England in the North?

The question has been raised that England should play outside of Twickenham and particularly in the North of the country.

The main problem with this is the income that the Twickenham tests generate for the RFU. It follows then that the RFU are unlikely to sacrafice income in order to schedule games outside of Twickenham especially as it is the power base of the RFU itself.

I feel that this is shortsighted from the RFU and that an attempt to develop and promote the game in other regions of England would, in the long term, be beneficial both financially and in terms of increasing player numbers. Sale and Newcastle have both struggled to compete in the Premiership in recent seasons and I am sure that the scheduling of test fixtures in the North would help these sides promote the game locally, increasing player numbers and quality. This, in turn, would benefit the England Test side.

I am aware that the income generated at Twickenham particularly in the 6 Nations is vital to funding the clubs and grass roots projects but surely one of the Autumn fixtures could be played at Old Trafford (it has been used before), its certainly big enough. It has been annouced recently that England are due to play all 3 of the southern hemisphere giants next autumn and I for one think it would be fastastic to see the All Blacks play at Old Trafford.

As I understand it RWC 2015 ,will be played in Englandmonly the Millenium
being used outside it.
Unlike 1991 when the whole UK was involved,Old Trafford is said to be one of stadiums involved.Myself with a series of Fiji plus the 3 SH sides at the end of 2012.
There is no good reason why they should not be played in other parts of England.

Money is the main Factor , why would you not use your own 82,000 capacity stadium that you can fill up nearly every game. i think the average price of tickets would be about £80 (Complete guess) so thats £80x82000 in revenue and thats not even including the high priced drinks and food that is also sold where as if the where to use a stadium up north they would i guess have to give the stadium owners a share of the profits.

England do make the odd trip up north , the last time being about 2 years ago when they played argentina. But in this day and age traveling to London is easy even if it is a bit hard on the wallet, but then again so are match day tickets.

Playing up north should happen once every 2 years but suggesting Ditching HQ as a permanent home ground is laughable.

If i remember right, the last time old trafford was used to host a rugby game (international game) Old trafford complained about how mutch the turf was ripped up, that they said NO MORE, rugby games that is.

No one is suggesting we ditch HQ as a home but one high profile game a year could be affordable and worth it in terms of marketability.

Next year there are 4 AIs. They could host SA/Oz/NZ at Twickenham and perhaps play Fiji elsewhere - if a decent sized football stadium is available.

Are any of the Rugby League clubs 'oop north' big enough to hold a Union International? Shouldn't be too much problems with the turf getting chewed up then?

Metal Tiger wrote:Are any of the Rugby League clubs 'oop north' big enough to hold a Union International? Shouldn't be too much problems with the turf getting chewed up then?

Not if you want a massive profit I'd have though:

Headingly (Leeds): 20,000
Galpharm Stadium (Huddersfield): 24,500
KC Stadium (Hull) 25,500
DW Stadium (Wigan) 24,000

ST James park....(sorry the Sports Direct Arena ) 53000

As GF suggests, it might be a good idea for England to play in some of the stadiums planned for the World Cup.

Perhaps Anfield, Elland Road, St Jame's Park, Old Trafford or even the Ricoh Arena.

Cumbrian wrote:As GF suggests, it might be a good idea for England to play in some of the stadiums planned for the World Cup.

Perhaps Anfield, Elland Road, St Jame's Park, Old Trafford or even the Ricoh Arena.

Id imagine England will play their high profile pool matches at Twickenham? 1st, 2nd or 3rd seed(Depending where England are). Then the 4th and 5th seed pool matches at somewhere like Old Trafford.

I presume for the knockout stages all England games would be at Twickenham or Wembley? Id imagine Wembley most likely, biggest stadium so most money to be made as its a guaranteed sell out. Obviously final will be at Twickenham.

I think England should play their Fiji match 'Up North', the south sea island matches usually only leave Twickenham half full so best to send it to a smaller capacity stadium anyway.. And anyone who really wants to watch England would rather watch the big 3 teams anyway.

tomhughesnice wrote:

Cumbrian wrote:As GF suggests, it might be a good idea for England to play in some of the stadiums planned for the World Cup.

Perhaps Anfield, Elland Road, St Jame's Park, Old Trafford or even the Ricoh Arena.

Id imagine England will play their high profile pool matches at Twickenham? 1st, 2nd or 3rd seed(Depending where England are). Then the 4th and 5th seed pool matches at somewhere like Old Trafford.

I presume for the knockout stages all England games would be at Twickenham or Wembley? Id imagine Wembley most likely, biggest stadium so most money to be made as its a guaranteed sell out. Obviously final will be at Twickenham.

I think England should play their Fiji match 'Up North', the south sea island matches usually only leave Twickenham half full so best to send it to a smaller capacity stadium anyway.. And anyone who really wants to watch England would rather watch the big 3 teams anyway.

Yes, England will play their games at Twickenham, I just think that England should try and generate some interest in cities like Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds and Newcastle or face empty stadiums in four years time. Thing about the Fiji match is, that it could be seen by some fans as them being fobbed off. It may not be the best attitude but England vs. Fiji doesn't compare to a fixture like England vs. S.A, Australia or NZ. Put any of the latter on at Old Trafford and I honestly believe it would be a sell-out success, put Fiji there and I can see about 40,000 fans turning up.

majesticimperialman wrote:If i remember right, the last time old trafford was used to host a rugby game (international game) Old trafford complained about how mutch the turf was ripped up, that they said NO MORE, rugby games that is.

I'd imagine that not to be true, given that they play at least one Rugby League game a year on it. I'll grant you that there isn't such a scrummaging issue with League and that, but iI still can't imagine them saying no to Union and yes to League. Besides which, nobody would turn down the revenue, particularly with the groundstaff they have at Premiership clubs to repair pitches if needs must.

Anyway, in my opinion I am not sure whether it would be worth England moving a big game away from Twickenham. The main problem they would have is that is what ground would be readily available. I suppose if it was announced early enough, the Premier League fixture organisers could easily ensure that whoever Manchester United (for example) are playing that weekend, that their game is away.

Cumbrian wrote:

tomhughesnice wrote:

Cumbrian wrote:As GF suggests, it might be a good idea for England to play in some of the stadiums planned for the World Cup.

Perhaps Anfield, Elland Road, St Jame's Park, Old Trafford or even the Ricoh Arena.

Id imagine England will play their high profile pool matches at Twickenham? 1st, 2nd or 3rd seed(Depending where England are). Then the 4th and 5th seed pool matches at somewhere like Old Trafford.

I presume for the knockout stages all England games would be at Twickenham or Wembley? Id imagine Wembley most likely, biggest stadium so most money to be made as its a guaranteed sell out. Obviously final will be at Twickenham.

I think England should play their Fiji match 'Up North', the south sea island matches usually only leave Twickenham half full so best to send it to a smaller capacity stadium anyway.. And anyone who really wants to watch England would rather watch the big 3 teams anyway.

Yes, England will play their games at Twickenham, I just think that England should try and generate some interest in cities like Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds and Newcastle or face empty stadiums in four years time. Thing about the Fiji match is, that it could be seen by some fans as them being fobbed off. It may not be the best attitude but England vs. Fiji doesn't compare to a fixture like England vs. S.A, Australia or NZ. Put any of the latter on at Old Trafford and I honestly believe it would be a sell-out success, put Fiji there and I can see about 40,000 fans turning up.

I must admit...if it was announced that St James Park would host England v Fiji...or to be honest any Tier 1 side v a minnow....i would be chuffed to bits....Top quality rugby is rare up here so would be nice to see....