Quote: Andy Gilder "With all due respect to the RL World Cup, compared to the RU World Cup it is a minnow next to a shark. The RU World Cup is probably the second biggest single sport international event on the planet behind its football counterpart.'"
True in terms of number of teams, and spectators / income, but its absolute gash, and for anyone to think that its vastly better than an RL comp is deluded.
In RU, there are 4 maybe 5 teams that can win it. In RL there are 3.
In both competitions there are massive washout games, although in the RL World cup they tried to reduce it by a tiering system.
With both competitions it only really gets interesting at the semis.
The problem with the RL internationals is that there is no structure to them, or very little structure to them.
With RU internationals you know you get Autumn internationals against southern hemisphere teams, 6 nations in the new year, and tours to southern hemisphere teams in the summer.
With RL, we get a poorly thought out mid season game, and some international matches whose format seems to be decided by the flip of a coin 18months in advance.
If I were in charge I would have autumn internationals alternating between southern and northern hemisphere teams each autumn, with the world cup instead every 4 years.
As well as a lower tier international competitions in autumn for the likes of the home nations and france (depending on who is in the 4 nations), and similar for the pacific islands.
I think the other major issue is with the profile of internationals. The main difference in mindset / viewing of the two games is that in RL clubs come first, and in RU its internationals.
the RFL need to work on making the international game more appealing to spectators, and the supporters need to get as excited at seeing GB beat the Kiwis & Aussies, as going to the Cup final or grand final.
Use a bit of nouse, let kids in free with an adult etc, but get people into the games and fill the stadiums.