Well Done RLWC Team! Best yet!

[Just Browny]

I am going to give it more thought but I think there's more than a hint of us glossing over some of the nonsense bits of 2013 when we recall the highlights:

- rubbish crowds at Neath and Wrexham

- a random game in Limerick with Australia galloping Ireland

- a really uncompetitive set of knockout games except for the NZ-Eng semi.

[gingerjon]

4 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

I am going to give it more thought but I think there's more than a hint of us glossing over some of the nonsense bits of 2013 when we recall the highlights:

- rubbish crowds at Neath and Wrexham

- a random game in Limerick with Australia galloping Ireland

- a really uncompetitive set of knockout games except for the NZ-Eng semi.

It’s a fair point about those three games - the Limerick one in particular.

[Tommygilf]

By the organisers own metrics, the men's tournament hasn't been the success they were hoping for (does that qualify it as a failure?)

They've failed to reach targets they were "confident" of surpassing in terms of attendances: 2013 and the Women's Euros were consistently mentioned along with the 750,000...

But for the BBC coverage and the Women's and Wheelchair tournaments eh?

[Wellsy4HullFC]

10 hours ago, Hemi4561 said:

You give yourself away when you juxtapose "the real euros" against the "women's football euros"

Yup, I noticed that too.

10 hours ago, Madrileño said:

Give what away?

The Euros are the Euros. They are not the "men's Euros" they are the Euros.

They did not change their name when women's football started having a European championship as well. 

They didn't change their have, you're right. But your choice of using "real" as an adjective to differentiate it from the women's rather than "men's" implies that you think the women's is fake. It's the sort of misogynistic language used by people to put down women's sport as inferior.

Your continued use of the word "wheelchairs" to describe the wheelchair version of the sport also just in context appears really condescending. When you're getting called a troll, it's likely because you're constantly trying to steer the conversation away from positives, focus only on the negatives and condescend the other versions in the process.

That, and the fact that you are clearly a returning user with a new username makes it hard to believe otherwise.

I'm all for critiquing the game, and probably agree with a lot of your points, but your delivery leaves a lot to be desired. What's your aim? To just be right? Or to change people's opinions through your discussion?

[Tosh]

Had there not been an economic downturn and crisis especially affecting families in the north west then I think crowds would have been a lot bigger for the group games and 1/4 finals.

[Jughead]

The wheelchair tournament was a resounding success. Record breaking crowd after record breaking crowd, trending many times on social media, some good coverage on free to air TV and a final that was not decided until very late. 

I didn’t see much of the womens tournament so I can’t comment on it but there were a couple of good crowds of 7,000+ and 8,000+ at York and Leeds. 

As for the men’s tournament, I just don’t think it was all good, sometimes shrouded in lies by the organizer’s. The ticketing fiasco was exactly that with areas marked as sold out despite them being completely empty and other areas suddenly going on sale after being sold out or unavailable. I get what they tried with implementing serious pricing rather than being a rock bottom priced sport but I think there were mistakes there and many group games likely to be a walkover could have been cheaper.

I also don’t think people are all that interested in one-sided games, certainly not being stuck in a corner or behind the sticks, even at £25 a ticket. England’s attendances were impressive on the whole, pulling in 100,000+ in non-heartland cities of London, Newcastle and Sheffield. 

On the pitch, England were an abject failure, failing to get to the final despite a route that saw them unable to play a tier one nation until the final. Australia were Australia and a joy to watch at times, Samoa were the fairytale story going from embarrassment in game one to knocking out the nation that embarrassed them to reach the final, the outpouring of emotion from players representing their nations and seeing new sides in Greece and Jamaica on the World stage. 

Many lessons to be learnt from this and they have till, most likely, 2033 to work out those answers. 

Edited November 20, 2022 by Jughead

[Wakefield Ram]

15 hours ago, crashmon said:

its great that we had the WC final in front of 67,000 folks, plus a large tv audience?  Very positive

Can't wait to see the world champion aussies play again after seeing that? Can somebody point me to the next Aus games, I assume they will be on Sky

Hopefully it will encourage the Aussies to re-start regular  internationals if only for financial reasons. 67,500 for a final not featuring England is pretty good IMHO.

Edited November 20, 2022 by Wakefield Ram

[sweaty craiq]

There is limited interest in Mismatched group games at the ticket prices we used, we then used the same grounds for the unattractive fixtures.

2013 got it right by sharing these games to more locations, allowing that location to make a big occasion of THEIR fixture. We shouldn’t be doing £10 tickets but selling out at £20/30 at grounds like Rochdale or York or Workington/Barrow is far better than multiple low grade games at LSV or Donny

The inclusivity of this World Cup has given us a huge opportunity to grow all aspects of the sport, I pray we seize it in a tsunami of positivity 

[Mr Frisky]

11 hours ago, Madrileño said:

I can answer it:

It has made zero profit. 

But yeah... Great to know that the final made "a significant amount more money" than in 2013.  Keep the positivity coming.

I'll deal in reality. The entire tournament made no money.

 

How do you know? - or is it you hope it made no money as part of your agenda?

[Tommygilf]

24 minutes ago, Tosh said:

Had there not been an economic downturn and crisis especially affecting families in the north west then I think crowds would have been a lot bigger for the group games and 1/4 finals.

I don't think so tbh. The density of tickets was far too much (and would have been more if Anfield and Bolton remained for the Quarter Finals), and the ticket pricing and lack of packages were still there.

Current times won't have helped, but they haven't defined this tournament either.

[del capo]

1 hour ago, Wakefield Ram said:

Hopefully it will encourage the Aussies to re-start regular  internationals if only for financial reasons. 67,500 for a final not featuring England is pretty good IMHO.

So how many 'extra' tickets were do you think sold after England failed to complete their otherwise 'nailed on' route to the Final ? I suspect none. Those tickets were sold well in advance on the hype of England getting there via a pre-determined easier path,,,,,,,,

[Wellsy4HullFC]

In regards to ticketing, I think that we learned that:

Many people will pay premium prices to watch England World Cup games, even outside the heartlands. The Greece game was a harder sell though, but still well attended.

Many people will pay premium prices for semi finals and finals, even without England in.

No sell outs at those games though mean there is still room for some balance in prices.

Many people will not pay premium prices for other games, especially walkovers. There should definitely be lessons learned there. The emptiness of stadiums put a huge dampener on the men's tournament in comparison to 2013. It wasn't a good look. 

I get we need to move away from being a budget sport if we want more money in the game, but too much too fast (and during a cost of living crisis) was clearly not going to work.

 

I have no issues with the structure of the tournament. The main criticism seems to be around England's route to the semi, saying it was designed to make it easier to get to the final. I disagree, I think it was clearly to make it a guarantee that they'd be playing at the large stadium in London!

Having straightforward qualifying rules (none of this super group nonsense to manufacture close games earlier on) made it simple for the fans to follow.

16 is a good number. It allows opportunity for nations to get in the spotlight. We need to get away from this notion that sport is only about high quality matches. It's about selling stories too. It's about giving opportunity. We need to stop being so bloody insecure.

[Chrispmartha]

Well personally im gutted it’s all over Ive enjoyed pretty much all of it, the only game I didn’t enjoy was the England Greece game, i had a terrible seat and i just found it boring.

I went to

England V Samoa in Newcastle (i had corporate tickets and took 5 of my best mates, we had a fabulous weekend)

England V Greece (mentioned above)

New Zealand V Ireland

Tonga V Samoa (amazing!)

Australia V New Zealand (up there with the best games ive ever seen)

England V Brazil (great occasion)

Jillaroos v PNG and England v NZ (first time at yorks wonderful little stadium)

 

last but not least

England V France Wheelchair final, a game snd occasion ill never forget.

I think i pretty much managed to watch all the games on tv - i may have missed a couple of women’s and WC games.

 

its been a blast

[RL Tragic]

8 hours ago, Just Browny said:

I am going to give it more thought but I think there's more than a hint of us glossing over some of the nonsense bits of 2013 when we recall the highlights:

- rubbish crowds at Neath and Wrexham

- a random game in Limerick with Australia galloping Ireland

- a really uncompetitive set of knockout games except for the NZ-Eng semi.

Hang on

Let’s just put this in to perspective. The scale of the crowds opening ceremony and feeling of 2013 took us all by surprise . Let’s just look at some facts .

No where near the funding , Government support build up for 2013 to 2022 . 
 

in 2013 no one made claims that they would attract over 50% more than they actually did  .

Let’s have a look at your points .

- rubbish crowds at Neath and Wrexham ,

In 2013 we had impressive crowd after impressive crowd well thought out and marketed at different locations. If we are going to call out two relatively poor crowds should we start listing the shockers from 2022.

- a random game in Limerick with Australia galloping Ireland .

A sound idea to have an Ireland team playing In Ireland . Like France in France of wales in wakes both of which you have neglected to comment on .

- a really uncompetitive set of knockout games except for the NZ-Eng semi.

Fair point , but that is really down to quality of players available then vs now not the organisers .

 

No ones denied that this edition has had some success. The anger comes from the fact it should not have been ok it should have been fantastic. It’s only because of poor but not poorly paid leadership ( The Rugby League curse ) that it wasn’t, we shouldn’t settle for it . 

[yipyee]

23 hours ago, IM2 said:

Have to say praise where praise is due. What a tournament. Obviously would have been great to see England in the final and win but that wasn't to be.

61 live games on BBC

4 tournaments & some real entertainment in all comps. Wheelchair has been massive

Lots more depth in the top 8

Unprecedented media coverage

Proper sponsors (not Bill's skips of Wigan or Bobs Butchers Castleford)

Record crowds

Record money going into the International game. That has to be huge

 

Imo a real step up. yes loads could have been done better. some odd ground choices. in hindsight maybe some flex in ticket prices but who would have known the cost of living crisis would be so acute. But for me it's been a massive success. I hope they keep the team together for the French RLWC. 

well done again RLWC team!

 

 

 

Messed up the opening ceremony, rigged the draw so England never got to play anyone ranked above them which made for a drab home world cup, messed up the ticket prices, poor entertainment with no live singers of anthems and dodgy versions, made Scotland look silly in kilts and drinking iron bru etc... no Scottish team have to try to be Scottish.

The biggest failure was not to play the tournament last year, for no reason whatsoever they delayed it a year, last year everyone was eager to go and do things and had saved up cash from lockdown. They bottled it and have suffered because of that.

Union are streets ahead and always will be whilst we champion failure

Edited November 20, 2022 by yipyee

[Chrispmartha]

5 minutes ago, RL Tragic said:

Hang on

Let’s just put this in to perspective. The scale of the crowds opening ceremony and feeling of 2013 took us all by surprise . Let’s just look at some facts .

No where near the funding , Government support build up for 2013 to 2022 . 
 

in 2013 no one made claims that they would attract over 50% more than they actually did  .

Let’s have a look at your points .

- rubbish crowds at Neath and Wrexham ,

In 2013 we had impressive crowd after impressive crowd well thought out and marketed at different locations. If we are going to call out two relatively poor crowds should we start listing the shockers from 2022.

- a random game in Limerick with Australia galloping Ireland .

A sound idea to have an Ireland team playing In Ireland . Like France in France of wales in wakes both of which you have neglected to comment on .

- a really uncompetitive set of knockout games except for the NZ-Eng semi.

Fair point , but that is really down to quality of players available then vs now not the organisers .

 

No ones denied that this edition has had some success. The anger comes from the fact it should not have been ok it should have been fantastic. It’s only because of poor but not poorly paid leadership ( The Rugby League curse ) that it wasn’t, we shouldn’t settle for it . 

I think it has been fantastic whilst acknowledging some mistakes have been made.

ive preferred it to the 2013 one

[Chrispmartha]

2 minutes ago, yipyee said:

Messed up the opening ceremony, rigged the draw so England never got to play anyone ranked above them which made for a drab home world cup, messed up the ticket prices, poor entertainment with no live singers of anthems and dodgy versions, made Scotland look silly in kilts and drinking iron bru etc... no Scottish team have to try to be Scottish.

The biggest failure was not to play the tournament last year, for no reason whatsoever they delayed it a year, last year everyone was eager to go and do things and had saved up cash from lockdown. They bottled it and have suffered because of that.

Union are streets ahead and always will be whilst we champion failure

Erm NZ and Australia pulled out of the tournament last year.

[dkw]

9 minutes ago, yipyee said:

Messed up the opening ceremony, rigged the draw so England never got to play anyone ranked above them which made for a drab home 

The biggest failure was not to play the tournament last year, for no reason whatsoever they delayed it a year, last year everyone was eager to go and do things and had saved up cash from lockdown. They bottled it and have suffered because of that.

 

You know it wasn't the organisers who pushed for it to be cancelled, right?

[yipyee]

1 hour ago, Chrispmartha said:

Erm NZ and Australia pulled out of the tournament last year.

And??

[yipyee]

1 hour ago, dkw said:

You know it wasn't the organisers who pushed for it to be cancelled, right?

Should have gone ahead anyway

[Just Browny]

51 minutes ago, yipyee said:

Should have gone ahead anyway

England definitely wouldn't have played anyone ranked above them if they had done that.

Edited November 20, 2022 by Just Browny

[Dave T]

I can absolutely understand why some people would say this is their favourite WC ever, and I think that's a subjective call that can't be argued too much. 

Im struggling to assess it tbh, because it is so different from any previous RLWC. 

But if I break it down, as a customer, I can't think of any area of the men's comp that has been better organised than the highs of other comps. I think for every positive there is a negative, and I really couldn't assess the men's comp any more than a 5 or 6 out of 10.

The real highs of that part of the comp actually come from the initial investments that were secured - £10m into legacy projects is brilliant and should not be forgotten, £15m in costs a game-changer and I expect allowed us to deliver the real positives from this tournament. 

The TV coverage was outstanding - a genuine highlight, and I enjoyed an awful lot of RL over the last 5 weeks or so. 

But as for the men's comp, again as a customer (the financials should be strong from this - hopefully) compared to 2013, the actual experience of the events doesn't compare too well. The 2013 tournament boasted 76% occupancy, this one hit 56%. 

The opener this year was brilliant, but in 2013 we also had a 45k opener, staged in Cardiff, and we didn't have a failed opening ceremony. 

The England games had lower crowds than 2013, the semis were similar across two games, and I did prefer having them as two events, but 40k in London is slightly disappointing when we look back to that 67k at Wembley. 

The final was outstanding again this year, as it was in 2013.

I don't see anything as a fan/customer that was better this time in the men's comp. The atmospheres were flat as a pancake in comparison. 

If we were looking solely at the men's comps, I'd say it was nowhere near as good as 2013.

But, that brings us on to the PDRL, Wheelchair and Women's comps. Broadly speaking, these were the stars of the show, particularly the wheelchair event. They dragged the tournament from mediocre to superb when they were on. The way these tournaments were embedded into the wider RLWC tournament was excellent - and let's be honest, there was plenty of poor scheduling and organisation, but plenty to like. 

2013 was like a breath of fresh air and set a new benchmark. This tournament has done some things that took us forward, we really need to make sure we keep pushing forward and kicking on. 

The tournament finished strongly, but it doesn't mean we ignore the first three weeks, and lessons need to be learned. 

Overall, it was good, with some brilliant highs, but ultimately, it should have been much, much better. 

Edited November 20, 2022 by Dave T

[yipyee]

2 hours ago, Just Browny said:

England definitely wouldn't have played anyone ranked above them if they had done that.

No different to this tournament then.

Should have gone ahead, teams not coming fined and all games put down as 24-0 losses

[Just Browny]

4 minutes ago, yipyee said:

No different to this tournament then.

Should have gone ahead, teams not coming fined and all games put down as 24-0 losses

Ok yeah that would have been great.

[meast]

On 19/11/2022 at 18:17, Madrileño said:

Zero sellout crowds.

Zero.

Not even the final. 

Well done. 

I guess the real success will come from how many people will have watched some of these fantastic games we've had in the last couple of weeks instead of looking at empty seats and deciding they'd like to watch the sport live or even participate in one of the formats?

There's more to it than how many people were in the stadiums in my opinion.