Vegas Again/2025 and WCC

[gingerjon]

49 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I was thinking the other day about awesome cities to watch RL, and I think SL has been pretty good in this area. 

As well as the usual towns and cities, we've seen SL played in Paris, Cardiff, London, Edinburgh, Paris, Barcelona, Wollongong, Newcastle (UK) amongst others. We also had Toulouse in, and had Covid not come along then we'd have had a team in Toronto. 

All the sights ... Aberavon, Bridgend, Bermondsey ...

It's a fair point though.

[stookie]

19 hours ago, gingerjon said:

No problem with that, and good they declared it. But it means I'll not be believing a single word they say on whether the event worked, succeeded (etc).

As Martyn said, he is the editor of the Sydney Morning Herald, a well respected paper in Aus. Paid for trip or not, there's no way he would risk his reputation writing a puff piece.

Is there anything specifically you disagree with?

Was actually a feature piece in the SMH : https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/kudos-to-the-nrl-v-landys-and-abdo-for-having-the-guts-to-try-something-big-20240303-p5f9bo.html

[Martyn Sadler]

19 hours ago, Worzel said:

Anyone who watched the "event" type build up, saw how NRL dominated the Aussie news cycle, watched the matches, and then finally saw the TV viewing figures land after the weekend won't be in any doubt that it succeeded.

A brave plan, executed with commitment and chutzpah, that delivered - and can build next year. It's a rare thing for our game and I'm delighted.  

Absolutely right.

The combination of the NRL as a sport needing to be sold with the Americans' expertise in marketing was always likely to give a great outcome.

One thing that the NRL is doing, it seems to me, which the FA Premier League managed to do some years ago, is extend the demographic that is interested in the game. Football managed to seduce the middle classes while not alienating its existing working class support. I think we can see the same process at work in Oz. The visuals of the Vegas trip will hopefully help break down more resistance in Australia against the NRL.

The other point worth making about the whole event is that it's a nonsense to suggest that America will be instantly won over. Those people who are complaining that the New York Times didn't run the game as its front page lead story on Monday and that the game wasn't the lead topic on all the radio shows on Monday morning don't seem to understand that even engaging 0.1% of Americans would give the NRL a solid base from which to develop future income streams.

I was also interested to read that the President of the 49ers has said he might be interested in investing in an NRL team after seeing Sunday's event.

Part of the reward for taking risks comprises the unanticipated benefits from the venture.

And just to give an example of this, in 1999, when Wakefield Trinity took a Super League game against St Helens to Barnsley's Oakwell ground, there was a young teenager in the stadium watching his first Rugby League match (so I understand).

His name was Matthew Ellis. 25 years later he runs a £100 million company and he owns the club.

Who knows whether he would have done if that game hadn't gone to Barnsley all those years ago.

[fighting irish]

1 hour ago, Martyn Sadler said:

Absolutely right.

The combination of the NRL as a sport needing to be sold with the Americans' expertise in marketing was always likely to give a great outcome.

One thing that the NRL is doing, it seems to me, which the FA Premier League managed to do some years ago, is extend the demographic that is interested in the game. Football managed to seduce the middle classes while not alienating its existing working class support. I think we can see the same process at work in Oz. The visuals of the Vegas trip will hopefully help break down more resistance in Australia against the NRL.

The other point worth making about the whole event is that it's a nonsense to suggest that America will be instantly won over. Those people who are complaining that the New York Times didn't run the game as its front page lead story on Monday and that the game wasn't the lead topic on all the radio shows on Monday morning don't seem to understand that even engaging 0.1% of Americans would give the NRL a solid base from which to develop future income streams.

I was also interested to read that the President of the 49ers has said he might be interested in investing in an NRL team after seeing Sunday's event.

Part of the reward for taking risks comprises the unanticipated benefits from the venture.

And just to give an example of this, in 1999, when Wakefield Trinity took a Super League game against St Helens to Barnsley's Oakwell ground, there was a young teenager in the stadium watching his first Rugby League match (so I understand).

His name was Matthew Ellis. 25 years later he runs a £100 million company and he owns the club.

Who knows whether he would have done if that game hadn't gone to Barnsley all those years ago.

Great post Martin.

[JonM]

7 hours ago, Worzel said:

American “soccer” advocate. He thinks rugby league’s rules are too complicated. Wait until he sees a Six Nations match

He describes rugby union as the simpler version in that article...

[unapologetic pedant]

1 hour ago, Martyn Sadler said:

 Football managed to seduce the middle classes while not alienating its existing working class support. 

Plenty of proles were alienated. Crucially, those who were priced out didn't lose interest in the PL or Soccer generally. Lower division and non-league clubs have probably been the beneficiaries.

1 hour ago, Martyn Sadler said:

One thing that the NRL is doing, it seems to me, which the FA Premier League managed to do some years ago, is extend the demographic that is interested in the game. 

I think Roosters are key. The Eastern Suburbs will never again be a prolific player nursery but the composite junior rep network the club has established, with Central Coast at the heart and female teams de rigueur, should be gradually building diaspora support. If a Roosters fanbase attended Allianz in similar numbers and with the same regularity as Swans fans at the SCG, and did so irrespective of form, the image projected of affluence and prestige would rival the Broncos.

[Worzel]

1 hour ago, JonM said:

He describes rugby union as the simpler version in that article...

That just proves that he doesn’t understand the games.

Rugby League’s rules are simpler. Which - much like chess - counterintuitively then gives its players much more latitude to create complexity within that basic framework. Simple rules enable creativity, and unpredictability. 

Rugby Union is more like role-playing games like Dungeons & Dragons. The rules are so complex, and open to interpretation, that the players need an in-game guide (the referee) to coach them through key moments, and so have a lot less ability to create inexepected, new scenarios, or make decisions. 

[ATLANTISMAN]

3 hours ago, Martyn Sadler said:

Absolutely right.

The combination of the NRL as a sport needing to be sold with the Americans' expertise in marketing was always likely to give a great outcome.

One thing that the NRL is doing, it seems to me, which the FA Premier League managed to do some years ago, is extend the demographic that is interested in the game. Football managed to seduce the middle classes while not alienating its existing working class support. I think we can see the same process at work in Oz. The visuals of the Vegas trip will hopefully help break down more resistance in Australia against the NRL.

The other point worth making about the whole event is that it's a nonsense to suggest that America will be instantly won over. Those people who are complaining that the New York Times didn't run the game as its front page lead story on Monday and that the game wasn't the lead topic on all the radio shows on Monday morning don't seem to understand that even engaging 0.1% of Americans would give the NRL a solid base from which to develop future income streams.

I was also interested to read that the President of the 49ers has said he might be interested in investing in an NRL team after seeing Sunday's event.

Part of the reward for taking risks comprises the unanticipated benefits from the venture.

And just to give an example of this, in 1999, when Wakefield Trinity took a Super League game against St Helens to Barnsley's Oakwell ground, there was a young teenager in the stadium watching his first Rugby League match (so I understand).

His name was Matthew Ellis. 25 years later he runs a £100 million company and he owns the club.

Who knows whether he would have done if that game hadn't gone to Barnsley all those years ago.

Excellent post Martyn totally spot on.

My wife commented on the demographics of the crowd ,and said that it was the nearest she had seen to the Catalans Dragons which was interesting.

 

 

Edited March 5 by ATLANTISMAN

[emesssea]

2 hours ago, Worzel said:

That just proves that he doesn’t understand the games.

Rugby League’s rules are simpler. Which - much like chess - counterintuitively then gives its players much more latitude to create complexity within that basic framework. Simple rules enable creativity, and unpredictability. 

Rugby Union is more like role-playing games like Dungeons & Dragons. The rules are so complex, and open to interpretation, that the players need an in-game guide (the referee) to coach them through key moments, and so have a lot less ability to create inexepected, new scenarios, or make decisions. 

Like how you threw the Union is chess, league is checkers out the window with that analogy

[Dunbar]

18 hours ago, Futtocks said:

Here's a much more chippy take, which may cheer up the fun-sponges: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2024/mar/04/nrl-las-vegas-games-review-allegiant-stadium-roosters-vs-broncos-eagles-vs-rabbitohs-?CMP=aus_bsky 

A line like: "That’s not to dismiss rugby league’s chances entirely. The US has 330 million people, many of them with more disposable income than brains." suggest the author has a sizeable chip on his shoulder.

While it doesn't read well, I don't think that sentence is so bad when placed in the context of the article and the words that followed.

As a sport, we have to have a bit of a thicker skin if we are going to put ourselves out there.  In fact, this article is better than no article at all so bring it on.

God knows we are critical enough of other sports.

[Worzel]

56 minutes ago, emesssea said:

Like how you threw the Union is chess, league is checkers out the window with that analogy

Cheers. Yeah that comparison has done my head in for years. Clearly League is much more like chess than the other lot. The idea that having more rules makes a game more complex, and requiring more intelligence, is completely undermined by how few rules chess has. 

[Dave T]

Apparently 40k and 60k viewers on FS1 in the US for these games. 

Edited March 5 by Dave T

[EggFace]

6 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Apparently 40k and 60k viewers on FS1 in the US for these games. 

[emesssea]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

Apparently 40k and 60k viewers on FS1 in the US for these games. 

Starting a double header at 930 pm, was never going to be a rating hit when most of the country lives in east or central time. I fell asleep sometime during the first half of the second game.

Also I dont recall seeing any advertising for it. I watch a decent amount of college basketball on FS1 and Fox, never saw any. Not saying there wasnt any just not when I was watching. If it wasnt for you fine folk here, I wouldn't have realized it was happening this past weekend.

If the NRL really cared about spreading the game in the US, then they would have gone with a 730 and 930 kickoff. I honestly dont get this current fascination with Vegas either (despite the obvious reason). Play it in New York or LA.

[Copa]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

Apparently 40k and 60k viewers on FS1 in the US for these games. 

This article ( https://usafl.com/blogs/brian-barrish/20160524/examining-american-afl-tv-ratings ) has AFL getting 34,000 per game on Fox sports 1 a few years back and they’re still on Fox sports US with occasional Fox Sports 1 broadcasts ( https://www.afana.com/tvsched ).

This article has MLS as 343,000 per game in 2022 which is similar to the NHL and in better time slots.

https://fortune.com/2023/09/29/soccer-taking-over-america-apple-win-sports-streaming-wars-mls-deal-aden-ikram/amp/

In 2022, MLS regular season matches averaged 343,000 TV viewers, nearly the same as an NHL game. 
…….

Given this extra context I suspect the NRL had done more than enough to justify being solid filler content.

Edited March 6 by Copa

[Sports Prophet]

17 hours ago, The Future is League said:

I don't know why PV should start taking notes as in the past AFL has said it wants to destroy Rugby League in Australia.

Show me one occasion, or are you talking out your backside?

[emesssea]

Just to clarify, there is no Fox Sports US, theres only FS1 and FS2 (which very few people get I believe). Ill have to pay attention more this year, butt I dont recall saying AFL on FS1 on a regular basis, and its usually late at night as after hour filler program

[Sports Prophet]

14 hours ago, Martyn Sadler said:

Anyone who writes a comment like that in a supposedly serious article lacks sufficient self awareness to recognise that he is actually writing about himself.

What was the poor comment? 

The one which baffled me was this one: 

During the Fox broadcast of Saturday night’s festivities, a chyron informed viewers that Major League Rugby, the latest and perhaps best attempt to make the simpler and more globally recognised variant of the game successful in the US, was airing on the Fox Sports app.

[eal]

AFL has one or two games per week on FS1, one or two per week on FS2 (which has limited reach), and then the rest on Fox Soccer Plus (which has extremely limited reach).

The NRL game times were no doubt chosen with Australian time zones somewhat in mind, but starting the games at 9:30 and 11:30 PM in the dominant Eastern US timezone is too late, particularly the 11:30 PM game.

[Copa]

4 minutes ago, emesssea said:

Just to clarify, there is no Fox Sports US, theres only FS1 and FS2 (which very few people get I believe). Ill have to pay attention more this year, butt I dont recall saying AFL on FS1 on a regular basis, and its usually late at night as after hour filler program

I remember being in the US in the 80s and someone said “how was that Collingwood game?” when they heard my accent. They had watched it on TV. It’s been broadcast in the US for a long time.

[Sports Prophet]

9 hours ago, Worzel said:

That just proves that he doesn’t understand the games.

Rugby League’s rules are simpler. Which - much like chess - counterintuitively then gives its players much more latitude to create complexity within that basic framework. Simple rules enable creativity, and unpredictability. 

Rugby Union is more like role-playing games like Dungeons & Dragons. The rules are so complex, and open to interpretation, that the players need an in-game guide (the referee) to coach them through key moments, and so have a lot less ability to create inexepected, new scenarios, or make decisions. 

Great analogy. I can’t wait to tell the next infidel that RU is like playing Dungeons & Dragons  

[emesssea]

8 minutes ago, Copa said:

I remember being in the US in the 80s and someone said “how was that Collingwood game?” when they heard my accent. They had watched it on TV. It’s been broadcast in the US for a long time.

Thats back when ESPN was new and had few rights, so they showed AFL and it developed a cult following then disappeared for years

[emesssea]

12 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

What was the poor comment? 

The one which baffled me was this one: 

During the Fox broadcast of Saturday night’s festivities, a chyron informed viewers that Major League Rugby, the latest and perhaps best attempt to make the simpler and more globally recognised variant of the game successful in the US, was airing on the Fox Sports app.

Thats because the NRL game got temporarily bumped to FS2 which was suppose to be showing the MLR game, which then got bumped to the app. Its common to let viewers know where they can watch the regularly scheduled programming when this happens. Once the basketball game ended, NRL went to FS1, and MLR went to FS2 (without any warning thank you Fox Sports)

[Sports Prophet]

2 minutes ago, emesssea said:

Thats because the NRL game got temporarily bumped to FS2 which was suppose to be showing the MLR game, which then got bumped to the app. Its common to let viewers know where they can watch the regularly scheduled programming when this happens. Once the basketball game ended, NRL went to FS1, and MLR went to FS2 (without any warning thank you Fox Sports)

I knew that occurred, I was more focusing on referring to RU as the simpler variant.

[emesssea]

42 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

I knew that occurred, I was more focusing on referring to RU as the simpler variant.

Got the articles being referenced mixed up. Yah, just reading that article sounds like hes attempting to be the dead pan humor sports writer and is completely whiffin on it.