I got that list off Wikipedia. So I presume that these are the grounds that the rfl put forward in the original bid.

GROUPS: Headingley, Halliwell Jones, Langtree, DW, John Smith Stadium, Ricoh Arena, Bramell Lane, KCOM Stadium.

QF: Ethiad Stadium, Anfield, St James Park, Olympic Stadium

SF: Wembley

F: Old Trafford.

I'm not the one who claimed that if given the tournament that I'd get a Million spectators, but if there is to be any chance of getting that number, then the England games (hopefully 6 of them) all need massive gates, because Lebanon v Canada isn't going to cut it.....

Capacities:
Ethiad 55000
Anfield 54000
SJP 52000
OS 66000

2013 world cup quarter final attendances:
16200
5800
22300 (that was England at Wigan and I don't think that sold out)
13000

Other than wishful thinking and without relying upon the usual 'if the RFL marketed it properly', what possible reason is there for selecting those stadiums for the QF stage? One of those stadiums MIGHT be ok for an England QF - even then I think a 30000 capacity would be more realistic - but for the other QF they would make RL look ridiculous again.

If you think small, you'll get small.

I'd rather they sold RLWC 21 Tickets at a tenner a pop starting now and get promoting it to schools in the areas where there will be games. Get local schools to "adopt" a country like this [urlhttps://www.usasevens.com/las-vegas/adopt-a-country-program/[/url.
If England can't attract 50k to their pool games then the target of 1,000,000 will never be hit......the other lot got 2.5 million through the gates...Samoa v Japan in Milton Keynes got 30k.......yet you're suggesting England play in 30k stadiums?

But that's all the keyboard RL market experts have, along with "throw a load of money at it" which is quite easy when "money" is just a word on their computer screen and they don't have any responsibility of it and using it correctly.

So many on here could get a sold out Olympic Stadium for Lebanon vs Fiji in a QF if they were running the show don't you know.

There's a massive difference between Keyboard RL Market experts and just accepting where we are. The RFL "bigged it up" and claimed 1,000,000 spectators......to achieve this then the games featuring the host nation will need to be the best attended series of games for England/GB RL since the 97 tour.
As for "money" being thrown at it, I would much rather they tried to attract attention as opposed to just accepting that we'll only ever fill small stadiums for small games.....how do you think the other lot managed to get 30k in Brighton for Samoa v USA?

The organisers have 4 years in which to attract 1,000,000 spectators to 31 games across the UK..........iI'd suggest they roll up their sleeves and get on with it!

I'm suggesting England play the two group games against the smaller teams at stadiums in the heartlands, which would mean maybe up to a 25000 capacity. The group game against Australia or New Zealand - assuming that we have one of those teams in our group - can be played at a stadium with a much bigger capacity. Perhaps somewhere between 50000 and even Wembley at 90000 if it's Australia and part of a double header/opening ceremony. I'd then probably be aiming for a stadium of around 25000-45000 for the QF. It depends on who England at likely to play and what stadiums are due a game. The SF at Wembley and Final at OT is already decided on.

Making comparisons with rugby union is completely pointless. You need to forget about what RU can do and focus on what is realistic for rugby league. Otherwise you might as well suggest that England RL builds its own stadium because England RU has Twickenham, and then you can schedule Wales RL matches at the Principality Stadium because if Wales RU can get 75000 there, why can't Wales RL? Scotland RL can then play at Murrayfield, no doubt according to you in front of 60000 like the RU team does, IF only the RFL would get their marketing right. It's a nonsense and leads only to rugby league biting off more than it can chew. RL has 'thought big' on a few occasions and has often ended up looking a bit foolish - in terms of having half empty stadiums, I mean.

I don't know why someone decided to set a target of 1 million spectators. It sounds a nice figure, I suppose. Saying 1 million has more impact than saying 600000 or 800000 or whatever. It's more than double the number that attended in 2013 though, so I'd say it was fairly optimistic.

France and Ireland are also interested in hosting games for the 2021 world cup https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/ ... seas-hosts

France and Ireland are also interested in hosting games for the 2021 world cup https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/ ... seas-hosts

Disagree with this sentiment.

Samoa v USA in Brighton...a city with no professional Rugby side and no pedigree in the sport, attracted 29,000 fans. It is highly unlikely that many Samoan or American tourists were in the crowd that day, so you have to ask who was?

Samoa v USA could well be a pool match in 4 years time......is it your belief we're best not to book a stadium that holds 30k and try to fill it, but instead play it at Craven Park and hope to get 5k?

Union is the closest sport to ours and as such, comparisons are a daily event, whether they be regarding how the BBC hides our comp whilst ITV champions the other code, or how the RFU manages to make multiple millions on the gate for meaningless friendlies whilst we struggle at a tenner a ticket......it's time that we started really promoting ourselves and if that means sending staff out into schools and colleges and making sure that hosting cities are accountable for their ticket sales and promotion then so be it....I'd be aiming for all 92,000 tickets for next years Kiwi Tour to be sold by the start of the season and EVERY TICKET PURCHASER should be canvassed on their intentions for 2021......If the 1,000,000 was an optimistic number, then why say it? 31,000 as an average is a bit of a stretch, especially when 11 of the 28 games in 2013 didn't get past 4 digits and only one stand alone game got above 31k, but that's the number used in the bid and that's the target the RFL have given themselves....and never mind comparison with Union I'd be copying everything they did and trying to get 29,000 to Samoa v USA.....

I have no idea who attended that game or what the ticket prices were or what marketing they did. However, I do know that there is huge interest in international rugby union that simply doesn't exist with international rugby league. England rugby union gets 80000 at Twickenham seven or more times a year. England rugby league could only get 67000 at Wembley for a once in a blue moon World Cup semi final in 2013. I'm not knocking England RL - I like the sport and I'll always back my national team - but you can't pretend that the two sports are equal in terms of interest in the international game. Therefore just because RU can do something, it doesn't follow that RL can just copy it and achieve the same results. That's just pie in the sky stuff.



I'm saying that RL needs to be realistic. It needs to forget about RU and look at the evidence from past attendances and be sensible when trying to decide what sort of stadium is appropriate for each fixture and each stage of the competition. In principle I'm not against using any stadium. I'd be delighted if they used Wembley and got 90000 for Samoa v USA. But my head tells me that sort of attendance is unobtainable. I think 30000 is probably too optimistic as well. Good marketing and promotion can help any event - sporting or otherwise - but it can't work miracles.




The BBC doesn't hide anything. That's paranoid nonsense. The RLWC just isn't worth showing because not enough people are interested in it. What they do cover they do well. You can't tell me that Mark Chapman, Dave Woods, Brian Noble etc. aren't positive and enthusiastic about RL. But you can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear. If RL is unhappy with the BBC's coverage of the world cup it can instead go to ITV or Channel 4 or Sky or BT. Or are you going to claim that they're all against RL too?

It's not thinking small it's thinking sensibly. You don't got from the attendance figures for the 2013 QF's that were posted previously to 40/50/60k stadiums.

For the England QF game that did 20k+, try a 30/35k stadium. Those that did mid teens numbers go for 20-25k stadiums and for the last one that only did 5k go for a 15k stadium.

You have to build to get the biggest (or even mid sized) stadiums and International RL isn't at that point where we can fill them consistently.

What figures RU got for the World Cup in England are completely irrelevant despite your obsession with it. The stadiums and figures we go for should be ones that are right for us, not chosen because another sport got a certain figure between two overseas teams there. Do you think RU is kicking itself and getting criticised because a football World Cup in England could do even better numbers between two of the weaker lower profile teams than what RU did at Brighton.