Yes yes yes, world cup and all that but what is it that will propel rugby beyond its niche global status? Discus'sting!

First topic message reminder :

Here we all are bathing in our pre tournament blather, anxious, excited,  and yes some of us even quite a bit more than a little dejected by the lost opportunity that presents before us, but we won't let that divert us(no precious we won't....ed). And yet what is the question, what is the present future, what is the taste on the wind that speaks portentously of progress - what is it that is going to propel this majestic code of rugby forth - beyond its niche status in the global sports market place?

Will it be our Rugby Union World Cup, undoubtedly the most successful rugby tournament ever to have existed? I fear not......

Will it be the antithesis of love, or as some describe it the franglaise relationship of the english premiership and the top 14....non mon’amie, for they are but mono excessives feeling and feeding only themselves, until they can no more. This is not the path we desire........

Indeed then what if the rugby codes reform 130 years poste haste. Merger most high, talent unbound, grotesque media mogulia australis......this will not do we must transcend the post empire commonwealth etc. etc.

So it is the Lions then? The Lions, all british and irish, irish and british, celtic and anglo and everything between and beyond yesteryear and before, a marketing man's forget-me-not of cheap gin and guinness, a drug we've all consumed far too much of so now our addiction is complete...NO NOT THE LIONS FOR THE LIONS ARE BEYOND THE PALE! DEATH TO THE LIONS!

Then what is the answer, tell me, I need to know?

The answer my friend is blowing in the wind.........it is the Olympic rugby sevens; yes I know how mad is that? Yes the Olympics have accepted the shortened rugby code of 7 versus 7 and it is this code that will change the game. It is this event alone that will deliver rugby its chosen place amongst the sports world elite (a place so cruelly stolen by that association football) and so as Greece falls rugby will rise amount Olympus.

I endured it for 20 minutes and turned over to Eastenders. I'd rather watch the real thing than a lesser version where it's a procession of tries akin to rugby-basketball and the ref shouts 'Move!' in a northern accent repeatdly.

Sin é wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Obvious innit. We needed to have Barton tweeting about Rugby (union) instead of hurling then everything would have been wonderful

(All to too easy to write k instead of l with big clunky fingers)

Actually, it might not be a bad thing at all for rugby in England to have a few soccer players tweeting about rugby.

Joey is actually a big Rugby League fan.

On the general subject of footballers supporting Rugby, it is astonishing to hear them speak about how they admire the honesty and values of Rugby (respect for referee, opponents etc) yet at the same time defend their own antics that are the antithesis of these values.

GeordieFalcon wrote:Isn't the RWC the third biggest event after the Olympics and the puff ball world cup.

Mind if they don't stamp out this diving and play acting malarkey that's growing in the game I'll be stopping watching it.

So says every sporting event - Euros (my choice for number 3), Winter Olypics, Tour de France, Ryder Cup, NFL, NBA, Champions League, even Cricket World Cup (1 billions fans across India, Pakistan, Bangladesh will bump it up).

I don't believe any of these claims about RWC being number 3.

Firstly hurling, a great game to watch and a blydi stupid one to play, our school PE teachers tried to make us play it every year and every year it was stopped after a couple of sessions as some or several kids got their skulls split open, fingers or arms broken, teeth knocked out, etc. Maybe proper coaching would have helped rather than just throwing 30 teenage boys onto a field with a big stick each and a ball made of granite.

Sevens, again it's a great sport but it's not going to be a driver to get people into rugby proper, there's no real contact, no rucks, unconstested scrums and to play it sucessfully you need a team made up of fast runners - some non-rugby countries might do well at the Olympics by reverse engineering it - get some fast, mobile people with a bit of strength and teach them the basics of sevens.

Having lived in Yorkshire for many years I actually quite like rugby league, it's a good day out, the fans are by and large just as sociable as union fans, and the game is very intense and hard when you are close up. I'd say the last thing that the RFU would want is any form of reunion as within a couple of seasons the traditional powerhouse of the South East and Midlands would be getting their arses handed to them weekly by teams from Leeds, Warrington and Wigan, which would be very bad for business plans and TV rights.

The key to union is that at the lower level it's still just about the game for all shapes and sizes, where a 14 stone fat lad can get a game on the same team as a 8 stone whippet, that to me is union's USP - anyone can play.

TG wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Isn't the RWC the third biggest event after the Olympics and the puff ball world cup.

Mind if they don't stamp out this diving and play acting malarkey that's growing in the game I'll be stopping watching it.

So says every sporting event - Euros (my choice for number 3), Winter Olypics, Tour de France, Ryder Cup, NFL, NBA, Champions League, even Cricket World Cup (1 billions fans across India, Pakistan, Bangladesh will bump it up).

I don't believe any of these claims about RWC being number 3.

Biggest is subjective too. Is it most revenue? Most brand awareness? Highest average attendance? Most watched? Most amount of countries?

Rugby world cup does have a pretty broad variety of countries.

Issue with the Euros and Champions League for example is in the name. It's just Europe.

Ryder Cup is USA vs Europe. NFL and NBA are American.

These aren't global in the sense that they don't have a wide enough appeal. Perhaps you could either neither does the RWC but at least he has a broad representation. Sure there are some notable absentees like India and China as huge markets that could be involved but that's a work in progress.

beshocked wrote:

TG wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:Isn't the RWC the third biggest event after the Olympics and the puff ball world cup.

Mind if they don't stamp out this diving and play acting malarkey that's growing in the game I'll be stopping watching it.

So says every sporting event - Euros (my choice for number 3), Winter Olypics, Tour de France, Ryder Cup, NFL, NBA, Champions League, even Cricket World Cup (1 billions fans across India, Pakistan, Bangladesh will bump it up).

I don't believe any of these claims about RWC being number 3.

Biggest is subjective too. Is it most revenue? Most brand awareness? Highest average attendance? Most watched? Most amount of countries?

Rugby world cup does have a pretty broad variety of countries.

Issue with the Euros and Champions League for example is in the name. It's just Europe.

Ryder Cup is USA vs Europe. NFL and NBA are American.

These aren't global in the sense that they don't have a wide enough appeal. Perhaps you could either neither does the RWC but at least he has a broad representation. Sure there are some notable absentees like India and China as huge markets that could be involved but that's a work in progress.

Agreed, much of this is subjective, and certainly RWC has a wider global spread - more like pockets to be honest.

But in terms of TV and commercial value you will find that Superbowl, Champions League and Euros are much higher than RWC. Furthermore Euros from 2016 will have 24 nations, and this and Champions Leagues  has a very broad appeal beyond Europe. Champions League TV deal - ~1 bilion from BT alone. How does that compare to RWC tv deal? Let's not also forget, Champions League is a club competition and it's biggest stars have been non-European.