals, remain in the usual venues (including two venues very close to each other). Saying that, I do appreciate that it's very easy for us to say we should play matches in London, Coventry, Newcastle etc. and actually arranging that mid-football season and, of course, paying for it isn't as straight forward. I suspect we are paying the price for a World Cup which made a number of strategic errors and lost money. That has probably forced us to be more risk averse. The test series is a historic one but I still think it is an uphill task to sell Tonga, a country with a population a little larger than the capacity of Wembley, especially to a wider audience. It is a country that most who aren't into rugby will know nothing about, and many may not have even heard of. For example, I think a match between England v France outside of the heartlands may have a greater appeal on the face of it than a match against Tonga, due to the recognition factor.

Here are attendances for England matches, not against Australia or New Zealand, nor in a World Cup on home soil, since we ditched the GB brands: April 2023 v France = 8,422 June 2022 v All Stars = 9,393 June 2021 v All Stars = 4,000 (capacity limited due to covid) October 2018 v France = 5,144 October 2016 v Scotland = 21,009 October 2013 v Italy = 4,382 June 2013 v Exiles = 7,926 November 2012 v France = 7,921 October 2012 v France = 7,173 July 2012 v Exiles = 7,865 June 2012 v Exiles = 11,083 November 2011 v Wales = 10,377 June 2011 v Exiles = 14,174 October 2010 v France = 7,951 October 2009 v France = 11,529 October 2008 v Wales = 11,263 Given the historic attendances that these fixtures get, I'm not sure why there is such a shock at why we are not selling out these stadiums. It is entirely in line with what we would expect over the course of the last 15 years. What arguably is noticable is that the largest crowd came in Coventry (v Scotland in 2016) and Doncaster also posted good crowds (Oct 2008 and 2009), and neither are rugby league hotbeds. Perhaps there's a lesson in there that we can sell internationals to more novice crowds instead of relying on the same each time. If the map on the RL ticketing site is accurate (a big if), it'll look fine on TV tomorrow.

It's nothing more than my own view rather than based on anything concrete but I doubt IMG or anyone expected London to hold a Super League place at the time gradings were announced. I expect that IMG, given their public comments on the important of a London presence, probably saw a slower build up with London eventually reaching a stage of being a Super League side and a stable one at that. The fact that London are here from 2024 changes that dynamic significantly. I'm not sure of the mechanics of the new system. It may be rigid, as you suggest, and require a vote to allow more flexibility, or the terms may allow IMG to have ultimate discretion to make recommendations to the RFL as it sees fit. At this stage, it is little more than speculation on my part what IMG may do, but it is arguably the first major challenge of our new structure. It has been brought it to allow teams to build without the threat of automatic relegation. It would fly in the face of that aim to relegate London after one season in Super League (and they could be relegated theoretically even if they have a strong on field season and finish mid table). Yet at the same time, it would fly in the face of the grading system to allow a side with a lower grading than a side outside of Super League to retain its place.

It's never sat comfortably with me that on field achievement is a side note. London have earned it on the field, so fair play to them, they deserve a shot. But to be fair to IMG, they have never indicated a willingness to go away from their points system, that is just my suspicion about what will happen.

It will be interesting to see how it goes. Last time, not one side had a licence revoked. It's a common misconception that Crusaders did. They did not, they withdrew their application.

Yep, that's exactly how I think it would work, in the event that London didn't meet the criteria. I think IMG would say that London are of such strategic importance that they would be granted a license.

Now is probably a good time to remind ourselves of what IMG have said in public about London. Call me a cynic but you can have whatever handbook or criteria you like, but I see almost zero prospect of London. having earned on field promotion, being kicked out of Super League after one season by IMG. London identified by IMG as key in effort to transform rugby league | Rugby league | The Guardian

Looks like the RFL have done their usual trick of showing tickets as not available then releasing more. For example, block C in the North Stand at St Helens was showing as having no tickets available yesterday. Now it has 32% availability! And the East stand was showing at about 2% availability, now it is at 25%!

I'm going to the match at St Helens and looking forward to it. I watched a couple of Tonga matches at the World Cup last year and they are as big of a draw to me as New Zealand would be. It's always hard to tell what kind of crowd will be expected as you never know if the RFL just haven't put some tickets on sale or if they are actually sold. If all tickets that are showing as sold are sold, it'll look fine on TV. Hopefully, a decent first match will then build interest for the next two tests.