So given a World population of about 6.5 billion in 2007, and an estimated total of 1.4 billion tv sets in the world, we can safely assume that two thirds of the total mass of humanity watched the RUWC with each and every tv set in the world having on average three viewers.

Sounds plausible.

Wasn't that figure derived from numbers watching the news where a clip may have been shown or something like that?

I'm assuming Flex only eats McDonalds and only listens to Justin Bieber...

4.2 billion lol

what odds can you get on New Zealand winning the 2015 RUWC?

I think [icumulutive[/i (sic) was the key word there.

As a fan of both codes, I think comparisons between the two sports are becoming largely meaningless. The only comparable aspects are the back lines but even then, with the heavy onus on territory and defending kicks in Union, it isn't easy to draw too many parallels.

Something which regularly astounds me though, is some of the very, very poor basic skills on display in the top level of Northern Hemisphere Rugby Union. It would seem as though the entertainment value of RU in Europe is being grossly damaged through the emphasis of the wrong things during development.

4.2bn over say a 32-game tournament works out at 131m per game.

Given that the five biggest markets for the sport are probably UK, France, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand, I'd say that's a substantial stretch of your belief to get a combined audience of 131m for every game of the tournament.

Someone, somewhere has taken a peak figure and extrapolated it out to come up with 4.2bn, even on a cumulative basis.

Why the comparisons with Unions RWC


1.



Point of order. RWC 2015 will shift more tickets, generate bigger viewing numbers and cover more column/website inches than the last 14 RLWC's combined....your World Cup envy lets you down


__________________________________________________________________________________
2.


Oh dear.....2011 was held in a country of 4.2 million people....2007 was held in France. It may be a shot in the dark, but I suspect RWC 2015 will increase significantly on 2011.
___________________________________________________________________________________
3.


































__________________________________________________________________________________
4.

You start with a fact and end with your opinion.....England and France will be in with a shout in 2015 and there's always Welsh Wales as an outsider. No QF or Semi-final line up has been the same in the history of their competition and to date, nobody has "retained it".
I'd actually go so far as to predict that of the 3 potential RWC 2015 winners you've named, only one will make the final and 2 the semi-finals......does that make you feel better about knowing 3 of the RLWC semi-finalists for 2017, 2021, 2025, 2029 and 2033 with the 4th team being at least 50% "heritage Australians"?
__________________________________________________________________________________
5.

11/8....SA are 11/2, England 7/1, France, Ireland, Wales and Aussie 10/1.
The Kangaroos were odds on in this RLWC......NZ 2/1, England 5/2 and everyone else 25/1+.
Good point about the AB's though...14 games in a row unbeaten this year is pretty impressive.....they've had good runs before...and then choked at the cup. The Roos have lost 5 to NZ and 3 to GB in the last 13 years.....I would hazard a guess as to them being one of the, if not the most dominant team in any international sport...162-2 for their last 3 games at the RLWC.
_________________________________________________________________________________

The RLWC 2013 was a great RLWC.....best attended, increase in averages, competitive pool games, FTA TV and increased media coverage, game exposed to new fans and an increase on 2008 profit margins....it wipes clean the fiasco that was RLWC 2000! To compare it to the Union tournament does it a massive disservice.

They take the ratings every 15 mins for every game and add it together.

Something like 95% of all RUWC viewers come from the UK&I, France and the SANZAR nations.

It is freely accepted that 4.2 billion is wrong.........RLWC 2013 Final attracted 100k in aussie, 36k in NZ and 1.8 in the UK.....RWC final 2011 attracted 17,000,000 in France alone...at 9am......

come on, let's compare the codes some more

RL in Britain is striving to be successful here. For now, we are not bothered about comparing RL to RU anywhere else or even here thanks. We know RL is a better game than RU and that's all we need to know.

Britain is still a class stratified society. We know that, for whatever reason, the upper middle classes will in general support RU, and because their people predominate at the top end of society, RU will continue to receive an undue weighting of media attention.

The people's games here are soccer and RL. In RL in Britain, it is more of an issue for us to compare ourselves with soccer. Soccer is of course a much bigger game here on any measure. But we still want to compare RL with soccer. Our potential 'markets' include the same people. Neither game is actually a threat to the other and there can be and is mutual respect and co-operation.

In measuring RL v soccer, RL is not of course looking in any of our lifetimes to overtake soccer. The key measures of the [irelative[/i success of RL in expanding over time are in ratios.

eg: compare RL and soccer in say 1970 (when GB ast won the RL Ashes) and 2013.
pick anything:
eg average attendances
value of the TV deals
numbers participating
etc

if RL has gone from 1% of the soccer figure in 1970 to say 4% of the soccer figure in 2013 that's a 400% increase in the time period and shows RL this country has gradually but massively improved over that era. In Britain, RL is most definitely continuing to build success.

1. I think You'll find I didn't start the comparison with Union and specifically their RWC.
2. RL and RU invite comparison given the origins of the games and their similarities.
3. Union is not the preserve of the upper-middle classes. 750,000 at their 2003 parade.[urlhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/rugby_world_cup/3300061.stm[/url
4. TV audiences for England at the RLWC were equalled or beaten by Union friendlies not featuring England.....are there really 2.8 million welsh upper class s or is your class debate slightly outdated?
5. Soccer attendances in the 1970's? Really? Compare Union attendances in 1970 and compare them to now.....Jesus, take Union attendances in 1990 and compare them to the Aviva premiership now


6. On the subject of Media attention......the RLWC getting matched or beaten by friendly Union games on the BBC has all to do with upper-middle class media bias. The 2013 Autumn Internationals played in the 4 Nations and France attracting close to 1,000,000 fans in 17 games at a 59k average has SFA to do with Media Bias.....the fact that most of these internationals had series naming sponsors has little to do with media bias and the fact that RLWC 2013 will post only 10% more profit than 2008, with 55% more games and 57% more fans has little to do with media bias either. Over 92% of the players representing countries in these 17 games were actually BORN IN THOSE COUNTRIES.....little influence of this media bias there either.


You aren't interested in comparing RL with Union but you should be. I know which game I prefer to watch and I know which game in my opinion is better......it is the game that could learn a lot from the other slower and more ponderous game when it comes to administration....England v NZ at Twickenham with about 82,000 people in attendance will have generated close to 5 million on the gate.......they had 2 more of those and then the Fiji/Barbarians game.......they will have generated more profit in 4 games than the entire RLWC of 28 games.

Your comparison with soccer is totally invalid BTW.......tickets to Premiership matches are as expensive (if not more so) than any other sporting tickets in the UK.....your "UPPER-MIDDLE CLASS" are actually middle and lower middle classes with a Capital Once Credit Card