Less than 20,000 sold for Cup Semi Triple Header it seems

[GUBRATS]

1 minute ago, ShropshireBull said:

If Spurs like it then opens a place for an international down the line. 

Considering the booze they're going to sell , I'd suggest they'll love it 

[Toby Chopra]

1 minute ago, Tommygilf said:

The cup was created at a time when knock out competitions were the most popular and best attended fixtures. That just isn't the case anymore and hasn't been for some time. Everyone likes winning a final, but a one off 6th round tie, even between two real rivals, just doesn't have anything like the appeal anymore.

Sometimes it is necessary to recognise when something has run its course, or at least needs refreshing to stay relevant. With all due respect, fixing the draw to ensure SL clubs are away at certain points seems a short term tacky solution imo. 

The cup isn't fundamentally unpopular, but buying 1 off tickets amongst the RL fanbase seems to be except for the biggest events. I don't think we as a sport are in a privileged enough position to stick our heads in the ground about this.

I agree with that, I suppose it's just a question of what does "refreshing" mean? There's not necessarily any other format out there that meets a need of the public, so as long as teams aren't actually losing money hosting games, carrying on as is works for me. If we change the competition to something unrecognisable/scrap it completely, then it's lost for good. 

That point may come, but in my experience when you close things you often notice intangible benefits have been lost that you couldnt quite put your finger on before.

Again, not a reason not to do it ever, but  not due to random RFL fiddling with little longterm thought. 

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, ShropshireBull said:

If Spurs like it then opens a place for an international down the line. 

It certainly keeps the relationship open

[Toby Chopra]

5 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

If Spurs like it then opens a place for an international down the line. 

As much as I loathe saying this as a Spurs fan, my guess is that most fans will prefer their experince at Arsenal in the RLWC than going to Spurs stadium, due to it being much easier to get to, and more stuff in the locality (ish). 

That's the one we want to cement for an annual international in my view. 

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, Toby Chopra said:

I agree with that, I suppose it's just a question of what does "refreshing" mean? There's not necessarily any other format out there that meets a need of the public, so as long as teams aren't actually losing money hosting games, carrying on as is works for me. If we change the competition to something unrecognisable/scrap it completely, then it's lost for good. 

That point may come, but in my experience when you close things you often notice intangible benefits have been lost that you couldnt quite put your finger on before.

Again, not a reason not to do it ever, but  not due to random RFL fiddling with little longterm thought. 

I don't disagree, and I should have made far more clear that I see the 1895 Cup taking on a far more prominent role than currently too to mitigate that intangible loss somewhat.

[GUBRATS]

1 minute ago, Toby Chopra said:

As much as I loathe saying this as a Spurs fan, my guess is that most fans will prefer their experince at Arsenal in the RLWC than going to Spurs stadium, due to it being much easier to get to, and more stuff in the locality (ish). 

That's the one we want to cement for an annual international in my view. 

Yes but is it a brewery with a pitch attached to it ?

[GUBRATS]

Just now, ShropshireBull said:

I don´t see why a Women´s 9´s international wouldn´t be a better curtain raiser. Can be held closer to kick off and actually feels like it would offer us chance to draw in different market. 

No , no , no and NO 

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, ShropshireBull said:

I don´t see why a Women´s 9´s international wouldn´t be a better curtain raiser. Can be held closer to kick off and actually feels like it would offer us chance to draw in different market. 

In the context of the Challenge Cup being dramatically changed from its current format, I think having the 1895 Cup as the community focused curtain raiser would be a good point and is more in the spirit of what that competition can grow in.

[Leyther_Matt]

5 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

In the context of the Challenge Cup being dramatically changed from its current format, I think having the 1895 Cup as the community focused curtain raiser would be a good point and is more in the spirit of what that competition can grow in.

Personally feel the 1895 Final would be better as a standalone event as was the case with the (comparatively successful) Northern Rail Cup. Play the Women's Challenge Cup before the men's one, and make an effort to engage with the different demographic of that fanbase if we're interesting in boosting the crowd for the men's game.

[Dave T]

22 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

The cup was created at a time when knock out competitions were the most popular and best attended fixtures. That just isn't the case anymore and hasn't been for some time. Everyone likes winning a final, but a one off 6th round tie, even between two real rivals, just doesn't have anything like the appeal anymore.

Sometimes it is necessary to recognise when something has run its course, or at least needs refreshing to stay relevant. With all due respect, fixing the draw to ensure SL clubs are away at certain points seems a short term tacky solution imo. 

The cup isn't fundamentally unpopular, but buying 1 off tickets amongst the RL fanbase seems to be except for the biggest events. I don't think we as a sport are in a privileged enough position to stick our heads in the ground about this.

We need to be careful that we don't overstate any problems. It doesn't really matter whether it used to get big crowds for some earlier rounds really. That ain't massively relevant to 2022.

We see poor crowds for the playoffs and the Challenge Cup Semi Finals and Final often has bigger crowds than the SL equivalent and generally has far bigger viewing figures too.

It really is weird that we have gone to an almost subscription model like Netflix and then act confused when those 'subscribers' don't pay for another episode on a PPV basis. 

[Anita Bath]

4 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Apologies I was away this weekend and wanted to give this some proper consideration.

On a purely short term fix, the inclusion of Cup games where there is home advantage for one side, in whatever variety, into the Season Ticket model the sport as a whole has adopted seems to make obvious sense. As I said that is only a short term fix however.

Getting more to the heart of the issue, I think the notion of the Challange Cup being an "open" competition is now fundamentally flawed. The supremacy of Full time Super League teams in a Rugby League match makes games against non-FT opponents almost always one sided (which is no fun to watch for anyone). I don't see this changing anytime soon.

Perhaps most controversially then I would suggest restricting entry to the Challenge Cup, whilst having the 1895 Cup fulfill the community/part time RL aspect that has been largely lost from the most publicised stages of the Cup (and even when it is there, as stated above, it often causes apathy as walkovers are expected). Restricting access just means it not being "open" to me - enabling the powers that be to have strategic inclusions as they see fit; ie. qualifiers from the Championship, Elite 1 clubs. 

From that I see two broad potential options fitting in with the short term idea of Cup Games going onto Season tickets. 

1. Groups, semi finals, Final. There are a lot of ways this could be done. Group games would guarantee a set number of home fixtures for teams which is what most of them want (it maybe even replaces the oft bemoaned loop games). I would prefer a system which kept these to a minimal number, I've seen 4 groups of 5 with 2 home games each suggested for 4 group games each in total. There are of course other formulas for how this could be achieved too.

2. Two legged ties. Not something which has been tried in RL before, but RUs European Cup added an element of this to this year's competition and it seems to have been very positively received. If kept as a straight knockout it further guarantees a home fixture for each club in the competition, though it could be an element of the aforementioned groups style competition too.

I see opportunities for "cup memberships" for more casual fans being a possibility for clubs to look at selling to a different audience than their current season ticket base. For the BBC and other broadcast partners it could be an opportunity for more regular exposure of both the sport and the cup; building up the competition and the awareness of the game and its clubs.

I'm not saying any of this is 100% right or indisputably the best way forwards, but it is clear to me at least that the core reasoning behind the the Cup being how it is doesn't really apply anymore.

Two legged ties were tried in the post war years in thefirst round (round of 32). 1953-54 seaon was the last season with two legged ties

[Jughead]

I liked the Northern Rail Cup as it’s own event, though I equally don’t have much of an issue of the 1895 being a part of the cup final. I don’t know if I’d have the Women’s Final at Wembley as part of a single event or double header in the immediate future but I would like it to be its own standalone event, not added on to something else. 

 

[JohnM]

Anyway, the crux of he argument is this: FEWER, not LESS THAN.

[Dunbar]

26 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

I don´t see why a Women´s 9´s international wouldn´t be a better curtain raiser. Can be held closer to kick off and actually feels like it would offer us chance to draw in different market. 

As Douglas Adams wrote, 9 is the answer, we just don't know what the question is yet!

[gingerjon]

33 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

I don´t see why a Women´s 9´s international wouldn´t be a better curtain raiser. Can be held closer to kick off and actually feels like it would offer us chance to draw in different market. 

The way to promote women's rugby league is to have the girls play some of their lovely little internationals before the men get on with the real business of a club fixture?

[Tommygilf]

20 minutes ago, Leyther_Matt said:

Personally feel the 1895 Final would be better as a standalone event as was the case with the (comparatively successful) Northern Rail Cup. Play the Women's Challenge Cup before the men's one, and make an effort to engage with the different demographic of that fanbase if we're interesting in boosting the crowd for the men's game.

Possibly, I think the Women's Cup, and Womens game in general would be best served building up its own following where possible.

The 1895 Cup being the Community asset for clubs that have basically no chance of getting to a CC semi or quarter final currently would be better imo.

[Gerrumonside ref]

If we were to move the women’s Challenge Cup to the same day/weekend as the men’s Challenge Cup final, then (without knowing the practicalities) could we also stage the wheelchair Challenge Cup final in the same city on the same weekend.

Then we could really stage a takeover on the BBC and benefit from a lot of cross promotion aimed at different demographics hopefully embracing all three finals same city, same weekend.

That might reinvigorate interest in the Challenge Cup brand (our best known) and have a trickle down effect on the interest levels of the earlier stages.

[Gerrumonside ref]

Just now, ShropshireBull said:

Same weekend could work. Don´t think it needs to be same day at all. Friday night Women´s at Plough Lane. Men´s sat then wheelchair Saturday evening. 

Yes, then that would give people more reason to try and take in all three events and elevate the two others that we are trying to promote.

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, ShropshireBull said:

Better than a cup final in a stadium with virtually noone there before a semi double header.

Is it?

Because that's an amazingly low bar and I'm not convinced you've done anything other than trip up on it with a suggestion that is even more laughably ill thought through.

[gingerjon]

6 minutes ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

If we were to move the women’s Challenge Cup to the same day/weekend as the men’s Challenge Cup final, then (without knowing the practicalities) could we also stage the wheelchair Challenge Cup final in the same city on the same weekend.

Then we could really stage a takeover on the BBC and benefit from a lot of cross promotion aimed at different demographics hopefully embracing all three finals same city, same weekend.

That might reinvigorate interest in the Challenge Cup brand (our best known) and have a trickle down effect on the interest levels of the earlier stages.

Again, that reads more like diluting what could be three distinct and exciting events.

[Damien]

I think we really need to get away from the mentality of the way to get better attendances for failing events is to lump in other events with them. 

The Challenge Cup final should be a different target market than women's RL, never mind international RL and 9s. Obviously there will be some crossover but I can't believe anyone will go to the Challenge Cup final just because there is women's international 9s tagged on. The audience and target market should be completely different for all these.

[Gerrumonside ref]

1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

Again, that reads more like diluting what could be three distinct and exciting events.

Not if you stage them separately over the same weekend I feel.

Maybe in time they could become hugely attended/viewed events and I hope that is the future for the women’s and wheelchair sports.

But at this present time I think they would benefit from cross promotion with the men’s Challenge Cup final.

Lets face it, the RLWC is being staged simultaneously for the very same reasoning.

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, ShropshireBull said:

Obviously I think it´s better or I wouldn´t have said it genius. Pretty sure broadcasters can sell England Women vs France easier than 1895 cup and that´s what matters. I note that once again you´ve adding nothing of your own to the discussion, so thanks for your incredible contributions. 

You're welcome.

The 1895 Cup has already been live on the BBC as a curtain raiser to the Challenge Cup final and the BBC already show England v France (and England v Wales) women's internationals when they are played.

So you've moved precisely nothing forward whilst reducing actual women's internationals to the status of curtain raisers for a men's club game.

 

[gingerjon]

2 minutes ago, Damien said:

I think we really need to get away from the mentality of the way to get better attendances for failing events is to lump in other events with them. 

Bingo. It always ends up with less than the sum of the parts.

[gingerjon]

Just now, Gerrumonside ref said:

Not if you stage them separately over the same weekend I feel.

Maybe in time they could become hugely attended/viewed events and I hope that is the future for the women’s and wheelchair sports.

But at this present time I think they would benefit from cross promotion with the men’s Challenge Cup final.

Lets face it, the RLWC is being staged simultaneously for the very same reasoning.

The men's Challenge Cup that we've spent about 20 pages pointing out is failing and has lost its lustre?

These new, exciting, progressive competitions that we want to draw in a new audience will benefit from association with that?