Rugby league-could some lessons be learned from cricket?

[Dave T]

12 minutes ago, hunsletgreenandgold said:

Not read the whole thread but i've seen a few trying to play down the success of The Hundred been in part due to 'lots of free tickets' - does anybody actually have any evidence of that? Most prices for adults are relatively in line with RL and kids tickets been as cheap as they are is just common sense really. The first weekend back of unrestricted crowds saw RL massively beaten on attendance by a new game/format with completely new teams. This should be a worry to SL and going back to the thread title, yes RL could learn a lot from cricket! 

Tickets for adults are lower than SL games at the bottom end.

At Manchester tonight it's £30, £25 and £16 for adults. £5 for kids. For lesser games it starts at £12 for adults.

At Warrington tonight it's  £31, £27, £25 and £22. £10 for kids. That is standard pricing and doesn't drop below the £22.

As an aside, I enquired about hospitality at a Hundred game in a couple of weeks for my birthday. Decent prices - but the website rather lacks in details and the guy I emailed was no more helpful. Trying to understand food and drink options and timings is too difficult to bother.

[gingerjon]

Just now, Dave T said:

Tickets for adults are lower than SL games at the bottom end.

At Manchester tonight it's £30, £25 and £16 for adults. £5 for kids. For lesser games it starts at £12 for adults.

At Warrington tonight it's  £31, £27, £25 and £22. £10 for kids. That is standard pricing and doesn't drop below the £22.

As an aside, I enquired about hospitality at a Hundred game in a couple of weeks for my birthday. Decent prices - but the website rather lacks in details and the guy I emailed was no more helpful. Trying to understand food and drink options and timings is too difficult to bother.

The Hundred was even cheaper in the pre-sale.

I could have got adult tickets for £10 and £5.

I *believe* some county members/mailing list subscribers are still being sent similar links.

[DavidM]

4 minutes ago, Dave T said:

At Warrington tonight it's  £31, £27, £25 and £22

Wow , is that standard for SL ?

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, DavidM said:

Wow , is that standard for SL ?

At Wire, yes. 

[phiggins]

56 minutes ago, Dr Tim Whatley said:

There really is. Winviz is often a bit wild, but the models bookmakers use for in-play betting will give a very good indicator of a team's chances at any given time.

That's my point. For the average fan, you're not going to have access to such models, so you're relying on your own opinion / hunch. By displaying the win predictor, you make those models available to people, which is why I said it was a good fit for cricket.

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

I get frustrated that we see stats at half time, but then not at fulltime, it's like they do it because it has been done since the 80's or whatever, but don't take it seriously.

I put a comment on one of the other threads about other stats that I'd like to see which I presume they could get from GPS data that the teams will already be recording. 

Could we see biggest hits and fastest speeds of the players throughout the game, for example? People keep talking about building up new stars, but there seems to be precious little effort being made to do it. Identifying the speedsters and big hitters might help to highlight some more exciting attributes of the players than the bog standard stats we've seen for the past 25 years.

[THE RED ROOSTER]

Here is a tweet from James Buttler better known by his Twitter nom de plume Cricket Badger

Read this and substitute the two words Rugby League for Cricket and he is spot on. You might not learn any lesson but can identify similar problems.

Quote

Following an earlier tweet some people have asked what I'd change about county cricket. My biggest gripe with cricket in general is short-termism. People that run cricket should have an eye on 50 years time but all too often changes happen to gain instant impacts and boost CVs

People that run the game try and make their mark not necessarily improve the sport long term. Too often when changes don't have instant impact they change again. Domestic formats rarely stay the same year on yeàr. The changers are often in other jobs by the time it fails.

So, too much short term planning and not enough eye on leaving the game stronger than they found it. When changes are made they should be thought through, debated properly and should be for a long term impact rather than making the changer appear like they've done something.

https://twitter.com/cricket_badger/status/1420115041437765637

[LeeF]

7 hours ago, hunsletgreenandgold said:

That's interesting - it would appear each stadium has it's own ticketing policy. Headingley for example didn't offer any free tickets (believe me I tried haha) to adults but the admission was for both games in full. 

Headingley was far from full for The Hundred game. It was just over 50% for the men’s game and about a third full for the Women’s match

[londonrlfan]

The last sport I'd want to copy is cricket. This looks like another attempt to get the yoof interested, but they're just not. The only reason it's given endless coverage in the media is because broadcasting is full of middle aged, white, middle class men; cricket's target audience. 

[The Frying Scotsman]

2 hours ago, londonrlfan said:

 The only reason it's given endless coverage in the media is because broadcasting is full of middle aged, white, middle class men; cricket's target audience. 

Interesting.

And what is Rugby League's "target audience"? (I'm asking, because I have no idea, and would love to know)

[GUBRATS]

8 minutes ago, The Frying Scotsman said:

Interesting.

And what is Rugby League's "target audience"? (I'm asking, because I have no idea, and would love to know)

People 

[The Frying Scotsman]

5 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

People 

probably sums it up, @GUBRATS  

I suspect they haven't got a clue.

[phiggins]

On 28/07/2021 at 11:30, gingerjon said:

The Hundred was even cheaper in the pre-sale.

I could have got adult tickets for £10 and £5.

I *believe* some county members/mailing list subscribers are still being sent similar links.

Was said to be 27,000 in Lords last night. I'd suggest the RFL would struggle to shift that many tickets even at those prices for anything bar a final, and maybe day 1 of Magic Weekend.

[gingerjon]

18 minutes ago, phiggins said:

Was said to be 27,000 in Lords last night. I'd suggest the RFL would struggle to shift that many tickets even at those prices for anything bar a final, and maybe day 1 of Magic Weekend.

Quite possibly.

But cricket shifts those numbers and more for domestic and international cricket - at higher prices with less marketing spend - multiple times each year.

So I'm still not seeing anything particularly useful for RL to be learnt.

[phiggins]

27 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Quite possibly.

But cricket shifts those numbers and more for domestic and international cricket - at higher prices with less marketing spend - multiple times each year.

So I'm still not seeing anything particularly useful for RL to be learnt.

I'll have to take your word on attendances as I'm only working on memory rather than anything documented, but I was under the impression that the test grounds would probably be full for derby games (Middlesex/Surrey, Lancs/Yorks, Warks/Worcs), but not so much for other game. While the 50 over cup would get nothing like that.

On the pricing. Lancs membership for all t20 home games is around £80. So not much more, if at all more expensive.

I think the thing RL should be thinking about is, how have they created a competition where every game is an event in itself? That doesn't mean RL should jump straight into a franchise competition, but maybe look at the matchday experience for example?

 

[Tommygilf]

33 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Quite possibly.

But cricket shifts those numbers and more for domestic and international cricket - at higher prices with less marketing spend - multiple times each year.

So I'm still not seeing anything particularly useful for RL to be learnt.

Wait until after this big meeting today

[gingerjon]

9 minutes ago, phiggins said:

I'll have to take your word on attendances as I'm only working on memory rather than anything documented, but I was under the impression that the test grounds would probably be full for derby games (Middlesex/Surrey, Lancs/Yorks, Warks/Worcs), but not so much for other game. While the 50 over cup would get nothing like that.

On the pricing. Lancs membership for all t20 home games is around £80. So not much more, if at all more expensive.

I think the thing RL should be thinking about is, how have they created a competition where every game is an event in itself? That doesn't mean RL should jump straight into a franchise competition, but maybe look at the matchday experience for example?

 

Agree with you a consistent, quality, matchday experience. I mentioned it earlier how, for example, every venue at The Hundred, is set up essentially the same with the same price bands, same family/non alcohol stands and guaranteed merchandise/concessions etc.

[Dave T]

7 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Agree with you a consistent, quality, matchday experience. I mentioned it earlier how, for example, every venue at The Hundred, is set up essentially the same with the same price bands, same family/non alcohol stands and guaranteed merchandise/concessions etc.

I'd agree with this. I really like some of the branding around the Hundred, I know it can be jarring, but there is a consistency there that looks modern and progressive. 

I like localised variations, but there should be minimum standards that you expect to see at every SL game you go to. 

[GUBRATS]

8 hours ago, phiggins said:

I'll have to take your word on attendances as I'm only working on memory rather than anything documented, but I was under the impression that the test grounds would probably be full for derby games (Middlesex/Surrey, Lancs/Yorks, Warks/Worcs), but not so much for other game. While the 50 over cup would get nothing like that.

On the pricing. Lancs membership for all t20 home games is around £80. So not much more, if at all more expensive.

I think the thing RL should be thinking about is, how have they created a competition where every game is an event in itself? That doesn't mean RL should jump straight into a franchise competition, but maybe look at the matchday experience for example?

 

Yes they have created a new comp , but you cannot gauge it a success yet , 3 years down the line perhaps 

[phiggins]

21 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Yes they have created a new comp , but you cannot gauge it a success yet , 3 years down the line perhaps 

Agree with that, which is why I don’t understand why some would want to dismiss it already. I’ve no idea how it’s doing financially, but I’m enjoying watching the games

[GUBRATS]

1 hour ago, phiggins said:

Agree with that, which is why I don’t understand why some would want to dismiss it already. I’ve no idea how it’s doing financially, but I’m enjoying watching the games

Why ?

[phiggins]

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

Why ?

Why am I enjoying watching the games? Mainly because I like watching cricket, particularly when the games are played at a good level.
 

While I can take the format or leave it, I think it’s a step up in quality from usual domestic competitions, with most games played with a good atmosphere in the ground as well. 

[Eddie]

Must admit I’d rather watch paint dry than watch cricket, and I’ve only scanned the comments on this thread, but cricket can’t be compared to rugby league as it’s a national game with people prepared to throw money at it, and TV companies who want to show it - RL has none of those three key things.
 

From speaking to pals who like cricket about the hundred they all think it’s a ###### idea, ok it might take off but if it does it will need millions pumped into it, millions that they probably have and RL doesn’t. And as for 9s which I’ve seen people mention as an equivalent, it’s not proper rugby league. 

[gingerjon]

9 hours ago, phiggins said:

Agree with that, which is why I don’t understand why some would want to dismiss it already. 

Because, to labour the point, it has already cost £40m and is meant to make a profit - a proper profit involving money to support the whole game, not a "well, it's raised awareness" profit - right from the off. Literally from match one.

If it doesn't do that then it's failed. No matter how many excellent Jemimah Rodrigues innings we get to see.

[gingerjon]

10 hours ago, Dave T said:

I'd agree with this. I really like some of the branding around the Hundred, I know it can be jarring, but there is a consistency there that looks modern and progressive. 

I like localised variations, but there should be minimum standards that you expect to see at every SL game you go to. 

It was notable yesterday because they were broadcasting from Southampton and I've been there for internationals quite recently.

The positive was, what you say, they had done an obvious and excellent job in branding. Plus, on the pan backs, a decent job with the wrap around match day experience. But then Southampton, once you can get in (separate issue) is very good for that.

The negative, more for the cricket thread itself than this but worth pointing out, is that the tournament clearly lacks signed up sponsors. KP, who are shirt sponsors, were also programme sponsors *and* advertising in some of the breaks. Most of the time the LEDs were advertising Sky Sports or The Hundred itself. You don't mind seeing that for some of the time but it was notable just how much was filler advertising.