Why are Rugby League fans so miserable all the time...?

[whatmichaelsays]

I raised this point with Matt on said Twitter feed, but pointing out negatives is not, in itself, being negative and it's wrong to portray it as such. You can point out a negative for positive reasons. 

But in answer to the question, I think the crux of the issue is that as sports around us have developed, innovated, expanded and grown, RL has at best stagnated in terms of the crowds it generates, the levels of finance it generates to invest in the sport and the levels of media interest it generates. 

We have too much of a disparity between the standards of our relatively small number of clubs and that has fuelled a split in the supporter base. On one side you have those who believe that the sport needs to move forward, expand and explore new opportunities. On the other, you have those shouting "focus on the heartlands" with no idea what that actually involves, resisting expansion and fearing that the former group is trying to persue a standard that their club might not be able to reach. 

That's what creates so much of this in-fighting. It's why our players earn a pittance compared to those 20 years ago, it's why we have loop fixtures that nobody wants and its why we can't attract new people to watch and play the sport. 

Is it negative to point that out?

[Manx RL]

[Lowdesert]

2 hours ago, Tre Cool said:

My view is it all comes down to mistrust and complete lack of confidence in the RFL to govern the game effectively and make the game what most fans believe it should be.  There's so much historical resentment that has never been dealt with and it all bubbles up in negativity, anger and conspiracy theories.  Forced mergers, not promoting teams finishing top, endless changes in league structure, massively successful home international years followed by years of no games at all.  There's so many failings and then weak PR which means this anger is never dealt with.  

We have to see the replies to this survey and the options given to ascertain more detail.  Asking whether the governance of the sport makes you miserable needs fleshing out.  

In all honesty, what do most people know of the workings of the RFL on this board?  Sure, we know what the end product is, but now we have SL ceo’s running the show.  No questions asked about them seems a gerrymandered scapegoating attempt similar to the blame the RFL have received for Bradford’s plight.

’Lack of marketing’.  I can understand the lack of marketing for the internationals and any other representative events, but aren’t Clubs responsible for their own.  Hull FC and York are constantly giving me updates, news stories, promotions.

Some ‘fans’ on twitter could type anything.  Could be anyone with an axe to grind.  Can we see more detail in this survey?

 

 

[Big Picture]

1 hour ago, Allora said:

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

Because it got there before football 

I don't think that is accurate.

Of course it's not.  Soccer is only one of about five types of football in the world.

[Big Picture]

1 hour ago, Toby Chopra said:

This is an interesting point, and one worth engaging with. 

What I'd say, though, is that the shift to speed, strength and power is the inevitable outcome of full time professionalism, as these are the things that can be easily increased with full time training. 

And if the game hadn't fully professionalisef in the 90s, given all the subsequent changes in the the shape of the economy, employment and the wider sporting and media landscape, would it even have survived in any form till today? I have my doubts. 

The challenge for all sports, not just rugby league, is to have a grassroots that caters for all types of people and that is based around fun and sociability, while also having a pathway to elite professionalism. Football and Union struggle with this too.

It's more than just full time professionalism, it's also rule changes and new interpretations.

One glaring example of that is the bizarre English obsession with speeding up the game.  This leads to a simplistic game without the skill needed to break down/through a set defense which was an important part of the game before those rule changes and new interpretations came along.

[Big Picture]

Duplicate post removed.

Moderators — why can't we just delete duplicate posts like we can on sites like Facebook????

[Toby Chopra]

1 minute ago, Big Picture said:

It's more than just full time professionalism, it's also rule changes and new interpretations.

One glaring example of that is the bizarre English obsession with speeding up the game.  This leads to a simplistic game without the skill needed to break down/through a set defense which was an important part of the game before those rule changes and new interpretations came along.

Not saying you're wrong, but could you give an example of this? 

Because my view would be that it's harder to break through defensive lines because defences are fitter, faster and much better drilled - another outcome of full time professionalism. 

Offences, in some cases, have just failed to keep up. But I'd struggle to describe this year's Saints team or Cas from a couple of years ago as lacking in skill in the backs. 

[Big Picture]

1 minute ago, Toby Chopra said:

Not saying you're wrong, but could you give an example of this? 

Because my view would be that it's harder to break through defensive lines because defences are fitter, faster and much better drilled - another outcome of full time professionalism. 

Offences, in some cases, have just failed to keep up. But I'd struggle to describe this year's Saints team or Cas from a couple of years ago as lacking in skill in the backs. 

You only have to compare the frenetic English game with the more structured game down under to see it.  Defenses in the Aussie game are much better set than in the English game, with the result that their players have to develop and maintain the skill of breaking down a defense.  Every time England plays Australia, the Aussies have a definite edge in that area of play, as we all know well.

[Padge]

1 hour ago, John Drake said:

Not judging by this thread so far, or this forum in general, tbh. It's a general malaise, and it's not new either. The moaning of RL fans predates Twitter. 

It also pre-dates SL and I notice already SL being blamed for everything including making supporters miserable. 

2 hours ago, Cerulean said:

Super League - which gradually forced the sport to depart from the skilful thrilling game of handling and running and evasion, into a contest of high speed battering and wrestling, where the team with the most kilograms is the most likely to succeed.

This started in 1982, that is a good few years before Super League, this change was coming regardless.

[Man of Kent]

1 hour ago, CanadianRugger said:

Negativity of RL fans is a carry over from other aspects of life like Brexit.  The population that supports Brexit is the same population that watches Rugby League.

In other words, negativity of the RL population in England is a reflection of who you are as a people.  It has little if anything to do with the sport itself.

Breathtaking ignorance. 

[Themusician_2]

In Australia they are not because it's one of the most popular sports in their country. In England we are negative because we are the 3rd football code in this country so the game gets overlooked.

[Clogiron]

I'm in the camp of preferring the game from a previous era, thank god for Harry Edgar & RL Journal who still speaks more common sense about the game than anyone else in the media.

While full-time professionalism may have brought about many changes, most for the worst, to the game I honestly feel it's time is drawing to a end, it's only now really sustainable at 5 or 6 clubs, too few to form a meaningful league, the rest will have to adapt to part-time players on match fees.

The game seems unable to generate enough income from sources other than a TV contract for multiple reasons, and having all your eggs in one basket is never a good idea, so the chicken's are about to come home to roost

[Themusician_2]

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

Because it got there before football 

Not true rugby arrived after football and aussie rules to australia

[Lounge Room Lizard]

For me,the lack of honesty and openness at my 2 Clubs (Halifax and Melbourne Storm) over the years about certain things anoys me and also feel like there are many skeletons in the Cupboard. I dont think certain issues have been properly addressed and this has created a air of mistrust and left a huge mark on both Clubs on how things were done. It just now makes me very sceptical about  Clubs and how they do things and what is really going on.

As for the running of the game by the RFL, NRL and RLIF I have absolutely no faith in any of the people involved. The lies, deceit, agendas and the failure to do whats best for the game has left me in a position where I dont trust them and struggle to see the positives the organizations bring to the game. There has been very little openness and honesty on why certain decisions have been made or not. The failure and sometimes deliberate attempt to sabotage the International Game, for example, has left me bitter. The RLIF is useless and yet the likes of Nigel Wood get a big salary, when that money should be used for development. Outside the RLEF and Danny Kazandjian there is next to no help for developing Nations to promote or develop the Sport from the RLIF.

The way Licensing/franchising was done in the UK was a joke and there was no transparency at all and nothing was done to benefit the game as a whole. I feel the RFL has damaged the game under Nigel Wood and now Ralph Rimmer, but nobody has made them accountable for the poor running of the RFL. We have seen some strange decisions made which have damaged the Sport- Asking the Toronto/Toulouse/Catalans to pay to play in the Cup, The role of the rfl with Bradford Bulls, The failure to run reserve Grade Comp Properly, The failure of marketing the game and events and the doing away of all Development Officers are decisions which I feel have hurt the game in many ways

The way the NRL has done next to nothing to help the game in the Country areas and has not been fully open and honest on things. The NRL is only interested in money and not the fans or other parts of the game. Its handling of the Peptides/Salary Cap Breaches at Cronulla and the way the Match Officials and Judiciary operate is something the NRL has failed to sort out properly. The failure of the NRL to support the International Game is a disgrace.

The game itself is fantastic. I think the negativity and moans are down to the way the fans feel they have been let down by the people running the game and clubs and the frustration that lessons are not learned and fans are treated often so badly.

[Oxford]

Why are Rugby League fans so miserable all the time...?

 

Just lots and lots of perfect practice and any coach will tell you perfect practice makes perfect.

[Man of Kent]

8 minutes ago, Clogiron said:

I'm in the camp of preferring the game from a previous era, thank god for Harry Edgar & RL Journal who still speaks more common sense about the game than anyone else in the media.

While full-time professionalism may have brought about many changes, most for the worst, to the game I honestly feel it's time is drawing to a end, it's only now really sustainable at 5 or 6 clubs, too few to form a meaningful league, the rest will have to adapt to part-time players on match fees.

The game seems unable to generate enough income from sources other than a TV contract for multiple reasons, and having all your eggs in one basket is never a good idea, so the chicken's are about to come home to roost

Not sure you’re right about only five or six clubs being sustainable. The middle ranking clubs like Cas and Wakey turn a profit on gates + TV money. 

Sure, the same clubs seems to win everything but that’s the same for other sports I could mention. Ditto for other sports’ reliance on TV money.

Sky has had the Super League rights for almost a quarter of a century...why do you think they will bin it off now? And if not them, why wouldn’t anyone else want to show it?

[Angelic Cynic]

I'm guessing,John,that with you following Bradford Bulls,and Matthew Shaw having an interest in Halifax that both of you have 'had a moan' in the past - and fairly recently.

Many clubs are not run correctly and the sport is far from transparent - at club and governing body level.

There is a lack of skill on display from when the sport was mainly part-time.( Ask the former superstar players )

It is of benefit,I feel,that many do 'moan'.It means they care,even if many comment without researching as much information as they can before doing so.

It would seem it is much more preferable to complain and retain the emotion for the sport/club,than to reach the state of apathy that would be a very understandable stance.

The supporters,of clubs and the sport,probably put a far higher percentage of their disposable income into clubs than many of the owners do.Consultation with supporters will only cost them a little bit of time.

  Negativity shows people care.Far better than apathy.I fear apathy may not be too far away.

[Davo5]

17 minutes ago, Lounge Room Lizard said:

For me,the lack of honesty and openness at my 2 Clubs (Halifax and Melbourne Storm) over the years about certain things anoys me and also feel like there are many skeletons in the Cupboard. I dont think certain issues have been properly addressed and this has created a air of mistrust and left a huge mark on both Clubs on how things were done. It just now makes me very sceptical about  Clubs and how they do things and what is really going on.

As for the running of the game by the RFL, NRL and RLIF I have absolutely no faith in any of the people involved. The lies, deceit, agendas and the failure to do whats best for the game has left me in a position where I dont trust them and struggle to see the positives the organizations bring to the game. There has been very little openness and honesty on why certain decisions have been made or not. The failure and sometimes deliberate attempt to sabotage the International Game, for example, has left me bitter. The RLIF is useless and yet the likes of Nigel Wood get a big salary, when that money should be used for development. Outside the RLEF and Danny Kazandjian there is next to no help for developing Nations to promote or develop the Sport from the RLIF.

The way Licensing/franchising was done in the UK was a joke and there was no transparency at all and nothing was done to benefit the game as a whole. I feel the RFL has damaged the game under Nigel Wood and now Ralph Rimmer, but nobody has made them accountable for the poor running of the RFL. We have seen some strange decisions made which have damaged the Sport- Asking the Toronto/Toulouse/Catalans to pay to play in the Cup, The role of the rfl with Bradford Bulls, The failure to run reserve Grade Comp Properly, The failure of marketing the game and events and the doing away of all Development Officers are decisions which I feel have hurt the game in many ways

The way the NRL has done next to nothing to help the game in the Country areas and has not been fully open and honest on things. The NRL is only interested in money and not the fans or other parts of the game. Its handling of the Peptides/Salary Cap Breaches at Cronulla and the way the Match Officials and Judiciary operate is something the NRL has failed to sort out properly. The failure of the NRL to support the International Game is a disgrace.

The game itself is fantastic. I think the negativity and moans are down to the way the fans feel they have been let down by the people running the game and clubs and the frustration that lessons are not learned and fans are treated often so badly.

The Halifax/Melbourne part aside,what he said.

Top post by the way.

[Clogiron]

9 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Not sure you’re right about only five or six clubs being sustainable. The middle ranking clubs like Cas and Wakey turn a profit on gates + TV money. 

Sure, the same clubs seems to win everything but that’s the same for other sports I could mention. Ditto for other sports’ reliance on TV money.

Sky has had the Super League rights for almost a quarter of a century...why do you think they will bin it off now? And if not them, why wouldn’t anyone else want to show it?

I don't think they will bin it off, but it will be probably be a reduced amount and the signs are that the SL club's want to keep it all to themselves which leaves the rest with problems.

The day's of all in this together seem to be long gone, which weakens the sport immeasurably

[Gerrumonside ref]

We were happy in the haze of a drunken hour, but heaven knows we’re miserable now.

[Chris22]

I think the answer is because it's easy to moan! And there is always something to moan at.

It's easier to criticise than to praise particularly in a partisan environment!

We should not confuse legitimate criticism with negativity though. 

[Cerulean]

40 minutes ago, Lounge Room Lizard said:

....The game itself is fantastic... 

You are very fortunate that you are thrilled by the sport: I wish I could still be.

But there is obvious and increasing disquiet that the sport is no longer The Greatest Game, not what is could be, that it has become too homogeneous, a high-speed battering and wrestling competition played out by heavyweight robots, lacking the fluidity and exhilaration of skilful ball-handling and running and evasion. Again, you are lucky that this is not how you see it, but it is how may see it. A lot of people believe that it has become unattractive, even ugly at times, not something parents would want their children to be involved in, not something for youngsters to have a go at, not something to be played in parks and playgrounds and gardens. I’ll say again, arguments about league structure - essentially about who bumps along at the bottom of Super League - are a distraction. The sport needs to look at how it is played and how it is viewed.

[Man of Kent]

11 minutes ago, Clogiron said:

I don't think they will bin it off, but it will be probably be a reduced amount and the signs are that the SL club's want to keep it all to themselves which leaves the rest with problems.

The day's of all in this together seem to be long gone, which weakens the sport immeasurably

Maybe I’m too optimistic but I see British rugby league as being generally on the up, not down.  

Clearly not everywhere and at every club but it seems in a good place to me. There’s tons to like at the international level and this season’s Super League is arguably the best ever.

Even the Championship is on the up and Sky is about to start screening every round of the play-offs.

Cheer up, dude

[Aidan Putt]

1 hour ago, Manx RL said:

Cribbins and a Pike is worth a like.

Cribbins and a Common Bleak would have been optimal.

[Toby Chopra]

1 hour ago, Big Picture said:

You only have to compare the frenetic English game with the more structured game down under to see it.  Defenses in the Aussie game are much better set than in the English game, with the result that their players have to develop and maintain the skill of breaking down a defense.  Every time England plays Australia, the Aussies have a definite edge in that area of play, as we all know well.

Sure, but I'm not sure that's down to speeding up the game because of rules, in fact isn't the ruck faster in oz than in England. Their offences are better becasue of just the reality of more players, more money and better coaches.