The club game in Union is now bigger than the club game in RL.

Go figure.

International RU have had several competitive teams for many many decades and thus can have a proper international calendar. International RL only really has 3 top teams to market competitions on and that's something that pre-dates SL. Lions tours in RU only take place every 4 years, Ashes in cricket every 2 years (give or take 6 months depending on the hosts summer). You just can't expect to get along with GB vs Australia in RL all the time with games in NZ thrown in.

Quote: William Eve " Isn't there a British Lions Tour of NZ during the UK summer off-season of 2017? Good luck to SL getting any media coverage while that Tour is taking place.'" Yes there is. The hype over selection has started already. And and it's going to be massive.., www.nzlionsseries17.com/News/NewsArticle/27627

Quote: William Eve " Isn't there a British Lions Tour of NZ during the UK summer off-season of 2017? Good luck to SL getting any media coverage while that Tour is taking place.'" Yes there is. The hype over selection has started already. And and it's going to be massive.., www.nzlionsseries17.com/News/NewsArticle/27627

But that's partly because they prioritised the international game over the domestic. While we were crowing over how good Wigan were compared to Bath, Union were investing time, money and effort in the international scene. A scene they'd already invested significantly in anyway. We never really have in RL.

We're slightly hamstrung by the nature of the game. It's easier to compete in Union. I believe the gap between England and Italy in Union is similar to that between England and France in League but you don't see the same kind of utter dominance in Union.

However, if we never start and lay the groundwork then we'll never grow. We have to realise the real growth isn't going to come from a few more people watching Leeds, Wigan or Hull. But from using the international game as a recruiting sergeant for the sport for players, supporters and sponsors. That's what Union does.

The main infrastucture is via TV..Yet the RFL supports something that keeps the game alive, yet in the same breathe is killing it.There where other offers on the table that may not have been has financially beneficial,but a far wider coverage of the game would have become available,had other options been taken into proper consideration,rather than lets take the money and run.

RL is becoming stale,a drought of entertaiment,yes new blood may bounce the TV attendances.At the end of the day the real cause is being disguised.This isn't sport anymore, it's a TV series on Thursday nights.

I agree however I think that's a symptom rather than a cause.
The cause is that we, as a sport, simply aren't relevant to enough people. Even in the heartlands the sports profile is pretty low. Now partly that's due to a centralised national media but partly it's because we've largely ignored the groundwork, both at amateur and international level, we've needed to do for the last 25-30 years.

Add to that we are in the heartland of professional soccer - the biggest club in world in slap bang in the middle of RL's catchment area. In RL's heartland you have 2 Liverpool clubs, 2 Manchester clubs, Leeds Utd, Hull City, Huddersfield Town, Bradford City who get 16-18k a game.

Tough to compete against the biggest sport in the world for working class athletes, the majority of RU players don't come from the same background. As RL in NZ how easy it is to compete for the best rugby athletes.

It's a big ask to enhance RL's international profile when it remains a million miles away from establishing a national one.

But the international profile can drag the national one with it. It's not going to work the other way around. The only sport that's done that is football and we are nowhere close to the behemoth that football is.

People outside the heartlands really aren't bothered about seeing Wakefield play Salford. Most of them don't even know where those places are. They might take a passing interest in Wigan v Leeds or Wigan v Saints but not much more than that.

Put England v Australia or New Zealand (or a competitive France or Wales) on and they'll start paying attention.

They may well pay attention if England play Australia.....but then what? Can't just keep playing them and the Kiwis and even a lot of long term passionate RL fans shrug their shoulders at the prospect of games against the Welsh and French. And after those international games they'll still have to make do with Salford vs Wakefield or Widnes vs Castleford.

The main reason international RU and cricket do so well is because they have 8/9/10 truely competitive teams, not just 3, and thus can have a truely varied international calendar.

They didn't always have that, they built it. As we must.

There is plenty of things the game can do to raise its profile with more international games, international club games, and its general games but that requires a will and commitment to be something more than it is.

Correct, but the clubs are now wholly dependent on regular visits to Sky's foodbank. The sport has got used to no other way of existing.

Union has always had a strong high profile international competition which has produced packed stadiums bringing in regular steady high income. Much of this income was and still is invested in development at mini and junior levels. Once Union went professional the writing was on the wall and League was too complacent as it basked in the early success of Superleague. The RFL should have been more pro active in the days when Superleague on Sky attracted higher viewing figures and crowds than Union club games.

Union has come on in their professional era in leaps and bounds with players becoming much fitter and more skillful. As they first recruited League coaches and then players the product became much more attractive as a spectator sport and both crowds and Sky viewing figures increased followed by increases in the TV royalties and sponsorship. As a true national and international sport there as then only going to be one winner.

League had hung on in for a period because the product was more entertaining but once the combination of bad rule changes and the steady loss of our top players to both Union and NRL made worse by the failure to attract main Sponsors have left it threadbare with the result we now all can see.

IMO Union is now a far better product with high skill and fitness levels, real competition for possession at all breakdowns and a strength in depth of playing talent due to the strong development area that will see it continue to flourish.

Had Caddick invested more wisely and at a higher level in Union so that he had a side capable of competing at the very top then he would have needed a new stadium to house the crowds today.

Unless League can somehow produce/recruit 20 or 30 genuine class players plus some needed rule changes quickly then I fear our game will continue to decline with falling crowds and tv sponsorship. Meanwhile our top players will keep swopping codes and our youngsters will join local union clubs rather than League ones as they eye the higher earnings and profile.

I am really worried that the leadership of our game has left it all too late.