Have you been messing with the Rugby Union Calculator? It's of interest to at most around 2% of the world's population. Being generous.

Any evidence to back up the claim that 3.5 billion people find Union entertaining?

The majority? That's a lot of people! I've watched my fair share of Union, and I see what you're saying.

Still boring though.

Is watching 20 minutes of a game not enough to make an informed judgement on?

Are you saying that you have to watch more than 20 minutes to ensure that something entertaining happens?

I don't understand...???? You seem to be saying that can sample 20 minutes of Rugby Union, watch nothing of any entertainment value, but because you didn't watch the full game you'd not understand why it is worth watching?

Do Rugby Union games often contain periods of up to 20 minutes where nothing much happens and if, for arguments sake, you just happen to watch THAT 20 minutes you'd not get a true understanding of the sport? If so then the remaining 60 minutes must be an action packed, roller coaster, end-to-end type of game, otherwise it would be a really drab, dull and tedious sport to watch.

Pfft you're just an uncomprehending fool who's in the minority of the worlds population that doesn't find Union entertaining. Yep, Juan has asked everyone.

He didn't ask me, I hate it.

Actually you don’t have to ask everyone – you can do sample extrapolation.

You simply pop along to Headingley on a Tykes (or whatever they’re called these days) game; ask 2 people you just happen to encounter on the Eastern Terrace if they are enjoying/understanding the game.

One says yes the other says no – from that you can simply extrapolate the results to the world’s population.

I had assumed we were talking of sports fans and rugby in particular. But if you make the same calculation for League fans it will make the same point.

I assume you are being pedantic and not just thick

It's sport and can be both boring and exhilarating. I have seen plenty of boring leagues games too. Many of the greatest players (meaning rugby players for the pedants ) in League's history came from Union where they learnt and displayed their skills.

Since becoming professional Union has progressed in leaps and bounds and has transformed itself from being essentially just a players game into a leading spectator sport. The pro-players are now athletically fit with high skill levels which cover a much wider range than league players.

Union allows contest for possession at all stages and this is one of the reasons the public (sporting - public please note!) prefer it to League. Rugby Union does not just appeal to rugby fans but the big games attract a lot of fans from other sports and is played in many more countries than League.

My own preference is for league but I also have a great love of Union. Although they are different games they both are handling games that share many of the same skills. Attacking back play in both games is very similar which I along with the majority of rugby fans can appreciate.

I don't understand people who cannot watch the two codes of rugby without trying to compare one to the other, they are different games played to different rules with different tactics and different field positions, the points scoring is different, the number of players on the pitch is different, set moves during the game are different and the whole emphasis of both codes are different.

The ball is the same shape - maybe thats what is confusing all of you ?

Loyal Leeds Fan wroteJust watched the last 20 minutes when he came on, and in that time he touched the ball only twice. Completely boring, genuinely no idea why people find Union entertaining. I hope he himself gets bored and comes back.[/i"

The point I responded to was "[igenuinely no idea why people find Union entertaining"[/i

If you are to make a sweeping criticism of a whole sport based on a 20 minute period of play then be prepared to remain in the dark. I believe you need to watch a whole match before making negative comments and I believe you should watch a whole lot of matches to at least appreciate the differences before writing off a whole sport. Both codes of rugby have their fans and critics and of course it is up to individual taste but like it or not Union has a greater following in this country and around the world.

I do not agree with your logic as many league games contain periods of sometime longer than 20 minutes where it is "drab, dull and tedious to watch" That does not make it follow that all of of League is "drab, dull and tedious to watch" There has been much criticism on this board of many recent SL games that are regarded by many as pointless and lacking in entertainment value but no need to write off the whole of SL!

Are you saying League has a greater following than Union?

Sorry. I promise not to forget next time