Sat 29th Jun: France Vs England. Stade Ernest-Wallon 17:00 BST (SL+)

[north yorks trinity]

16 minutes ago, StandOffHalf said:

Binning the Ashes, haha. Saying that England don't deserve to play them.

They were binned years ago and given Aussie behaviour since the turn of the century I won't trust any future plans till they actually take place.

[gingerjon]

1 hour ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

To put it in perspective everything is financed by government hand outs fees

Whereas I think a key part of the problem is that every other in sport in France does well in this - and you've praised it in the past - but now, for whatever reason, the municipal support for RL in France is falling.

We need people to unlock more government hand outs.

[StandOffHalf]

5 minutes ago, north yorks trinity said:

They were binned years ago and given Aussie behaviour since the turn of the century I won't trust any future plans till they actually take place.

I share your apprehensiveness about the Aussies pulling the plug. I hope the series goes ahead, as I hope that an England-France game goes ahead in 2025 - preferably in one of the three RL towns that Atlantisman mentioned up-thread.

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

55 minutes ago, langpark said:

I realise we have the benefit of hindsight, but yes I think Perpignan or London (Plough Lane) would have been ideal for this match.  I think PL is unavailable at the moment, but maybe one to consider for the future?

I was happy they showed ambition and held it in Toulouse at a 20k venue, but they just did not have the budget, marketing, execution etc. to match it.  So if that is the case, then they should go to a smaller and "safer" venue.

Not sure Plough Lane would have hit the 3000 mark mate 

It's a ball ache to get to and not sure anyone would care unless a lot of money on marketing was spent 

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

11 minutes ago, Cerulean said:

I know it's not the question you asked, so please forgive me for an impassioned rant here:

The pinnacle of the sport in the Northern Hemisphere is now no more than repeated fixtures of Wigan v Warrington, St Helens v Leeds, Hull v Hull KR: it’s not enough, it’s not enough to capture the imagination, to hold the enthusiasm, to provide a backdrop for increased participation, to maintain or grow the sport.

And the present major generational review of the sport is nothing more than a spreadsheet and powerpoint exercise to select who bumps along the bottom of Super League, providing the few top teams with acceptable games. It’s not enough.

The alternative? A serious review of where the game is, what it can be, how existing enthusiasm can be maintained and then extended, how remaining resources can be retained, how the visual impact of the sport can stand out against the exponentially growing swamp of alternative calls on sporting and leisure spending, how youngsters can participate and progress through the levels of a wonderful sport filled with running, evasion, catching, kicking,exhilaration, teamwork, fitness, tactics, a proud history, a cultural grounding. A major review which, because there is no one else, can only be instigated by those few clubs who have the income, power, profile, and influence, to bring the game unselfishly together. A really serious major review.

It won’t happen.

There is an alternative view point to expansion that plenty of folk go for......

'fish where the fish are' 

E.g. Oldham and Bradford have a lot less RL interest than they did 

Some argue that the overall gains will be greater 'per pound' of money spent in those sorts of places than say a Northampton, Bristol ot even London 

RL is a 'significant sport' for 5 million people in this country (as opposed to a major one for 15 million people in Australia) 

Is it better/more realistic to raise up nearby places like Bolton to significant status?

[gingerjon]

6 minutes ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

It's a ball ache to get to

It is if you drive.

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

4 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

It is if you drive.

Just googled it from my house right now 

1 hour 16 minute drive 

1 hour 36 minutes by public transport 

Have I missed something Jon?

[Wellsy4HullFC]

1 hour ago, north yorks trinity said:

I'm talking about the suggestion that today's game would put people off attending the Samoa tests which seems an odd extrapolation to me. My criteria for an exciting game are any one of: a big event; skilful players on show; a result that matters; a close game. I think the Samoa tests offer, at worst, at least one, possibly 2-3 of those.

I'd agree that the Samoa tests are the very least offer skillful players on show and a close game (hopefully). Whether the result matters is up in the air: it's always great to win, but other than being the better team, you don't really get anything for winning these types of series (which is why multi-team competitions featuring high-level teams are more attractive to most).

The way the international game has been treated recently for these types of fixtures, you know it won't be a big event and the French tests further dissuade people in that manner. If you want people to attend in numbers, this is very important. Otherwise they'll just watch on TV.

[gingerjon]

14 minutes ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

Just googled it from my house right now 

1 hour 16 minute drive 

1 hour 36 minutes by public transport 

Have I missed something Jon?

You've previously commented that it's difficult to park/get to etc when driving. You've also said you pretty much exclusively drive to games now.

Plough Lane, like most London grounds, is far more straightforward by public transport which is the method the overwhelming majority use when travelling to games in London. Not perfect but not bad. And not remotely inaccessible - which was your reason why a game there would get a low crowd.

[HawkMan]

34 minutes ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

Not sure Plough Lane would have hit the 3000 mark mate 

It's a ball ache to get to and not sure anyone would care unless a lot of money on marketing was spent 

I must say something here, as a born and bred Londoner, PL is not a ball ache to get to, nor is anywhere in London if you're a Londoner and really want to get to a particular place.  London has 600 bus routes and also 600 YES 600 railway stations. It is a completely integrated transport system. Any RL fan desperate to see RL in London would not be put off by Plough Lane.  The attendances there are ###### because there's not that many fans. Very sad but true.  Now if the Broncos or indeed England were to play at a big stadium, Emirates or Tottenham,  the lure of the stadium would entice more obviously,  but Plough Lane isn't a problem.

FYI 334 Railway stations ie Network Rail or Overground and 270 Underground Stations = 604

Edited June 29, 2024 by HawkMan

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

Just now, gingerjon said:

You've previously commented that it's difficult to park/get to etc when driving. You've also said you pretty much exclusively drive to games now.

Plough Lane, like most London grounds, is far more straightforward by public transport which is the method the overwhelming majority use when travelling to games in London. Not perfect but not bad. And not remotely inaccessible - which was your reason why a game there would get a low crowd.

I do exclusively drive in and of London when I can....have for years 

The odd time I don't like this seasons game against Wire it confirms why I do.....it took 3 hours to get home after some sort of issue meant all trains back were delayed/cancelled .....

Plough Lane is hard to get to by both public transport and driving 

[Wellsy4HullFC]

23 minutes ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

There is an alternative view point to expansion that plenty of folk go for......

'fish where the fish are' 

E.g. Oldham and Bradford have a lot less RL interest than they did 

Some argue that the overall gains will be greater 'per pound' of money spent in those sorts of places than say a Northampton, Bristol ot even London 

RL is a 'significant sport' for 5 million people in this country (as opposed to a major one for 15 million people in Australia) 

Is it better/more realistic to raise up nearby places like Bolton to significant status?

Fishing where the fish are is great. 

However, are we in a position to even fish? Does the sport here invest in geographic areas? I think the closest we've come to that is plonking a random event somewhere in isolation. 

What we need to fish for is benefactors that wish to significantly invest in teams, because the sport doesn't have the resources to invest in them itself. But what bait have we got to attract and hook them? A complicated system of entry to the professional ranks that many feel would shut them out of certain levels is hardly going to do it. I'd be tempted to allow any club into the top flight that can demonstrate the finances to support it independently for a probationary x-amount of years before receiving any central funding based on results. Only fund the top 12 clubs, and if the new clubs overtake the old ones and they can't afford to stay up without the funding, then relegate them. Sorts the haves from the have-nots.

[ATLANTISMAN]

46 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Whereas I think a key part of the problem is that every other in sport in France does well in this - and you've praised it in the past - but now, for whatever reason, the municipal support for RL in France is falling.

We need people to unlock more government hand outs.

I am referring more to the governing body not clubs.

 

[gingerjon]

2 minutes ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

I am referring more to the governing body not clubs.

 

Again, though, we need to find a way of getting that money, not having a political position that it shouldn't exist.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

9 minutes ago, HawkMan said:

FYI 334 Railway stations ie Network Rail or Overground and 270 Underground Stations = 604

For comparison...

The city of Hull has 1 - Paragon Interchange.

East Riding has a further 20 railway stations.

Safe to say public transport in Hull is not very extensive!

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

Today's 'event' was thoroughly depressing for a variety of reasons, not least because I feel that the short-sightedness of the governing body has led us to this current position. There have been numerous choices that could have been made over the past 2 decades that could have led to a far more competitive and substantive northern hemisphere international scene than we are currently experiencing. The decision to split GB into home nations, only to then not have England ever play any of them seemed crazy to me. Decisions could have been made to invest in player pathways in those other home nations, but instead funding was reduced or cut altogether. There were opportunities to ringfence 2 French teams in Super League and better decisions could have been made, and greater support offered to a Welsh team in Super League. All of these choices would have required investment, but we are now counting the cost of neglecting these other nations, and I've never been more depressed about the state of international game (the thing that got me hooked on the sport), and completely lacking in confidence in the leadership of the game in the northern hemisphere. It just feels like death by a thousand cuts as the game gradually becomes less and less relevant. I'm starting to be far more interested in NRL than Super League, and the way things are going can see myself eventually just following that and not bothering with the British game. If somebody had told me 10 years ago that I'd feel that way now I'd have thought they were crazy. 

[Mumby Magic]

2 hours ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

Of course both would be ideal

I have to say the crowd today was very surprising .... Was expecting at least all the main stand to be decently attended 

I agree. Alot to learn but it is RL.

[Mumby Magic]

2 hours ago, sam4731 said:

 

How is that different from saying why not play Albania every year to improve their standards. We've been banging the same drum for ages and getting the same rhythm.

Get what you're saying. However to use your example, I feel we only bang the drum occasionally and at different tempos. 

 

[sam4731]

1 minute ago, Mumby Magic said:

Get what you're saying. However to use your example, I feel we only bang the drum occasionally and at different tempos. 

 

That might be the case but once a year is nowhere near enough to make a significant impact.

[Griff]

1 hour ago, HawkMan said:

I must say something here, as a born and bred Londoner, PL is not a ball ache to get to, nor is anywhere in London if you're a Londoner and really want to get to a particular place.  London has 600 bus routes and also 600 YES 600 railway stations. It is a completely integrated transport system. Any RL fan desperate to see RL in London would not be put off by Plough Lane.  The attendances there are ###### because there's not that many fans. Very sad but true.  Now if the Broncos or indeed England were to play at a big stadium, Emirates or Tottenham,  the lure of the stadium would entice more obviously,  but Plough Lane isn't a problem.

FYI 334 Railway stations ie Network Rail or Overground and 270 Underground Stations = 604

Like living in Leigh.

[Zilla Budgie]

What was the attendance do you think? 3 or 4K.

[Hopie]

8 minutes ago, Zilla Budgie said:

What was the attendance do you think? 3 or 4K.

Majority of the crowd was behind the camera, and it was a triple header so there would be people in and out all day, so no way to guess really.

Not a good crowd obviously, only compensation is hopefully they didn't make a massive loss if the stadium had already been hired and they were splitting costs.

[Click]

1 hour ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

I do exclusively drive in and of London when I can....have for years 

The odd time I don't like this seasons game against Wire it confirms why I do.....it took 3 hours to get home after some sort of issue meant all trains back were delayed/cancelled .....

Plough Lane is hard to get to by both public transport and driving 

So in other words, Plough Lane is hard for YOU to get to. 

I can cycle there in 50 minutes, not too hard.

[Leeds Wire]

4 hours ago, Damien said:

The trouble is it's quite obvious that our core support is not interested in international games like this and that is a huge problem. The game is reaping what it has sown with this.

I agree with you and I'm partly to blame, I suppose.

I used to go to every big match - Magic weekend, cup finals.... but especially internationals, they were the best. Seeing all those Welsh players like Jonathan Davies in a Great Britain shirt was a massive thrill.

I even used the university printer once to churn out hundreds of phonetic Welsh national anthem lyrics to hand out in the crowd when they played the Aussies at Huddersfield. We made it onto sky tv as a recall (why on earth did they put the Wales game on in Huddersfield?")

These days, I wouldn't walk to my local park to watch England, because it's so half-arsed. Great Britain was a fantastic brand with an iconic kit and those trips to GB games back then seemed so much bigger than watching club rugby; but these days there's no obvious international game to follow.

Edited June 29, 2024 by Leeds Wire

[Damien]

11 minutes ago, Leeds Wire said:

I agree with you and I'm partly to blame, I suppose.

I used to go to every big match - Magic weekend, cup finals.... but especially internationals, they were the best. Seeing all those Welsh players like Jonathan Davies in a Great Britain shirt was a massive thrill.

I even used the university printer once to churn out hundreds of phonetic Welsh national anthem lyrics to hand out in the crowd when they played the Aussies at Huddersfield. We made it onto sky tv as a recall (why on earth did they put the Wales game on in Huddersfield?")

These days, I wouldn't walk to my local park to watch England, because it's so half-arsed. Great Britain was a fantastic brand with an iconic kit and those trips to GB games back then seemed so much bigger than watching club rugby; but these days there's no obvious international game to follow.

You're not to blame for the game not providing a proper international game.