Jump to content

Grand Final Entertainment


Recommended Posts

On 19/09/2022 at 21:53, JohnM said:

This not the Super Bowl with cashed-up  advertisers promoting their brands  to  tens of millions of viewers so needing headline acts to pull'em in. This is rugby league where , unlike the NFL, the game outshines the pre-match.  If you want to damage your hearing and soften your brain,  go to a ###### music event, there's plenty of choice elsewhere.

Maybe though , if we could afford real music from the granddads and grandmas of music: The Rolling Stones, The Eagles, Roxy Music, ELO, Fleetwood Mac, Elke Brooks, Jules Holland, Kate Bush, Tiny Tim, and more, then, as at the Super Bowl, the pre match would far outshine the game on the pitch.

 

The RFLS idea of good artists that were famous in the 80s would be 5 Star and Kajagoogoo

Link to comment
Share on other sites


6 hours ago, Gomersall said:

Which idiot proposed American presentation styles when football hooliganism was rife?

Not fair to call them idiots, but it would be any Englishman who`d spent time in sports administration in the U.S.

Or players who`d had a spell in the North American Soccer League, which took off in the mid-70s on the back of Pelé at the New York Cosmos.

Could even be people who`d just had a holiday over there and gone to a Baseball or Gridiron game.

All the hoopla was put forward as a way to bring in families and thereby wrest control over crowd culture from the hooligans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Not fair to call them idiots, but it would be any Englishman who`d spent time in sports administration in the U.S.

Or players who`d had a spell in the North American Soccer League, which took off in the mid-70s on the back of Pelé at the New York Cosmos.

Could even be people who`d just had a holiday over there and gone to a Baseball or Gridiron game.

All the hoopla was put forward as a way to bring in families and thereby wrest control over crowd culture from the hooligans.

So nobody or any organisation you could actually name?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Soccer fans only agonize over the nature of the entertainment on the pitch.

Camila Cabello had a pitch-covering show before the Champions League final, Becky Hill did the same before the Euro 2022 final. Both had additional sponsors for those performances. I already know the outline of what is happening on the pitch before the Lionesses v USA because an email with the details has been sent.

This is how Euro 2020 started. Qatar 2022 will, like every major tournament, start with an expensive opening ceremony.

Soccer fans, most of them, will be bored rigid by all that. But they would notice if the event started to look cheap and unimportant.

  • Like 2

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look. This is not difficult. 

1. The UK is not the U.S.

2. SuperLeague is not the NFL.

3. The Superbowl would sell out without a half-time show.

4. The Superbowl half-time show is about advertisers tapping into huge TV viewing figures based on solid stats that prove that paying the huge costs of advertising generates a return for the advertisers. 

5. It just isn't going to happen to the GF.

6. Dad,dad, can we watch/go to the SL Grand Final because Nicki Minaj is doing a 5 min lip-sync half-time slot, dad, dad, can we can we dad? Aye, son. Just let's sell the house to pay for it.

Tickets for the game on Ticketmaster were starting at $6,600 each and go up to $24,000 and up as of Feb 1.

SeatGeek said that the average price customers were paying for tickets as of Feb. 1 was $10,427, while StubHub has an average of $9,800 and Vivid Seats are offering tickets for $5,862 up to $50,000 and beyond for exclusive seats.

 

 

  • Haha 2

"Stay away from negative people. They have a problem for every solution."

Albert Einstein   (Fat chance on THIS forum)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Look. This is not difficult. 

1. The UK is not the U.S.

2. SuperLeague is not the NFL.

3. The Superbowl would sell out without a half-time show.

4. The Superbowl half-time show is about advertisers tapping into huge TV viewing figures based on solid stats that prove that paying the huge costs of advertising generates a return for the advertisers. 

5. It just isn't going to happen to the GF.

6. Dad,dad, can we watch/go to the SL Grand Final because Nicki Minaj is doing a 5 min lip-sync half-time slot, dad, dad, can we can we dad? Aye, son. Just let's sell the house to pay for it.

Tickets for the game on Ticketmaster were starting at $6,600 each and go up to $24,000 and up as of Feb 1.

SeatGeek said that the average price customers were paying for tickets as of Feb. 1 was $10,427, while StubHub has an average of $9,800 and Vivid Seats are offering tickets for $5,862 up to $50,000 and beyond for exclusive seats.

 

 

You're right. We should accept that we're a cheap, budget sport with a declining, elderly fanbase of moaners.

  • Like 3

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Dave W said:

What's the betting that everyone questioning the need to have any entertainment at all other than the game itself are blokes in their 60s? 

Don't be daft.

Some are in their 70s.

  • Haha 2

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

You're right. We should accept that we're a cheap, budget sport with a declining, elderly fanbase of moaners.

Indeed. We should just accept our place as cheap Rugby and a budget sport for those who can't afford football. 

We really can present ourselves how we want to. I don't see how any fan would argue against trying to improve the entertainment package for fans. 

Rather depressingly at the RLWC forum last week, when asked about fanzones etc. Dutton explained they will have one at Newcastle and everywhere else it's up to the host town to do something if they want.

He then went on about funding the women and wheelchair tournaments and how proud he was of that and would rather spend the money there. I think that sounded great in his head, but the counter to that is that it shouldn't be either or. And ultimately what he was talking about was fan experience, which really should be right at the very top of what they are trying to deliver. 

Based on the high pricing and poor ticket experience, I can't help but feel that fans are way down the list for Dutton. 

  • Like 4
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Dave T said:

He then went on about funding the women and wheelchair tournaments and how proud he was of that and would rather spend the money there.

"We would entertain you but, y'know, there's the girls and the disableds we've got to fund instead ..."

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Dave W said:

What's the betting that everyone questioning the need to have any entertainment at all other than the game itself are blokes in their 60s? 

Exactly 

I've said it before ....my kids are ALWAYS more interested in what happens before the game, half time or after and around the ground. 

It isn't there fault .....they are getting slowly indoctrinated by me and will enjoy the tries and cheers too but if they aren't that excited when teams are exchanging sets in an arm wrestle 

My kids have talked/remembered as much about the things below than the actual game

- Cheerleaders dancing 

- Mascots 

- The minis playing matches at half time 

- competitions /Zorb fights at half time 

- chips and gravy/drinks from the van 

-bands/singers ....and the opera singing 

-thr crowds who have drums/ trumpets 

-big screen shout outs/zoom in on crowd 

Etc etc 

If they are happy then I am more likely to pay and go to games with them.....it's obvs that we need more than just the game 

 

 

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst people are right to point out that the RFL is not the NFL and the Grand Final is not the Super Bowl, that can't be used as an excuse for not putting the effort in. There's a big difference between "nothing having that sort of budget" and "cutting corners and doing it on the cheap". 

You might not be able to pitch the GF half-time show to A-list pop stars, but you could pitch it as a potential big gig for a breakthrough act. You don't have to settle for Terry O'Connor presenting the trophy because he's "available". You don't have to keep hiring Alex Simmons to shout at people in the car park because "that's what you did last year". 

It felt to me that in terms of the presentaiton aspect, they made more effort for the closed-door final at Hull than they did this weekend. I think they played a blinder that year working with what they had to work with, using lighting and video to build the tension. I'm with @Dave T - watching people unfurl washing isn't fun. 

There was a huge open goal with the GF25 thing to really go to town with the heritage aspect of the event, to invite previous Harry Sunderland winners or previous winning captains. 

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to agree with having an improved match day experience. I'm guessing that when people say that they mean about one hour prior to kick-off and half time.  

Having said that of the numbers attending do we know what they would like. I can add to the guess list most say here but what does the marketing teams know. Assuming their has been some marketing analysis going on.

Maybe they broke down the expected 80-65000 typical attendance and identified what each grouping would want and pay for the added value proposition.    Maybe 90% from the analysis just noted that they just like to turn up, watch the game and then go.  Maybe 10% want a big well known band and we could put lots of build up videos on the surround video and sound system (oh nope we only have a little screen in the corner which is a neck ache to look at if you can see anything).

Its a old low technology stadium that doesn't offer much to offer except the normal low tech stuff of a band in the corner and some on field stuff for kids.

I don't know but my point is just maybe some marketing whizz'o could tell us from the 60000 or more likely to attend what they would like.

Taking account that the broadcaster won't be showing any of the pre match entertainment. Mind you they could organise it as advertising for them surely would be an opportunity for any good entertainment.

Edited by redjonn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, redjonn said:

I tend to agree with having an improved match day experience. I'm guessing that when people say that they mean about one hour prior to kick-off and half time.  

Having said that of the numbers attending do we know what they would like. I can add to the guess list most say here but what does the marketing teams know. Assuming their has been some marketing analysis going on.

Maybe they broke down the expected 80-65000 typical attendance and identified what each grouping would want and pay for the added value proposition.    Maybe 90% from the analysis just noted that they just like to turn up, watch the game and then go.  Maybe 10% want a big well known band and we could put lots of build up videos on the surround video and sound system (oh nope we only have a little screen in the corner which is a neck ache to look at if you can see anything).

Its a old low technology stadium that doesn't offer much to offer except the normal low tech stuff of a band in the corner and some on field stuff for kids.

I don't know but my point is just maybe some marketing whizz'o could tell us from the 60000 or more likely to attend what they would like.

Taking account that the broadcaster won't be showing any of the pre match entertainment. Mind you they could organise it as advertising for them surely would be an opportunity for any good entertainment.

The problem is that the "just the game" crowd is a decreasing pool to draw on - and even most of them like a good spectacle as part of the show. 

It really felt a bit half arsed on Saturday. I've seen the equivalent or more done at regular Super League games. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

The problem is that the "just the game" crowd is a decreasing pool to draw on - and even most of them like a good spectacle as part of the show. 

It really felt a bit half arsed on Saturday. I've seen the equivalent or more done at regular Super League games. 

I agree, Leeds can do it reasonable well at times. The problem for me is that I don't get overly excited by a band playing in the corner and a few of the typical activities on the pitch. Although quite like the kids playing at half time but then that gets in the way of something else happening.

Old Trafford limits us to the band in the corner and some activities hard to see and hear on the pitch.  I can imagine some great use of surround video with great sound to really hype us up as well as a big name singer or band. Plus good stuff outside the stadium but again Old Trafford isn't an ideal inside or outside area.

Edited by redjonn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, redjonn said:

I tend to agree with having an improved match day experience. I'm guessing that when people say that they mean about one hour prior to kick-off and half time.  

Having said that of the numbers attending do we know what they would like. I can add to the guess list most say here but what does the marketing teams know. Assuming their has been some marketing analysis going on.

Maybe they broke down the expected 80-65000 typical attendance and identified what each grouping would want and pay for the added value proposition.    Maybe 90% from the analysis just noted that they just like to turn up, watch the game and then go.  Maybe 10% want a big well known band and we could put lots of build up videos on the surround video and sound system (oh nope we only have a little screen in the corner which is a neck ache to look at if you can see anything).

Its a old low technology stadium that doesn't offer much to offer except the normal low tech stuff of a band in the corner and some on field stuff for kids.

I don't know but my point is just maybe some marketing whizz'o could tell us from the 60000 or more likely to attend what they would like.

Taking account that the broadcaster won't be showing any of the pre match entertainment. Mind you they could organise it as advertising for them surely would be an opportunity for any good entertainment.

I suspect this is one of the ways we justify the proposition we provide. We ask those who attend and then give them that, and then wonder why we are not tapping into the new populations. 

I think one of the challenges I have is what does the SL Grand Final stand for, what is it trying to be - because we keep hearing all this talk of a family event (and the IMG guy I linked to here highlighted the fans mixing point) - but then we ignore the fact that there is nothing on for families at all - and it is usually an event full of drunks, and there is a fair amount of anti-social behaviour. 

I'm not convinced that any of the decision makers genuinely know what this event is like at ground level. It isn't that fun, and isn't that friendly. Sure, you can go and have an amazing time, but that can be said of anywhere that has sport, beer and a load of fans. But those staging the event are not really adding to it. 

Your last line isn't entirely accurate either. There is no reason why the broadcaster won't show the entertainment. Sky usually at least show clips of what is going on, the last time they actually spent any real time with the entertainment though was when James performed and the atmosphere was great. But the BBC are likely to show the WC Welcome this year, the Aussies show their entertainment, and we have done so before. They don't show what we do now because its pants. But even if they don't explicitly show it, sometimes even just seeing a major event happening in the background of the pre-match interviews etc. shows people sitting at home that this is a major fun event that they may be interested in. And this isn't just about hiring a good band, although music is a natural fit.

In reality, it is done on the cheap, while the plebs get drunk and the decision makers enjoy their champagne in the lounges.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I suspect this is one of the ways we justify the proposition we provide. We ask those who attend and then give them that, and then wonder why we are not tapping into the new populations. 

I think one of the challenges I have is what does the SL Grand Final stand for, what is it trying to be - because we keep hearing all this talk of a family event (and the IMG guy I linked to here highlighted the fans mixing point) - but then we ignore the fact that there is nothing on for families at all - and it is usually an event full of drunks, and there is a fair amount of anti-social behaviour. 

I'm not convinced that any of the decision makers genuinely know what this event is like at ground level. It isn't that fun, and isn't that friendly. Sure, you can go and have an amazing time, but that can be said of anywhere that has sport, beer and a load of fans. But those staging the event are not really adding to it. 

Your last line isn't entirely accurate either. There is no reason why the broadcaster won't show the entertainment. Sky usually at least show clips of what is going on, the last time they actually spent any real time with the entertainment though was when James performed and the atmosphere was great. But the BBC are likely to show the WC Welcome this year, the Aussies show their entertainment, and we have done so before. They don't show what we do now because its pants. But even if they don't explicitly show it, sometimes even just seeing a major event happening in the background of the pre-match interviews etc. shows people sitting at home that this is a major fun event that they may be interested in. And this isn't just about hiring a good band, although music is a natural fit.

In reality, it is done on the cheap, while the plebs get drunk and the decision makers enjoy their champagne in the lounges.

Can't stand The Hundred - for reason unrelated to matchday presentation - but the BBC (and maybe Sky, I don't really watch) definitely show the music acts that are featured. I knew about the pre-match entertainment at the football games I mentioned earlier because they were shown live and in full by the broadcasters.

  • Like 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

I suspect this is one of the ways we justify the proposition we provide. We ask those who attend and then give them that, and then wonder why we are not tapping into the new populations. 

I think one of the challenges I have is what does the SL Grand Final stand for, what is it trying to be - because we keep hearing all this talk of a family event (and the IMG guy I linked to here highlighted the fans mixing point) - but then we ignore the fact that there is nothing on for families at all - and it is usually an event full of drunks, and there is a fair amount of anti-social behaviour. 

I'm not convinced that any of the decision makers genuinely know what this event is like at ground level. It isn't that fun, and isn't that friendly. Sure, you can go and have an amazing time, but that can be said of anywhere that has sport, beer and a load of fans. But those staging the event are not really adding to it. 

Your last line isn't entirely accurate either. There is no reason why the broadcaster won't show the entertainment. Sky usually at least show clips of what is going on, the last time they actually spent any real time with the entertainment though was when James performed and the atmosphere was great. But the BBC are likely to show the WC Welcome this year, the Aussies show their entertainment, and we have done so before. They don't show what we do now because its pants. But even if they don't explicitly show it, sometimes even just seeing a major event happening in the background of the pre-match interviews etc. shows people sitting at home that this is a major fun event that they may be interested in. And this isn't just about hiring a good band, although music is a natural fit.

In reality, it is done on the cheap, while the plebs get drunk and the decision makers enjoy their champagne in the lounges.

I agree.  especial your observation "but then we ignore the fact that there is nothing on for families at all - and it is usually an event full of drunks, and there is a fair amount of anti-social behaviour."

On the sky showing more of the exciting entertainment my point was more that given for Sky as the broadcaster I would have thought it was a key priority to ensure they had the option of using the entertainment as a good good advertisement selling opportunity for high eye balls.  They just seem as disinterested as well in the wider experience.

I think a fresh start on the stadium choice and being able to come up with lots more experiences for a cross mix of people...

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I suspect this is one of the ways we justify the proposition we provide. We ask those who attend and then give them that, and then wonder why we are not tapping into the new populations. 

I think one of the challenges I have is what does the SL Grand Final stand for, what is it trying to be - because we keep hearing all this talk of a family event (and the IMG guy I linked to here highlighted the fans mixing point) - but then we ignore the fact that there is nothing on for families at all - and it is usually an event full of drunks, and there is a fair amount of anti-social behaviour. 

I'm not convinced that any of the decision makers genuinely know what this event is like at ground level. It isn't that fun, and isn't that friendly. Sure, you can go and have an amazing time, but that can be said of anywhere that has sport, beer and a load of fans. But those staging the event are not really adding to it. 

Your last line isn't entirely accurate either. There is no reason why the broadcaster won't show the entertainment. Sky usually at least show clips of what is going on, the last time they actually spent any real time with the entertainment though was when James performed and the atmosphere was great. But the BBC are likely to show the WC Welcome this year, the Aussies show their entertainment, and we have done so before. They don't show what we do now because its pants. But even if they don't explicitly show it, sometimes even just seeing a major event happening in the background of the pre-match interviews etc. shows people sitting at home that this is a major fun event that they may be interested in. And this isn't just about hiring a good band, although music is a natural fit.

In reality, it is done on the cheap, while the plebs get drunk and the decision makers enjoy their champagne in the lounges.

You've absolutely nailed it with this post Dave and that last line in particular.

Just to pick up on the plebs getting drunk as well. Many youngsters very much see drinking as an old man's thing and certainly don't drink like older generations used to. As such I can see the Grand Final experience actively putting off younger fans, the next generation of paying punters in their teens and 20s. For kids it really isn't a family event and when I have took my children I have been very conscious of some of some of the things going on around me. That is before some of the scenes getting to and from Old Trafford itself.

I think the Grand Final has very much typecast itself as an event for 40 and 50 year olds to go and get ****** and relive their youth. Don't get me wrong I am guilty of doing this myself (without acting like an idiot which appears impossible for some) and have had some great times. However, falling attendances suggest it isn't working and a change of direction is needed.

Edited by Damien
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Damien said:

You've absolutely nailed it with this post Dave and that last line in particular.

Just to pick up on the plebs getting drunk as well. Many youngsters very much see drinking as an old man's thing and certainly don't drink like older generations used to. As such I can see the Grand Final experience actively putting off younger fans, the next generation of paying punters in their teens and 20s. For kids it really isn't a family event and when I have took my children I have been very conscious of some of some of the things going on around me. That is before some of the scenes getting to and from Old Trafford itself.

I think the Grand Final has very much typecast itself as an event for 40 and 50 year olds to go and get ****** and relive their youth. Don't get me wrong I am guilty of doing this myself and have had some great times. However, falling attendances suggest it isn't working and a change of direction is needed.

I was at a loose end on Saturday, and didn't bother to jump on the 17 minute train to Manchester to watch this live, choosing to have a couple of beers at home and watch it. Nothing compelled me to attend this event.

I think the ground is terrible, in a horrible part of town with little round it. It looks far better on TV than in the ground.

I'm in that age bracket and have had some good times there, but there is little doubt that it is becoming less fun as an event. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...