Both.

Leeds do targeted emails, local radio, social media, mobile billboards. I’m not saying they couldn’t do more, but they do some marketing.

I'm not calling out any club in particular here. All clubs are guily of under-selling the sport to different degrees, but the game between Leeds and Castleford at Elland Road demonstrated that the sport can sell an event when the host club (and to be fair, Castleford did their bit as well) can be bothered to do it.

But it's just frustrating that whenever the debate about marketing the sport comes up, the focus automatically falls on the RFL when it really should fall on where the blame actually lies - the clubs. Like I said, Bristol probably had zero support from the RFU and zero support from Premier Rugby, but they went out themselves and did nothing that any Super League club shouldn't be able to do. Just look at Bristol's social media presence - it is literally full of content and it's getting tons of audience engagement that (admittedly based only on the evidence of one game) is translating into ticket sales. In the last 24 hours, the only Twitter post from Widnes is an advert from their official gumshield sponsor. That's the difference - in one code a lot of the clubs [ican[/i be d, and in the other a lot can't.

1. During the 2017/2018 AVIVA Premiership, London Irish played 11 "home games, none of which got below 4,000. Their Lowest gate was 4,457, which puts your "Tumpesque" and therefore false claim in the correct light.
5,502 - 6,188 - 7,538 - 7,775 - 10,019 - 4,457 - 5,250 - 15,274 - 7,848 and 7,628 were the declared crowds at Reading in their relegation season, delivering a true seasons average of 7,748. To be clear, that puts them ahead of Saldord, Wakefield, Huddersfield and Widnes in terms of regular season attendances, whilst putting them 150 behind the 2017 SL Grand Finalists, Castleford and only 270 or so behind the hoards of HKR!



Let me get this straight

Because Bath, Quins and Sarries took games on the road and created an event, you think their attendances shouldn't count?


Quins got the biggest gate of either code that year for their Boxing Day bash, Bath got 61,000 for their visit to the capital, whilst sarries got 50k and Newcastle got 30k...all to regular seasons where they decided to make an "event" and their marketing department delivered!
To be clear. Bath took 5,000 fewer to TW2 for a regular season game than HULL FC and Wigan got for the 2017 CC Final


Let's remove the twice counted double header and the "events at Newcastle, London and Twice Twickenham then....just for you.
1,901,353 is the declared season attendance prior to play offs. 22 rounds of 6 games gives us 132 games....divide the 1.9 million figure and we get 14,404....but it looks like those nasty Union folks have counted the double header.....so let's remove that figure....1,901, 353 - 56,532 = 1,844,821/131 = 14,082.
The other event games at Twickeham (2), London and St Jame's total 224,208 so let's rip them away too and we have 1,844,821 - 224,208 = 1,620,613/127 = 12,761.

Now, I'm not sure about you, but that's not a drop of 3k....it's a lot nearer half that figure.

I'l leave you with 2 thoughts here Easty.
Firstly, only in RL could someone find a way to slag off clubs who manage to put on successful events, because it makes them feel inferior about League. Yeah. We all know that the Unionistas play dirty, but if you're going to try and paint them in a bad light, then use history, because the statistics will always bury you.


Secondly......that abysmal London Irish average that you tried to promote as being raised from your imaginary 4k to 12k on the back of one event in another Trumpesque off the cuff remark is just Wrong......The Exiles, who were terrible and rightly relegated averaged a mere 10% fewer fans in attendance of their reading games than SL managed as a comp in the 2018 22 regular game season.

So to answer the OP.......yes, we really are that far behind, even when you surgically remove attendances to suit your bitter and bias agenda as Easty tried here.

When we started as a Summer Sport we held all the cards and all the SKY/PAY TV contracts and relationships.......without a doubt we dropped the ball and we have yet to regather it. Union will always carry more debt, but in the vast majority off cases they can afford to. Wasps, crippled with terrible crowds and ever mounting debt made a tough decision to move to Coventry.....looks like that is paying dividends now with the average crowds being 17,641, or in other terms triple what they used to get at Adams Park. This is an example of the evolve or die mentality our sport needs......if we let the smaller clubs hold us back or if we bemoan change, then the decline we are experiencing will continue.

Why would you not count games held at Twickenham? Any club in Rugby League or Union can choose to take a fixture to a major stadium.

Because it makes the poster in question feel uneasy?

Well said Call Me God.

To put it further into context PRL (Union's top club league in England) has been offered £275m for 51% of the league by CVC (former owners of F1). Regardless of whether you think CVC did a good job with F1 or whether it is a fair price (some Union club owners are desperate for cash, others think it is a gross undervaluation!) I don't see anyone rushing to SL with a similar offer.

Not sure how anyone can support what wasps did. Okay it's working out for the club but they kicked there existing fans in the teeth with that move. It's similar to what Wimbledon did when moving to Milton Keynes. Not giving a damn about the existing fan base.

I don't wanna see any rugby league side move 80 miles +. That's not right at all

The problem is that the existing fanbase was not enough on its own to sustain the club. It was simply a case of "do something or die". That is very much the position that RL finds itself in in many respects. We have supporters demanding that the door to Super League is left open and that clubs chase success, but the financial performance of many of our clubs show that those support bases cannot sustain that. Worse still, they're actively opposing attempts that the sport makes to try and make itself sustainable because it harms their team's chances of delivering the success that isn't sustainable.

Wasps had to do something in order to remain a competitive, viable club, and moving was one of I'm sure many options that they considered. When you consider the cost/difficulty of building a new stadium in the South East commuter belt, the local competition (competing for the same local audiences as Harlequins, Saracens and London Irish), I can understand why they saw the opportunity of an under-utilised and available stadium close to the second-biggest city in the UK.

Yeah, I get that for some local supporters, that sucks, but as heartless as it might sound the club has to keep itself relevant and viable. Wasps has been a somewhat nomadic club for most of its modern history - playing at Loftus Road and Adams Park, and taking bigger games to MK and Coventry. It comes down to what the sport and the clubs want to be - progressive, foreward-thinking and successful, or looking back at how good things used to be. History is what people cling to when they can't look forward to the future.

WASPS wouldn't exist if they hadn't moved...... But you'd prefer your club died than evolve?



Spot on

RL fans are skint
RU fans have disposable income