England v Australia 2025 - coming to the UK!

[Dave T]

4 hours ago, 17 stone giant said:

I disagree with the criticisms about Wembley as a stadium. If it seems big and spacious, that's because it is. 90000 compared to 60-62000 at Arsenal and Spurs, for example.

I loved the romanticism of the old Wembley and went many times, but the reality was that the stadium was run down and the surrounding area was a dump. Plus you were a long way from the pitch in certain seats, especially behind the goals/posts.

People won't put up with now what they would have done in the 1980s. Expectations have moved on.

Whether it's right for an England v Australia rugby league match or a Challenge Cup final, is a different question. But that's not the stadium's fault. That's a case of rugby league not being able to fill it, and perhaps therefore being better off using a smaller stadium.

The last time I went to the new Wembley was for the Leeds v Southampton football play off final. When it's full like that, it's immense. Look at what the Crystal Palace fans did with it at the FA Cup final.

The location is fine too. You can have a day in London and get to it in 30 mins or whatever.

I dont think people's issue is just that it's big, for me it's around design. Other major stadiums are easier to navigate and access and the concourse in the lower tier are just a bit drab. In fact as a stadium as a whole I find it rather drab. Particularly when you look at some of the impressive European grounds.

It does have good views of the pitch, and Club Wembley areas are great, but I think they've designed a lot of things that just aren't very customer friendly. Locations of toilets, layouts of bars, that kind of thing.

[Tommygilf]

3 hours ago, Father Gascoigne said:

Fair enough. But Club Wembley makes up what, 5k seats tops? It can't just be that. 

It was between 10 to 15k.

[Tommygilf]

27 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I dont think people's issue is just that it's big, for me it's around design. Other major stadiums are easier to navigate and access and the concourse in the lower tier are just a bit drab. In fact as a stadium as a whole I find it rather drab. Particularly when you look at some of the impressive European grounds.

It does have good views of the pitch, and Club Wembley areas are great, but I think they've designed a lot of things that just aren't very customer friendly. Locations of toilets, layouts of bars, that kind of thing.

It suffers almost from being the pinnacle of the last generation of Stadia, a bit like the Emirates or even Etihad. 

Compared to Spurs or one of the flash US stadiums like So-Fi for example its not as good, despite being the premier venue in Europe arguably. It came in just a bit too early for the innovations that now mark modern stadiums.

[Tommygilf]

I actually quite like Wembley, it has certainly improved over the past decade as developments around it have expanded and gone up.

Unfortunately I think it alone (and London more broadly) isn't the attraction it once was - a trend not limited to just RL fans.

That combined with some lacklustre experiences especially in those crucial first few years after it reopened can't have helped. On field the sport has always delivered, but off it, there was often not a lot great going on.

[sam4731]

The reason for choosing Wembley over other grounds is simple.

Rugby League isn't about how full a ground looks on telly or whether we'll have to discount tickets.

Rugby League is about that little boy or girl walking up Wembley Way England scarf, programme in hand, full of anticipation.

Wembley is right because it's Wembley. There is no substitute for it's iconic status.

 

[WN83]

2 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

The reason for choosing Wembley over other grounds is simple.

Rugby League isn't about how full a ground looks on telly or whether we'll have to discount tickets.

Rugby League is about that little boy or girl walking up Wembley Way England scarf, programme in hand, full of anticipation.

Wembley is right because it's Wembley. There is no substitute for it's iconic status.

 

Before the rebuild I would absolutely agree but probably not now. It's a bit soulless and is used that often nowadays that it doesn't have that 'special game' feeling for many. I've been to Challenge cup finals, test matches, football internationals, FA cup semis, an FA cup final and boxing there and just find it a bit 'meh'. Maybe I'm just getting miserable in my old age though. 

[sam4731]

1 minute ago, WN83 said:

Before the rebuild I would absolutely agree but probably not now. It's a bit soulless and is used that often nowadays that it doesn't have that 'special game' feeling for many. I've been to Challenge cup finals, test matches, football internationals, FA cup semis, an FA cup final and boxing there and just find it a bit 'meh'. Maybe I'm just getting miserable in my old age though. 

Wembley is 18 years old. The most important part of the ground is it's name. Wembley will always be Wembley and a new generation will have their own version of the memories that the old stadium created.

[M j M]

1 minute ago, sam4731 said:

Wembley is 18 years old. The most important part of the ground is it's name. Wembley will always be Wembley and a new generation will have their own version of the memories that the old stadium created.

We've had enough time now for it to strongly seem that isn't going to be the case.

[rookie1234]

23 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

The reason for choosing Wembley over other grounds is simple.

Rugby League isn't about how full a ground looks on telly or whether we'll have to discount tickets.

Rugby League is about that little boy or girl walking up Wembley Way England scarf, programme in hand, full of anticipation.

Wembley is right because it's Wembley. There is no substitute for it's iconic status.

 

I'm sure i read somewhere that Wembley was the main pull for the aussies coming over and agreeing to the test series. they weren't coming if it wasn't Wembley.

 

 

Edited May 22 by rookie1234

[JonM]

2 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

It was between 10 to 15k.

It was 15k when first built, reduced to 10k in 2017 after the initial 10 year deal had completed. There are now 5k seats in the second tier which are non-premium in terms of access to restaurant facilities etc.

[Anita Bath]

26 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

The reason for choosing Wembley over other grounds is simple.

Rugby League isn't about how full a ground looks on telly or whether we'll have to discount tickets.

Rugby League is about that little boy or girl walking up Wembley Way England scarf, programme in hand, full of anticipation.

Wembley is right because it's Wembley. There is no substitute for it's iconic status.

 

There is certainly no substitute for the twin towers. The history inextricably linked to the original that have no links to the current building.

[Coggo]

37 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

The reason for choosing Wembley over other grounds is simple.

Rugby League isn't about how full a ground looks on telly or whether we'll have to discount tickets.

Rugby League is about that little boy or girl walking up Wembley Way England scarf, programme in hand, full of anticipation.

Wembley is right because it's Wembley. There is no substitute for it's iconic status.

 

 

9 minutes ago, Anita Bath said:

There is certainly no substitute for the twin towers. The history inextricably linked to the original that have no links to the current building.

It’s the national stadium. That’s why it’s at Wembley and should stay at Wembley.

[sam4731]

10 minutes ago, Anita Bath said:

There is certainly no substitute for the twin towers. The history inextricably linked to the original that have no links to the current building.

When they tear this Wembley down in 100 years, there will be people saying that you can't replicate the historical significance of the arch. Sentimentality is a strong emotion.

[Leyther_Matt]

I think Wembley is great tbh. Doddle travel wise from central London. Club Wembley is great, we’ve got some top drawer seats for the Ashes for £45 which is an absolute steal IMO. The approach from Wembley Park will always be a magic sight.

Disclaimer - my views of Wembley have been improved immeasurably by Bolton and Leigh both lifting pots there in the space of a few months in 2023!

[Odsal Outlaw]

4 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

I actually quite like Wembley, it has certainly improved over the past decade as developments around it have expanded and gone up.

Unfortunately I think it alone (and London more broadly) isn't the attraction it once was - a trend not limited to just RL fans.

That combined with some lacklustre experiences especially in those crucial first few years after it reopened can't have helped. On field the sport has always delivered, but off it, there was often not a lot great going on.

Over 30 million visitors per year, third most visited city in the world. London is definitely an attraction.

And Wembley is a fantastic ground with plenty to do around it. The amount of comments on here about it being lacklustre … from the same people who will happily frequent the jungle and odsal

[Anita Bath]

1 hour ago, sam4731 said:

When they tear this Wembley down in 100 years, there will be people saying that you can't replicate the historical significance of the arch. Sentimentality is a strong emotion.

The sentimentality comes from events that made their mark on history….white horse cup final, Matthews cup final, don fox watersplash final, alec murphys wink in 1971 cup final, 1966 world cup final, Man U euro cup final 1968, wigan v hull cup final ( sterlo v kenny) etc, post war austerity olympics.

 

What are the outstanding memories of the new wembley…englands women winning the euros?

[The Hallucinating Goose]

7 hours ago, sam4731 said:

When they tear this Wembley down in 100 years, there will be people saying that you can't replicate the historical significance of the arch. Sentimentality is a strong emotion.

Do you really think Wembley will still be standing in 100 years? With the state of the world, London is gonna have been nuked by then, mate. Either that or the Martians will have invaded and destroyed it because of humanities insistance on the continued use of fossil fuels and so will have colonised that planet and begun mining it for all it's resources.

[The Hallucinating Goose]

I'm not a fan of Wembley. I've only been once and in all honesty just found it too big.

I was about halfway up the bottom tier on the end and my main issue was that, even at that lower level, I felt far too far away from the pitch. Even at that level the players seemed miles away.

I also found because of the size, that there wasn't much atmosphere, it was so cavernous that you couldn't hear the noise the fans at the opposite side of the ground were making, it just disappeared before it reached you. Absolutely no atmosphere in there.

[turn it in]

For me I just think that Wembley has lost it’s appeal and aurora that used to surround it what with it being the largest stadium in the nations capital etc.

these days you got 3-4 London premier league clubs that have stadiums with 60k+ capacity and are much more modern and fan friendly.

times change and people move on and think RL should regrading Wembley.

[Tommygilf]

7 hours ago, Odsal Outlaw said:

Over 30 million visitors per year, third most visited city in the world. London is definitely an attraction.

And Wembley is a fantastic ground with plenty to do around it. The amount of comments on here about it being lacklustre … from the same people who will happily frequent the jungle and odsal

I meant in the sense that its not a rare thing anymore, I love going to London. But that means that people don't need a cup final or ashes test to justify going or make it special.

It definitely didn't use to have lots around it. I went 5 times in 6 years between 2011 and 2016 for RL, and for boxing since too, and it definitely improved in that time. But that also meant that the initial impressions folk got in those first few years was sometimes not the best, or at least not a more finished product.

I said I actually quite like it, but it is a bit functional as a stadium. 

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, Tommygilf said:

I meant in the sense that its not a rare thing anymore, I love going to London. But that means that people don't need a cup final or ashes test to justify going or make it special.

It definitely didn't use to have lots around it. I went 5 times in 6 years between 2011 and 2016 for RL, and for boxing since too, and it definitely improved in that time. But that also meant that the initial impressions folk got in those first few years was sometimes not the best, or at least not a more finished product.

I said I actually quite like it, but it is a bit functional as a stadium. 

It's really not a great stadium. Slightly older ones have better functionality (Millennium for example) and it simply has no 'wow' factor when compared to most completed after it.

That said, it's big, does the job and can have a good atmosphere. It is pretty unforgiving on half-baked events though - which is, being blunt, why the Challenge Cup Final comes across really badly in it.

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

It's really not a great stadium. Slightly older ones have better functionality (Millennium for example) and it simply has no 'wow' factor when compared to most completed after it.

That said, it's big, does the job and can have a good atmosphere. It is pretty unforgiving on half-baked events though - which is, being blunt, why the Challenge Cup Final comes across really badly in it.

As I put in a post earlier, it almost came too soon. Its the pinnacle of the last generation of stadiums in many ways, but that meant it has been overtaken by the likes of Spurs, So-Fi etc in terms of what a truly top class venue can be.

Totally agree on the unforgiving point. It is very much an all or nothing venue. We still get between 50 to 70k in there for Cup Finals, but inevitably that leaves 20 to to 40k empty and that shows up very poorly in such a venue. 

I think the middle tier being club wembley was great from the accountants POV (indeed other grounds followed a similar model) but it almost completely killed atmosphere between the lower and upper bowls.

[Archie Gordon]

Expanses of shiny bright red seats don't help when it's well short of full. 

[gingerjon]

18 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

As I put in a post earlier, it almost came too soon. Its the pinnacle of the last generation of stadiums in many ways, but that meant it has been overtaken by the likes of Spurs, So-Fi etc in terms of what a truly top class venue can be.

Totally agree on the unforgiving point. It is very much an all or nothing venue. We still get between 50 to 70k in there for Cup Finals, but inevitably that leaves 20 to to 40k empty and that shows up very poorly in such a venue. 

I think the middle tier being club wembley was great from the accountants POV (indeed other grounds followed a similar model) but it almost completely killed atmosphere between the lower and upper bowls.

We disagree about it being the pinnacle. It's too user unfriendly - even for the time - for that. But you're right on the bowls feeling like they're in two separate grounds at times.

[The Hallucinating Goose]

50 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

Expanses of shiny bright red seats don't help when it's well short of full. 

Very true. You see with a lot of new stadiums, particularly smaller ones, that they are putting in a complete mix of colours completely random so as to break up big blocks of colour when there is empty sections and it's working really well.