England vs Samoa Series

[Gerrumonside ref]

12 minutes ago, Dave T said:

We can't create this false narrative that demand has dropped off since the 80s and 90s. It simply isn't true. It plays into a narrative that allows things to be cancelled. 

Sure we had a small handful of 50k+ crowds over these 20 years (4 to be exact) but many of the other crowds were really low. 

In the last couple of decades we've seen World Cups deliver some very good events, huge crowds for neutral finals, 67k for the Semis at Wembley, 45k in London for a Kiwi test as well. 

The demand is still there. 

The narrative is that young people don’t perhaps have as greater fondness for England or memories for it that an older generation had.

If England RL is a big sell in your mind right now then that is great.

But I just don’t see it personally.

Edited March 29 by Gerrumonside ref

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

The narrative is that young people don’t perhaps have as greater fondness for England or memories for it that an older generation had.

If England RL is a big sell in your mind right now then that is great.

But I just don’t see if personally.

I'm not sure I see any evidence that people aren't interested in following England. Quite the opposite tbh. 

[JM2010]

1 hour ago, Sports Prophet said:

And with all that, I can say, Covid cancellations aside, I think we play near enough international RL a year. Four games a year would be plenty for me.

Personally, I think three match test series are less appealing than they once were. I would rather see some diversity/variety in the end of season match ups.

For what it’s worth, I think England should cut their losses and start negotiating their way into convincing the Pacific Nations to finish 2024 with a Six Nations tournament, rather than bringing Samoa over for what will undoubtedly be another underwhelming series.

I agree with this. England need to try and get involved in the Pacific tournament at the end of the year which would then have the 6 best nations competing. If they could play in at least 2 of these per WC cycle then host an ashes or NZ series in between then that gives them good quality opposition every year. The only downside would be that they have to go down under to play in the 6N each time but it’s better than not playing 

 

[Gerrumonside ref]

Just now, Dave T said:

I'm not sure I see any evidence that people aren't interested in following England. Quite the opposite tbh. 

And the Tonga series?

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

3 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

I think we play near enough international RL a year. Four games a year would be plenty for me.

Nowhere near enough IMO. When I got hooked in to the sport it was off the back of GB playing regularly - that was what captured my imagination.

52 minutes ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

I just don’t see what the emotional attachment to England RL is for younger fans and we tend to see this reflected in attendance levels that feed into venue choices that becomes a vicious cycle.

Maybe not for young club fans who have regular, high profile rugby league to watch. But if we're looking to attract a new audience then it's the national team that is the best vehicle for doing this IMO. It's so difficult for people in the heartlands to understand, but outside of the heartlands, I would say a majority of people don't know what RL is, let alone whether or not they are a fan of it. Speaking to people at work on the Monday after Wigan's WCC win over Penrith, none of them had any idea what it was, let alone watched it. But conversely I've regularly seen lay-people watch and comment on the national side when they've been playing. Which is why the current state of the international game is so depressing to me.

[Gerrumonside ref]

5 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

Nowhere near enough IMO. When I got hooked in to the sport it was off the back of GB playing regularly - that was what captured my imagination.

Maybe not for young club fans who have regular, high profile rugby league to watch. But if we're looking to attract a new audience then it's the national team that is the best vehicle for doing this IMO. It's so difficult for people in the heartlands to understand, but outside of the heartlands, I would say a majority of people don't know what RL is, let alone whether or not they are a fan of it. Speaking to people at work on the Monday after Wigan's WCC win over Penrith, none of them had any idea what it was, let alone watched it. But conversely I've regularly seen lay-people watch and comment on the national side when they've been playing. Which is why the current state of the international game is so depressing to me.

The biggest issue we have is who to play and where?

I’m fairly convinced that England vs France on these shores does neither side much good and makes little money either.

All other candidate opponents are prisoners to the NRL schedule.

Honestly I think we need to beat Australia in Australia preferably in a final to kickstart a change in the way our game up here is viewed.

[gingerjon]

40 minutes ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

And the Tonga series?

Was dire in presentation and execution. Fell well short in imagination and delivery. Still averaged 12,000 per game.

[Dave T]

40 minutes ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

And the Tonga series?

Higher than pretty much any other non-Aus/NZ Tests that we saw over the 80s and 90s, for a poorly organised and uninspiring Test series. 

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

The biggest issue we have is who to play and where?

I’m fairly convinced that England vs France on these shores does neither side much good and makes little money either.

All other candidate opponents are prisoners to the NRL schedule.

Honestly I think we need to beat Australia in Australia preferably in a final to kickstart a change in the way our game up here is viewed.

I think we put too much onus on this. The Kiwis have a decent record vs the Aussies, besting them semi-regularly in finals, yet it hasn't really translated into huge Tests and the Aussies being more interested. 

Of course a win or two would be lovely, but as we see with the WCC and the tests they've lost against NZ and Tonga - they just don't really care. They have their own plan. 

[Gerrumonside ref]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Higher than pretty much any other non-Aus/NZ Tests that we saw over the 80s and 90s, for a poorly organised and uninspiring Test series. 

So is the opposition the sell then or England given your caveats here?

[Gerrumonside ref]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think we put too much onus on this. The Kiwis have a decent record vs the Aussies, besting them semi-regularly in finals, yet it hasn't really translated into huge Tests and the Aussies being more interested. 

Of course a win or two would be lovely, but as we see with the WCC and the tests they've lost against NZ and Tonga - they just don't really care. They have their own plan. 

Has it helped New Zealand Warriors though?

I agree the Aussies do have their own plan.

It’s club centric and it brings me back to my original point.

Edited March 29 by Gerrumonside ref

[Dave T]

Just now, Gerrumonside ref said:

So is the opposition the sell then or England given your caveats here?

England playing strong teams in well organised tournaments do well. I don't think that needs explaining. Some games will be more attractive than others, as they always have been and always will be. 

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

Has it helped New Zealand Warriors though?

I'm not sure that's anything to do with a discussion on internationals. 

[Gerrumonside ref]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

England playing strong teams in well organised tournaments do well. I don't think that needs explaining. Some games will be more attractive than others, as they always have been and always will be. 

So basically England RL then can’t just sell itself and thus we are in trouble if the Aussies continue their focus on growing the NRL at all costs.

[Gerrumonside ref]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

I'm not sure that's anything to do with a discussion on internationals. 

Indulge me.

[Sports Prophet]

21 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

Nowhere near enough IMO. When I got hooked in to the sport it was off the back of GB playing regularly - that was what captured my imagination.

How long ago was that and how often were GB playing then, compared to England playing now?

[JonM]

1 hour ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

You’ve ended the timeline at a convenient point there though!

That's when I stopped being a kid

[Gerrumonside ref]

Just now, JonM said:

That's when I stopped being a kid

That’s fair enough haha

[Dave T]

10 minutes ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

Indulge me.

The discussion we've been having is about England being less attractive than in yesteryear and people having no affinity. 

It has zero to do with NZ Warriors. 

[Damien]

20 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think we put too much onus on this. The Kiwis have a decent record vs the Aussies, besting them semi-regularly in finals, yet it hasn't really translated into huge Tests and the Aussies being more interested. 

Of course a win or two would be lovely, but as we see with the WCC and the tests they've lost against NZ and Tonga - they just don't really care. They have their own plan. 

I think the issue there is that it is all too sporadic. Sure NZ beat Australia last time round but then its shut up shop for 11 months at best. We don't even know when the next one is and by the time we get it everyone has forgot about the last match.

That's before the fact that we don't even treat such games as a major event, and especially in Australia, see broadcasters and organisers treat them as a tier below SOO and the NRL

Its impossible to build momentum or proper rivalry with the calendar and organisation that we see.

Edited March 29 by Damien

[Gerrumonside ref]

9 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The discussion we've been having is about England being less attractive than in yesteryear and people having no affinity. 

It has zero to do with NZ Warriors. 

All I’ve said is perhaps younger people will have less affinity with country than club and less happy memories of international rl

Anything else is misrepresenting what I’m saying.

Edited March 29 by Gerrumonside ref

[Gerrumonside ref]

5 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The discussion we've been having is about England being less attractive than in yesteryear and people having no affinity. 

It has zero to do with NZ Warriors. 

You appeared to suggest NZ doing well against Australia had zero effects.

I am countering this.

[Dave T]

7 minutes ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

You appeared to suggest NZ doing well against Australia had zero effects.

I am countering this.

It had zero effect on the area we were talking about. The Kiwis are no more attractive opposition to the Kangaroos. 

[Gerrumonside ref]

Just now, Dave T said:

It had zero effect on the area we were talking about. The Kiwis are no more attractive opposition to the Kangaroos. 

But it didn’t have zero effect.

[Gerrumonside ref]

@Dave T

I think we’ve taken our conversation as far as it is going to go.