Where did it go wrong? International RL

[Griff]

7 hours ago, Dunbar said:

Just for anyone who wants to see the actual numbers.

Great Britain or England played Australia 12 time in the 1980's to an aggregate attendance of ~312,000 people.

In the 1970's the same teams played each other 24 times with an aggregate attendance of ~624,000 people.

So, average in the 1970s - 26,000.

Average in the 1980s - 26,000.

[Dunbar]

6 minutes ago, Griff said:

So, average in the 1970s - 26,000.

Average in the 1980s - 26,000.

Yes.

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

14 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

We’ve come close since and again, imo, are very slowly catching up

The RL community has been saying this for as long as I've been watching. I don't think we're catching up at all - we've just always been a bit behind them.

16 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

The years, imo, when we lost being competitive, were when Jack Gibson introduced new training techniques, focused on strength, fitness and defense being key.

I agree this is where we fell behind them in the 80s.

17 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

When Larder did his research and brought his coaching manual out it was late 80,s followed by the RFL coaching scheme and then players went full time the horse had bolted.

I don't think it's the case that they're ahead because they adopted professional training approaches a bit earlier - I think it's because they have the pick of the best athletes over there, and most of our teams are playing second fiddle to soccer over here. We just don't have anywhere near the same talent pool to pick from. Unless the UK game broadens its horizons and looks to get more people playing then I can't ever see us catching up unfortunately.

[gingerjon]

42 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

You do make me smile.

You have gone from:

"We didn't have it in most of the years before, either. The period running from, roughly, 1980-1994 is the outlier not the norm."

To:

"I just meant the figures were not as consistently high as my memory would have had me believe."

I do have to ask if you are a politician because your ability to evade any kind of answer is amazing. 

Not really - I thought the evidence backed up that the 1980s were an unusual period of success. It turns out that that was not the case. So therefore I have altered my view so that it moves to the facts rather than try and keep holding an opinion that isn't actually true.

[Spidey]

Has nobody said changing from the GB Kit yet?

[Damien]

3 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

I don't think it's the case that they're ahead because they adopted professional training approaches a bit earlier - I think it's because they have the pick of the best athletes over there, and most of our teams are playing second fiddle to soccer over here. We just don't have anywhere near the same talent pool to pick from. Unless the UK game broadens its horizons and looks to get more people playing then I can't ever see us catching up unfortunately.

It was certainly the case in the 1980s when Lowdesert was talking about. Since then we have always been copying the Aussies, who themselves have continually innovated and sought ideas from the likes of American football, without really trying to innovate and steal a march on them. At all levels we seem content to merely copy whatever the Aussies are doing next and it's pretty hard to beat anyone when you are just doing that.

Sure other factors have come into play and yes Australia have a bigger talent pool but you can only play your best 17 and as England, NZ and even Tonga have shown you only need to get a good squad playing well together to stand a chance.

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

4 minutes ago, Damien said:

It was certainly the case in the 1980s when Lowdesert was talking about. Since then we have always been copying the Aussies, who themselves have continually innovated and sought ideas from the likes of American football, without really trying to innovate and steal a march on them. At all levels we seem content to merely copy whatever the Aussies are doing next and it's pretty hard to beat anyone when you are just doing that.

Agree with all that. When I started watching the game, GB played a different style to the Aussies. As you point out, nowadays we just seem to be copying them instead of innovating.

[Dunbar]

9 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Not really - I thought the evidence backed up that the 1980s were an unusual period of success. It turns out that that was not the case. So therefore I have altered my view so that it moves to the facts rather than try and keep holding an opinion that isn't actually true.

That's a fair point.

As a Rugby League fan, I love international League in the 80's and 90's and I envy those who saw Great Britain beat the Aussies as it is something I never have.

I would just say that it wasn't the 80's coming down to the previous decades, it was international League remaining strong through to the 80's and 90's.

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

8 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Has nobody said changing from the GB Kit yet?

Good point - I forgot about that...

[Griff]

16 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Has nobody said changing from the GB Kit yet?

Bit of a red herring really, is it not?

Everyone likely to play for England qualifies by birth, heritage or just living in England.  Being Welsh, Scottish or Irish is a bit of an irrelevancy.

If we ever went back to GB, I suspect it would be a marketing decision first and foremost.

[Spidey]

22 minutes ago, Griff said:

Bit of a red herring really, is it not?

Everyone likely to play for England qualifies by birth, heritage or just living in England.  Being Welsh, Scottish or Irish is a bit of an irrelevancy.

If we ever went back to GB, I suspect it would be a marketing decision first and foremost.

I was not being serious 

[Pie tries]

On 01/02/2024 at 13:15, ehbandit said:

I’m just watching the 2nd ashes test from 1994 on YouTube. A packed Old Trafford looks outstanding. 
why don’t we have this nowadays?

To answer your question - above sums it up - when went back wards at a rate of knots when we scrapped the two year ashes series. 
 

Glad it allegedly on the board again - but it should be the Lions, not England. I’ll accept every four years - but let’s get that locked in…. 

[Griff]

39 minutes ago, Spidey said:

I was not being serious 

My point still stands.

[Lowdesert]

1 hour ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

The RL community has been saying this for as long as I've been watching. I don't think we're catching up at all - we've just always been a bit behind them.

I agree this is where we fell behind them in the 80s.

I don't think it's the case that they're ahead because they adopted professional training approaches a bit earlier - I think it's because they have the pick of the best athletes over there, and most of our teams are playing second fiddle to soccer over here. We just don't have anywhere near the same talent pool to pick from. Unless the UK game broadens its horizons and looks to get more people playing then I can't ever see us catching up unfortunately.

When Gibson began getting players to buy in with what he wanted for success, they weren’t the best athletes at all.  Most were tradesmen, labourers, etc etc.  His mantra for hard work made them.  
 

Since, say, 2000 ish, the NRL have realised indigenous Australians, , samoans, Papuan's, Tongans are supreme athletes and gave them opportunity.  We are trying to get a stronger France whilst Scotland, Wales and Ireland are left to themselves.  Not on my watch Jack.  But this is the essence of growing the game.

Make the game something young people want to do and play.  Develop and nurture them.  Give them pathways which also benefit them in their future.  This imo is our single biggest challenge.

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, Dunbar said:

That's a fair point.

As a Rugby League fan, I love international League in the 80's and 90's and I envy those who saw Great Britain beat the Aussies as it is something I never have.

I would just say that it wasn't the 80's coming down to the previous decades, it was international League remaining strong through to the 80's and 90's.

We should also include the 00's, GB beat the Aussies in 2001, 2004 and 2006.

[Exiled Wiganer]

The 2000 World Cup happened. 

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

The 2000 World Cup happened. 

With hindsight, starting our World Cup with a game at Twickenham, we got everything we deserved. 

[Gooleboy]

Summer Rugby = no tours

GB scrapped

Closed shop SL for a time = some supporters alienated

No international fixture consistency

France having nothing to offer

Etc.

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

9 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

Closed shop SL for a time = some supporters alienated

I don't believe this had any significant affect

[Gooleboy]

26 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

I don't believe this had any significant affect

Of course it did. Many older supporters went to all the big games, cup finals, internationals and so on. Me and many mates included, but not anymore.

[Dave T]

57 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

Of course it did. Many older supporters went to all the big games, cup finals, internationals and so on. Me and many mates included, but not anymore.

The problem is that the evidence isn't there that we have lost fans at international level. 

The OP refers to a game against the biggest nation in the World that actually had 43k in. We got that sized crowd versus Samoa in 2022, smashed that versus the Kiwis in 2013, and beat that versus the Kiwis in 2015/6 IIRC. 

[Sports Prophet]

I will also add, the sport took Sky’s cash and as such hid itself behind a paywall.

With many sports, the public consciousness nose dived and with it, the international game hasn’t kicked on from those great days in the 80s and 90s.

[Dave T]

Just now, Sports Prophet said:

I will also add, the sport took Sky’s cash and as such hid itself behind a paywall.

With many sports, the public consciousness nose dived and with it, the international game hasn’t kicked on from those great days in the 80s and 90s.

Sort of. RL always maintained a terrestrial TV presence, and pretty much always on the BBC. 

Even for the decade or so that internationals were on Sky, the 2000 World Cup still had presence on the BBC and the BBC always had extensive highlights of internationals. 

I don't think we were anywhere near as hidden as people make out. 

[Sports Prophet]

5 hours ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

 

I don't think it's the case that they're ahead because they adopted professional training approaches a bit earlier - I think it's because they have the pick of the best athletes over there, and most of our teams are playing second fiddle to soccer over here. We just don't have anywhere near the same talent pool to pick from. Unless the UK game broadens its horizons and looks to get more people playing then I can't ever see us catching up unfortunately.

This is a philosophy I disagree with. There is ample evidence in the world across many sports which demonstrates the size of the talent pool is less important than the quality of coaching and training. 

[Damien]

22 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The problem is that the evidence isn't there that we have lost fans at international level. 

The OP refers to a game against the biggest nation in the World that actually had 43k in. We got that sized crowd versus Samoa in 2022, smashed that versus the Kiwis in 2013, and beat that versus the Kiwis in 2015/6 IIRC. 

To be fair that was a capacity crowd at Old Trafford at the time and it's also fair to say we'd have got many more if capacity would have allowed. Ditto at Elland Road. At that time outside Wembley that crowd was the maximum crowd that could be got anywhere else.

Edited February 2 by Damien