War of the Roses (2023 Thread)

[gingerjon]

11 hours ago, sam4731 said:

Any advances?

More than 100 goes at playing the fixture shows generates little interest beyond a handful of players and a dwindling number of spectators.

So you could add "repeated historical failure with no lessons learnt for the present" to the list.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

13 hours ago, RigbyLuger said:

We saw in the World Cup that England, even playing Greece, got a decent crowd in Sheffield. Internationals are easy to sell to the general public, YvL doesn't, and I don't see what has changed in the 20 years since the last ones, and now we've got more talk of player welfare and such. A England cap still means something.

Is that not down to the draw of the World Cup rather than the draw of England or internationals?

As evidenced by pretty much every mid-season international attempt, internationals alone are NOT and easy sell. The event is the seller.

England v France as a standalone fixture is not an easy sell over here. It's a forgone conclusion played at low intensity with nothing at stake in a small SL stadium. Nobody gets anything out of it.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

21 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

More than 100 goes at playing the fixture shows generates little interest beyond a handful of players and a dwindling number of spectators.

So you could add "repeated historical failure with no lessons learnt for the present" to the list.

Could the same not be said for ANY standalone mid-season representative fixture?

[gingerjon]

4 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

Could the same not be said for ANY standalone mid-season representative fixture?

There is a really long history for the Roses games - and sometimes a county championship involving Cumberland - which most of the others don’t have.

But, broadly, representative fixtures in England have been poorly attended most of the time. It’s why to overturn that or to make a success you can’t go half baked - which is what we are really doing now, Roses or not.

[RigbyLuger]

1 hour ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

Is that not down to the draw of the World Cup rather than the draw of England or internationals?

As evidenced by pretty much every mid-season international attempt, internationals alone are NOT and easy sell. The event is the seller.

England v France as a standalone fixture is not an easy sell over here. It's a forgone conclusion played at low intensity with nothing at stake in a small SL stadium. Nobody gets anything out of it.

Maybe playing it in Warrington or Leigh doesn't help in that either. That's us not taking a punt on taking an international somewhere different for a change. Plenty of stadia about.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

1 hour ago, RigbyLuger said:

Maybe playing it in Warrington or Leigh doesn't help in that either. That's us not taking a punt on taking an international somewhere different for a change. Plenty of stadia about.

That's part of it, but those selections are an admittance that this fixture isn't that attractive.

International friendlies don't draw. Even a one off against Australia would sell far less than a meaningful tournament game.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

3 hours ago, gingerjon said:

There is a really long history for the Roses games - and sometimes a county championship involving Cumberland - which most of the others don’t have.

But, broadly, representative fixtures in England have been poorly attended most of the time. It’s why to overturn that or to make a success you can’t go half baked - which is what we are really doing now, Roses or not.

If they were going to go the Roses route, they'd have to make it an event otherwise it's pointless. It's the only one you could have a chance of making an event as it involves 2 sets of fans (French won't travel in numbers and Exiles don't have fans) and be a competitive game. It'd have more players available from clubs you feel represented. I just think it's a good way to celebrate our heritage rather than be embarrassed by it.

[Human Punk]

It seems to me that the only non-national component of the UK with anything approaching an separate identity is Yorkshire. I haven't been there more than a couple of dozen times probably, but they do seem to bang on about it being special, and big and different, and I have heard chants of 'Yorkshire' coming from fans of individual Yorkshire teams.

So instead of 'Roses', which disenfranchises most of the country, why not Yorks v the rest of the country, and they can prove how special they are. As a comparison with Origin, and the animosity between the 2 states, I'd guess that the closest thing that we have to a county than no-one else likes is Yorkshire. I even think that people might be better disposed towards Leeds if it were located elsewhere.

So Yorks against the world (or the rest of England).

[gingerjon]

20 hours ago, Human Punk said:

It seems to me that the only non-national component of the UK with anything approaching an separate identity is Yorkshire.

Cornwall wants a word.

[Tommygilf]

On 16/08/2023 at 08:29, Wellsy4HullFC said:

Is that not down to the draw of the World Cup rather than the draw of England or internationals?

As evidenced by pretty much every mid-season international attempt, internationals alone are NOT and easy sell. The event is the seller.

England v France as a standalone fixture is not an easy sell over here. It's a forgone conclusion played at low intensity with nothing at stake in a small SL stadium. Nobody gets anything out of it.

I don't think that is fair. 

These matches against France etc, held in small towns in small stadiums, rely heavily on local engagement. There's not a mass of travelling support from across the country.

Ultimately if you live in Warrington or Leigh, you have plentiful access to top flight RL if you want it. A one off England game isn't really that attractive by comparison.

Taking this sort of game to London, where we have a proven record of good international crowds, a dearth of top flight RL exposure rather than a saturation, and a much more attractive option for travelling fans from across the country to visit, would be much better. Guaranteed. Even Leeds has a proven record of getting good crowds for international matches for similar reasons if not to the same extent.

Unfortunately the RFL have no money or imagination, so its a men and womens double header in "insert North West RL ground" and a wonder why it struggles to reach 5 figure attendances.

[Tommygilf]

22 hours ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

If they were going to go the Roses route, they'd have to make it an event otherwise it's pointless. It's the only one you could have a chance of making an event as it involves 2 sets of fans (French won't travel in numbers and Exiles don't have fans) and be a competitive game. It'd have more players available from clubs you feel represented. I just think it's a good way to celebrate our heritage rather than be embarrassed by it.

If, come 2027 when the Kangaroos or Kiwis tour here, they play the non-England players Yorkshire team as a warm up, I'm sure it could work. Especially if the 3 test series only had 1 game in Yorkshire (most likely at Elland Road).

Other than that I don't see a way that this really takes off and doesn't flop. 

[Wellsy4HullFC]

11 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

I don't think that is fair. 

These matches against France etc, held in small towns in small stadiums, rely heavily on local engagement. There's not a mass of travelling support from across the country.

Ultimately if you live in Warrington or Leigh, you have plentiful access to top flight RL if you want it. A one off England game isn't really that attractive by comparison.

Taking this sort of game to London, where we have a proven record of good international crowds, a dearth of top flight RL exposure rather than a saturation, and a much more attractive option for travelling fans from across the country to visit, would be much better. Guaranteed. Even Leeds has a proven record of getting good crowds for international matches for similar reasons if not to the same extent.

Unfortunately the RFL have no money or imagination, so its a men and womens double header in "insert North West RL ground" and a wonder why it struggles to reach 5 figure attendances.

I'm sorry, but if the RFL believed that with a small amount of effort they could draw a decent crowd in London for a mid-season game against France, they'd do it. If we're going to use lack of investment or imagination in the event as an argument, then it works both ways. I can only compare what's actually happening, and what I said actually happens.

If it was a draw, they wouldn't intentionally hold it in small northern towns with little marketing. They'd actually invest because it'd make money. They don't because it won't.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

11 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

If, come 2027 when the Kangaroos or Kiwis tour here, they play the non-England players Yorkshire team as a warm up, I'm sure it could work. Especially if the 3 test series only had 1 game in Yorkshire (most likely at Elland Road).

Other than that I don't see a way that this really takes off and doesn't flop. 

What would you consider minimum for a success?

[Damien]

7 hours ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

I'm sorry, but if the RFL believed that with a small amount of effort they could draw a decent crowd in London for a mid-season game against France, they'd do it. If we're going to use lack of investment or imagination in the event as an argument, then it works both ways. I can only compare what's actually happening, and what I said actually happens.

If it was a draw, they wouldn't intentionally hold it in small northern towns with little marketing. They'd actually invest because it'd make money. They don't because it won't.

There is no evidence to say the RFL would do this. All evidence shows they consistently take the easy option and do the bare minimum with little investment and marketing.

There's plenty to show the opposite though. It's literally what they are doing for the Tonga test series this year and what they have done v France for as long as I can remember. 

[Tommygilf]

7 hours ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

I'm sorry, but if the RFL believed that with a small amount of effort they could draw a decent crowd in London for a mid-season game against France, they'd do it. If we're going to use lack of investment or imagination in the event as an argument, then it works both ways. I can only compare what's actually happening, and what I said actually happens.

If it was a draw, they wouldn't intentionally hold it in small northern towns with little marketing. They'd actually invest because it'd make money. They don't because it won't.

They inexplicably don't believe they could do it for Tonga. They take the "safe" option which isn't safe at all.

[Tommygilf]

7 hours ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

What would you consider minimum for a success?

At least a 5 figure crowd, ideally closer to 20k. 

[Mathius Hellwege]

8 hours ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

I'm sorry, but if the RFL believed that with a small amount of effort they could draw a decent crowd in London for a mid-season game against France, they'd do it. If we're going to use lack of investment or imagination in the event as an argument, then it works both ways. I can only compare what's actually happening, and what I said actually happens.

If it was a draw, they wouldn't intentionally hold it in small northern towns with little marketing. They'd actually invest because it'd make money. They don't because it won't.

They don"t because they are stuck in a defensive M62only mindset

do not give them any benefit of the doubt

[Mathius Hellwege]

Back to original topic

NH Rugby League is dead besides the end-of-season window with the current NRL-positioning

 

Either be very creative with the War of Roses or push France to the moon by a three game series around summer holidays in France and England

Decide and then stick to the plan until 2030 is more important than which plan you are pursuing (I would go for WoR with a French side after the French behaviour for the Wareington game)

[Wellsy4HullFC]

France mid-season will NEVER work when only one or two clubs field most of the team. They will drop out, exposing the lack of depth, leaving the game up a meaningless friendly. The England team will not involve its best players also.

People are not stupid. They know what they are getting served is not first class international rugby league. You're relying on absolute diehards with lots of disposable cash or the ignorance of casual fans. 

Until we have a dedicated window and the French players are not concentrated in such a small group, England v France mid-season will not be a good showcase of international rugby league. In fact, it's not only a waste of time, it's damaging to the brand (all 3 brands) and it's better to not even play it.

England without its best players is not good for its brand 

France without its best players is not good for its brand.

International rugby league without its best available players is not good for its brand.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

3 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

They inexplicably don't believe they could do it for Tonga. They take the "safe" option which isn't safe at all.

They've never done a Tongan series do I can understand why they've gone safe. But those grounds are still larger than what we put the mid-season game in and they struggle to half fill them.

I don't believe putting them in St James Park, Etihad and Wembley would have seen sellouts. Bigger crowds possibly, but nowhere near enough to justify the cost of running them there.

But again, comparing the end of season tests to the mid-season ones isn't a fair comparison for so many obvious reasons. I think a French end of season series would run far better than a mid-season one.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

3 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

At least a 5 figure crowd, ideally closer to 20k. 

With very little promotion, they got in the 10k region last time mid-week IIRC. It was never given a proper standalone weekend game.

 

[Tommygilf]

4 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

They've never done a Tongan series do I can understand why they've gone safe. But those grounds are still larger than what we put the mid-season game in and they struggle to half fill them.

I don't believe putting them in St James Park, Etihad and Wembley would have seen sellouts. Bigger crowds possibly, but nowhere near enough to justify the cost of running them there.

But again, comparing the end of season tests to the mid-season ones isn't a fair comparison for so many obvious reasons. I think a French end of season series would run far better than a mid-season one.

It isn't "safe" though is it? That's my point.

Time and time again we've shown that even against the Kiwis, having 2 tests in Yorkshire will affect the crowds at the non Leeds match, we have evidence to show that London always gets our best crowds for internationals. We also have evidence to suggest that smaller heartland venues struggle to get travelling support from across the country and rely on local uptake.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

Just now, Tommygilf said:

It isn't "safe" though is it? That's my point.

Time and time again we've shown that even against the Kiwis, having 2 tests in Yorkshire will affect the crowds at the non Leeds match, we have evidence to show that London always gets our best crowds for internationals. We also have evidence to suggest that smaller heartland venues struggle to get travelling support from across the country and rely on local uptake.

Oh I agree there wouldn't have been 2 games in West Yorkshire. It's safe in that it's the "cheap option".

What crowds have we had for internationals in London that weren't WC games or against Aus/NZ? I'd like us to test the water at some point and this would have been a great opportunity.

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

With very little promotion, they got in the 10k region last time mid-week IIRC. It was never given a proper standalone weekend game.

 

So like England knights at Headingley against Jamaica then?

As I said I think for Yorkshire, against touring teams, it could work. In Lancashire now I think it would leave a lot to be desired. 

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

Oh I agree there wouldn't have been 2 games in West Yorkshire. It's safe in that it's the "cheap option".

What crowds have we had for internationals in London that weren't WC games or against Aus/NZ? I'd like us to test the water at some point and this would have been a great opportunity.

Well quite, and by going cheap i fear we are going to be going failed.

On your last point, I made this on the thread for the topic but this would have been a prime opportunity to use Brentford, at a premium ish price range, to test that market in the SE. England always get good crowds in London.