Sun 19th May: CCSF: Huddersfield Giants v Warrington Wolves KO 15:15 (BBC)

[Dave T]

33 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Hopefully, I will watch these talented teams in a close contested final, if you like one sided affairs you can keep them I simply don't, that is why even being a season ticket holder at my club a couple of years ago I chose which games to go to the team were simply (as today and yesterday) far to good for their opposition and the majority of the games were a borefest, and as for this sport isn't for me I have been involved in it in all different manner of posts and disciplines for a very long time, and I will take a guess far far longer than you have, let's just agree to disagree what we both appreciate about this game.

Harry, I think it's fine to crave a close game. We all do, we want classics every time we watch, of course we do. 

But when a game is one sided, we don't have to be so melodramatic or downright negative tbh. 

It's sport, they won't always be classics. But there is plenty to enjoy. 

And I suggest that anyone who doesn't enjoy it just quietly goes and enjoys something else. 

[LeytherRob]

6 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Harry, I think it's fine to crave a close game. We all do, we want classics every time we watch, of course we do. 

But when a game is one sided, we don't have to be so melodramatic or downright negative tbh. 

It's sport, they won't always be classics. But there is plenty to enjoy. 

And I suggest that anyone who doesn't enjoy it just quietly goes and enjoys something else. 

It’s the nature of sport. Fans were spoilt last year with 3 incredibly close games in the semis and the final but it rarely works out like that. I’d have liked some closer games but at least there was some quality on display even if it was only 1 team in each half. I’d rather watch a game like one of these semis than lower scoring error strewn mess any day of the week.

[redjonn]

I'll be honest and can see some of Harry's point...

I as a fan when watching my team play I want them to win easily, ideally with plenty of time left so I can enjoy the crowd singing and roaring on their team. As distinct from the edge of the seat close games that get me even more on the edge of the seat and ready to hide behind the seats in front... that's when watching the team I'm a fan of whether RL or soccer...etc

If its other teams like today's semi I switch off if its not close or the game is not in contention.... Today's was an example were I went into the garden to enjoy the lovely sunshine well before half time...

[JohnM]

I like close games with the result in doubt to the very last moment.. ...unless it's my team that's playing. 

In that situation, yes, close is exciting, but only up to a point. 

I did find today's game worth watching as we're playing the winner in the Cup Final and want to see what the opposition looked like. 

And Connor, Man of Steel manque, is always good value to watch.

[DavidM]

If you wanna be a wind up merchant you’ve got to give it and accept you’re gonna get it back  it but Connor can’t take it and just ends up hurting his own team 

[Odsal Outlaw]

3 hours ago, Dunbar said:

Before I read the paper, does it differentiate between existing fans and new fans as that was the topic in hand, not whether you or Harry turned the game off?

I think the initial point was two fold, that one sided games reduce the audience, which the paper proves and second was that we want to recruit new fans to the sport. I haven’t read all the detail of the paper but don’t think it does differentiate. However, I would hypothesise that new supporters aren’t likely to be more enticed by a one sided game.

[Padge]

Talent is talent, class is class, watching a talented team score class tries is always a pleasure to watch. Some RL fans ( Harry ####### and his ilk) are what discourages people from wanting to experience what RL has to offer. Empty vessels etc.

Go and watch another sport if you don't like RL at its best.

Two teams this weekend played some outstanding rugby.

 

 

[Just Browny]

Another enjoyable trip to St Helens.

Warrington had more speed and intensity from the off today and I feel for the Giants fans who made the trip as the game was largely done before they even got a foothold - disappointing in a semi final.

The Thewlis-Connor incident was right in front of me but I couldn't make my mind up whether there was much in it. There were a few headshots on Thewlis again and Im worried about the damage that is being done by repeated head blows. Throwing bottles is rubbish though, very stupid.

[Yonder Province]

11 hours ago, Yonder Province said:

After reading so much in the press regarding this tie, I see that:

Warrington are the bookies favourites - they have the superior pack - the faster backs - the better coach - the signature of our captain - more fans watching closer to home........and yet 

With the start we got off to at St Helens.

The togetherness we showed at Catalan.

The grit and determination displayed at Leeds.

Who really knows?

 

 

And with the complete absence of all the required traits, we crumbled again.

Very well played Warrington, hope you now go from strength to strength.

As for Fartown - let's hope it's the end of the ridiculous Watson "Process" 

 

[Dunbar]

20 minutes ago, Odsal Outlaw said:

I think the initial point was two fold, that one sided games reduce the audience, which the paper proves and second was that we want to recruit new fans to the sport. I haven’t read all the detail of the paper but don’t think it does differentiate. However, I would hypothesise that new supporters aren’t likely to be more enticed by a one sided game.

I wasn't commenting on the size of the overall audience so we can put that to one side.

As for your hypothesis, I think it is multi variable.  What we got today was some really excellent attacking rugby and some great tries.  Do I think the overall game would have been better had those tries been distributed between both sides, of course.  But there was plenty for a newcomer to the sport to enjoy.

Take two extremes - an arm wrestle of a match that finishes 6-6 or a 50-0 that has some length of the field and spectacular tries.  I know which game I would prefer, but I maintain that if we want to attract new fans then showcasing a bunch of great tries is the way to go.... even if the game is effectively won sooner than we would like.  I would rather that than they give up on what they may perceive to be a 'dour' match without the stuff to grab and hold their attention.

[N2022]

23 minutes ago, Padge said:

Talent is talent, class is class, watching a talented team score class tries is always a pleasure to watch. Some RL fans ( Harry ####### and his ilk) are what discourages people from wanting to experience what RL has to offer. Empty vessels etc.

Go and watch another sport if you don't like RL at its best.

Two teams this weekend played some outstanding rugby.

 

 

Yes, and better two free-scoring semifinals before a tight final than they'd been drawn differently and we had two close semifinals but then a procession at Wembley

[dkw]

33 minutes ago, DavidM said:

If you wanna be a wind up merchant you’ve got to give it and accept you’re gonna get it back  it but Connor can’t take it and just ends up hurting his own team 

He's the worst wind up ever, the only person that ever gets wound up by his nonsense is him. He's just a complete moron.

[Odsal Outlaw]

5 hours ago, Odsal Outlaw said:

We want to recruit new fans to the game with high quality entertaining games. These two haven’t been high quality (as shown through the blow out scores) and they haven’t been close which keeps people interested. And they don’t look like events with crowds like today. Not every game can be a last minute thriller of course.

I would imagine if we saw viewing figures through the game they would drop off continuously through the game and prove my point. But doubt we’ll see them. 

 

 

4 hours ago, Dunbar said:

The chat was about attracting new fans.  My point is the fantastic tries scored would be a good start. And arguably much better than a close game would provide.

Obviously a close game with loads of great tries would be fantastic - but, as I say, I think we expect too much sometimes.  Neutrals just want to see quality and exciting play.

 

46 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I wasn't commenting on the size of the overall audience so we can put that to one side.

As for your hypothesis, I think it is multi variable.  What we got today was some really excellent attacking rugby and some great tries.  Do I think the overall game would have been better had those tries been distributed between both sides, of course.  But there was plenty for a newcomer to the sport to enjoy.

Take two extremes - an arm wrestle of a match that finishes 6-6 or a 50-0 that has some length of the field and spectacular tries.  I know which game I would prefer, but I maintain that if we want to attract new fans then showcasing a bunch of great tries is the way to go.... even if the game is effectively won sooner than we would like.  I would rather that than they give up on what they may perceive to be a 'dour' match without the stuff to grab and hold their attention.

If you go back through the thread, we were talking about audience size, I said people will switch off in a one sided contest, your view is they won’t as they see some great tries. The research I shared shows people will turn off as games outcomes become more certain. It also shows people won’t watch if the outcome is certain. Which although not differentiating between new  and existing fans does prove that overall the audience is lower and gets lower through the game. 
 

Of course a highlights package of great tries should excite any sports fan.

On your point of 6-6 vs 50-0. I’d go for the former and the research supports that more people would. Assuming you were going for the latter. If so this is probably why we disagree on this. But I think the research proves my point rather than yours.

[Dunbar]

8 minutes ago, Odsal Outlaw said:

 

 

If you go back through the thread, we were talking about audience size, I said people will switch off in a one sided contest, your view is they won’t as they see some great tries. The research I shared shows people will turn off as games outcomes become more certain. It also shows people won’t watch if the outcome is certain. Which although not differentiating between new  and existing fans does prove that overall the audience is lower and gets lower through the game. 
 

Of course a highlights package of great tries should excite any sports fan.

On your point of 6-6 vs 50-0. I’d go for the former and the research supports that more people would. Assuming you were going for the latter. If so this is probably why we disagree on this. But I think the research proves my point rather than yours.

I have only been discussing the perceptions of new fans, not existing supporters of our game.

[daz39]

Just got back and we got exactly what we deserve after that performance, an absolute towelling.

More half a££d efforts from our players and some atrocious defensive attempts too.

We look completely devoid of ideas in the final 3rd.

Credit to Wire though they blew us away in the first half and looked very good, we had no answer and just as last week appeared to throw the towel in in the 2nd half.

Jake Connor is really starting to annoy me now, he is fine if were on top and dominating the opposition but as soon as things don't go our way he seems to forget about his role in the team and decides he's going to be pantomine villain, he's so frustrating to watch and i can't imagine how hard he is to play alongside.

I'll also say i'm now beginning to believe that my club will not progress until change is made, whether that's at the top, the coaching team or the players, Apart from maybe 5 or 6 i wouldn't be bothered if they all left tomorrow.

Funniest thing was a group of young Wire fans trying to goad the Giants fans with 'Jake Connor is w-anchor' chants to which the Giants fasn turned round and agreed with!

I'm disappointed but still had a good day out with my mates, the final should be a cracker now if both play like that again.

[Curly perm]

Connor’s reputation seems to be preceding him. Players are just giving him a crack and the refs aren’t bothered! 

[Jinking Jimmy]

15 hours ago, Futtocks said:

Is he grouchy because Leigh didn't win a game this weekend?

He’s probably still stressing about the disallowed try last season.

[redjonn]

12 hours ago, Dunbar said:

I wasn't commenting on the size of the overall audience so we can put that to one side.

As for your hypothesis, I think it is multi variable.  What we got today was some really excellent attacking rugby and some great tries.  Do I think the overall game would have been better had those tries been distributed between both sides, of course.  But there was plenty for a newcomer to the sport to enjoy.

Take two extremes - an arm wrestle of a match that finishes 6-6 or a 50-0 that has some length of the field and spectacular tries.  I know which game I would prefer, but I maintain that if we want to attract new fans then showcasing a bunch of great tries is the way to go.... even if the game is effectively won sooner than we would like.  I would rather that than they give up on what they may perceive to be a 'dour' match without the stuff to grab and hold their attention.

The wonderful attacking rugby shown in a high points score does often make one wonder about the opposition making it easier for them, thus negating the wonder in favour of the poor defence.... not least a narrow spread leaving the wings wide open or a very poor side of defence to exploit...

We like to watch different aspects and all are fair comment as distinct from telling someone (not your comment but other) to watch another sport... 

anyway Warrington were far too good for the giants on the day... or conversely Giants were so poor making it easy for a good warrington side on the day

Edited May 20 by redjonn

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, redjonn said:

The wonderful attacking rugby shown in a high points score does often make one wonder about the opposition making it easier for them, thus negating the wonder in favour of the poor defence.... not least a narrow spread leaving the wings wide open or a very poor side of defence to exploit...

We like to watch different aspects and all are fair comment as distinct from telling someone (not your comment but other) to watch another sport... 

That demonstrates a certain mindset to be fair. 

[daz39]

11 hours ago, Curly perm said:

Connor’s reputation seems to be preceding him. Players are just giving him a crack and the refs aren’t bothered! 

As i've said previously, against any other player it would be a punishment but Jake is fair game it seems, BUT they know this will make him react and as soon as he does it's him who gets in bother, it's unfair but Jake needs to learn to rise above it, he won't though now it's too late, he's a free sinbin to any team who wind him up.

[Spidey]

1 minute ago, daz39 said:

As i've said previously, against any other player it would be a punishment but Jake is fair game it seems, BUT they know this will make him react and as soon as he does it's him who gets in bother, it's unfair but Jake needs to learn to rise above it, he won't though now it's too late, he's a free sinbin to any team who wind him up.

If he'd have been punished for pushing the Thewlis into the hoarding earlier on, the second incident wouldn't have happened.  He's only got himself to blame.  He's a pest and got some of his own treatment, he should take it on the chin and move on

[Dunbar]

2 minutes ago, redjonn said:

The wonderful attacking rugby shown in a high points score does often make one wonder about the opposition making it easier for them, thus negating the wonder in favour of the poor defence.... not least a narrow spread leaving the wings wide open or a very poor side of defence to exploit...

We like to watch different aspects and all are fair comment as distinct from telling someone (not your comment but other) to watch another sport... 

I see your point.  As we have discussed before though, Rugby League is such an unforgiving sport, on a day like yesterday a team like Warrington can pile on the points when they have the upper hand.  Wrestling that momentum back is so difficult.  My personal preference is to credit the attack when we see tries like that.

As for the wider discussion.  Again, if I were talking about a personal preference, I prefer a hard fought contest.  As an ex forward, I would happily watch a forward battle play out over 80 minutes with one pack fighting to get on top of another.

But does that attract new fans?  Would they sit through a titanic 80 minute struggle?

In fact in the age of lowered attention spans and multi device distractions, is 80 minutes even relevant to attracting new fans.  Having a great highlights package from a game, with some spectacular tries, to post on social media after the game may be a better vehicle to attract new fans than a last minute thriller after 80 minutes.

Who knows.  All I am saying is that there are positives to be found from a game like yesterday and the default assessment of one sided game being bad for the sport is not always the case.

[redjonn]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

That demonstrates a certain mindset to be fair. 

maybe... some of us are more pessimist than optimist or looking more at the negative than positive aspects, although that mindset often changes depending upon circumstances,

Warrington looked really good, then again Giants looked very poor with gaps to exploit everywhere.

Against Saints in the previous CC round Saints kept in the game till last 20 mins or so when Warrington run away with it - their was a possibility of Saints getting back into the game. In this game it was very early on in the game that it was clear their was a huge difference due to a very poor giants side on the day... I say on the day as lessons learnt may mean a closer game another day...

[sweaty craiq]

Hudds are good in slow niggly games, this Mr Moore is getting a reputation for creating fast expansive games - well done Sir

[Dave T]

When talking about the Connor incident, we should look at the fact that this is how Connor tackled Thewlis, who was lay prone on the ground. 

His first contact was on Thrwlis's head and then he dropped on his head and held him there for a few seconds. 

This didn't start with Thewlis.