See, now that is a good post with some actual context. "Sort out the game" isn't. It is a statement with no context and is often used by a whinger. It's like when people say "the country needs sorting out", yet they don't know what's wrong with it or how to go about sorting it out without causing more problems. It's just another tired throw-away comment. "Sorting the game out" can mead absolutely anything, and for all I know, what he wants to "sort out" could make the game worse.

Some of the things you say I agree with, however having our own stadium could help. You say that our finals have disparate attendances. But perhaps having a permanent, familiar and easily accessible stadium could make this better? Perhaps it would give us more scope for RL events? Perhaps it will give us increased income in the long run (the RU grounds make a packet for their local unions). It definitely would give us more visibility. Could make us more attractive to sponsors (the ground could be sponsored for a start).

Having your own identifiable stadium could be part of "sorting the game out".

At this point in time, with cash generally becoming tighter, this shouldn't even be on the agenda.
Although the RFL are now making money out of the GF and 4N, the sport is simply not wealthy enough to fund such a project.
There is nothing wrong with the situation as it is now and if the RFL wish to move either final to another venue, it is free to do so,
The only way to have a "home" would be to play all england fixtures at one stadium, where the fans are happy to pay to watch
in good numbers and the players feel get used to playing but, the down side to this would be, not taking matches "on the road" to
increase the spectator base of the sport.
FWIW, i'd go for The Galpharm, fairly central and of course the birth place of the game.

What the RFL need is a sugar daddie and then we can build a new stadium but until that happens we will have to stay as we are

So Leigh Sports Village, the Halliwell Jones, Langtree Park, Stobart Stadium, Salford City Stadium etc aren't modern enough? The RFL and clubs are working on modernising stadiums, but there is no point in building any stadium with a capacity in excess of 20,000, since even the bigger heartland clubs rarely attract above that number of fans.

As other posters have said, Wembley will do. We don't have a varied enough international/cup programme to justify building another.

Keep the CC final at Wembley & keep the GF at Old Trafford.

For everything else (Challenge Cup Semis, Championship GF's, England Internationals, World Club Finals even Amateur & Junior Finals.), use Odsal.

A Northern 'base' would be great for the game.

Odsal can easily hold what 25,000(?) and that's after years of suffering from no investment (discounting the coral stand). Surely the cost of upgrading Odsal to 45-50,000 is cheaper than a new build 45-50,000 stadium? The land is there and the foundations are there to build on.

Build a brand new larger 'grandstand' where the seating is now, sort out the huge terrace and put a roof on. Jobs a guddan.

Plus financially, it comes with a tennant in the Bradford Bulls and the cost of stadium maintenance etc will be alot lower than renting out of different stadiums all year.

I'm certainly glad you're not my accountant !
Odsal is a hole and its lease just happens to have been taken over by the RFL.
The Bulls aren't out of the mire yet and to spend hefty lumps of cash in this circumstance would be utterley wreckless.
At the moment, we have internationals, major semi finals plus CC final and GF.
The CC and GF attract 70-80,000 spectators and the internationals, as an average figure, 20-30,000 (I know there is potential for this to grow, but it would take a while to acheive this level of increase) also, the Bulls manage gates of around 11000 and this number would rattle round like peas in a whistle if the stadium capacity was increased to even 40,000, never mind 70,000.

I agree that using Odsal wouldn't be the best. It would cost far more to redevelop Odsal into a 40-50k ground with great facilities than it would be to start again somewhere else. Plus, sharing with an RL club would be bad for two reasons. One being that it stops it from being a "neutral venue", so couldn't be used for hypothetical finals (if there were ever new competitions) and CC semi finals. It also wouldn't come anywhere near to making the stadium efficiently used as it would only be used a few times a year and wouldn't come close to being half full for the majority of games.

For me, there isn't enough potential in the game (at present) to warrant having a stadium with a capacity significantly higher than 40-50k. Other than the two finals, what RL events do we seriously believe have the potential to sell over 50k tickets? The only two I can think of are England vs Australia games and the World Club Challenge.

And there in lies the problem. Until RL can develop a schedule that has around 10 events that could at least sell 30k+, it's a non-starter. However, I believe that the RL calendar CAN easily be developed into doing this. It's just at present there isn't any point as the extra workload in setting up these events wouldn't bring in the return due to not having a stable location. I think having a base is VERY important when it comes to event games, and there's no coincidence why the Grand Final being at Old Trafford (between the two best teams in the Northern Hemisphere) can nearly sell out every year, yet the WCC being played here there and everywhere on a random date (between the two best teams in the World) can rarely get over 30k. And personally I think the same goes for internationals. They aren't announced early enough, and people on a whole aren't that familiar with the venue for the given event. Playing at KC, DW, Galpharm, etc. doesn't feel like an event.

With the way the domestic season is currently scheduled, there isn't enough potential to add many or even any event games (either through domestic competitions or even international competitions). The SL season needs to be shorter. It needs fewer teams in it. And we need to add more competitions with finals that can get upwards of 20k at least. I suppose the return of P&R "could" give an event capable of achieving this.

Although I agree with much of what you say. To create further events in order to justify a new home is a strange type of logic.
If the RFL feel that we should play all major finals and internationals at one venue then it can be sorted. However, with the exception of the adhoc international programme, the major finals work pretty well as they are.
Perhaps we need to pick a smaller venus (25000 capacity) and get used to filling that and if and when demand starts to exceed supply then move on to a bigger capacity venue.

It would be a vanity project, unless some RL loving philanthropist wants to build it and donate it to the RFL it would just be a waste of money.

Current RL events and their current (roughly estimated) attendance averages:

World Club Challenge - 20-30k
Magic Weekend - 30k per day x2
England vs Exiles - 14k (now x2)
Northern Rail Final - 8-10k
Challenge Cup Semi-Finals - 12-20k x2
Challenge Cup Final - 75-85k
Championship Finals - 8-12k
Grand Final - 70-75k
England vs Australia - 25-45k
England vs New Zealand 20-25k
England vs anyone else - 10-15k



Grand Final and Challenge Cup Final are too big. England internationals could potentially grow if marketed right. Challenge Cup semis would need to be a double header (which many have been calling for for years). Northern Rail Final and Championship Finals too small, so would need changing.

If you reduced the Super League season by 4 games (reducing back to 12 teams), you could have an expanded WCC to an 8-team 2-group format (3 games + final), which would increase the profile of the WCC. A double-header group game featuring all the NRL sides could prove a popular event also to kick it off, which would be an extra game at the ground.
If you merged the remaining SL sides in with the top 8 from the Championship, you've got the makings of a revamped Northern Rail Cup, which would have group games of SL teams playing Championship teams (much needed added income for Championship sides), a bit of "cup magic" and another final later in the season (possibly May bank holiday, where the old Challenge Cup Final was). All fits in with the current schedule.

A return to P&R, some bigger clubs in the Championship due to a reduced SL could see bigger crowds at the Championship finals. 20k saw Widnes vs Castleford at a more central location with a bigger prize. I think the 4 before that also sold out (or where very close to). A bigger ground with more prestige and better marketing in a more suitable location could see much bigger crowds.

Other events could include the return of the Charity Shield. Yorkshire/Lancashire (played by players not selected by England as a trial game). More England internationals. I think with the right structure of the season, you could easily get to 10+ event games that could get 30-40k if allowed to build. Those events and the money from them would be a huge boost for RL's profile and its coffers. At present, we've got the GF, the CCF, England vs Aus and the 4N Final that would probably get anywhere near decent coverage.

How so? You can't have a stadium if there are no events at it. You either need to revamp your old events or make new ones.

If you want to grow your business (and sport is business), you need to add more products that people want. If we don't do that, we aren't going to move anywhere.


Can it be sorted? And how? That is the issue. If there was one venue that fitted the bill, I guarantee you we'd already be there. But there isn't. The major finals are where they are because we don't have anywhere else to put them that would "fit". Wembley is the biggest and most prestigious stadium in the country (and probably in the top 5 of the world). Nowhere else could fit the Challenge Cup's prestige and history quite like it. Old Trafford is the biggest stadium in the north, most suited to an evening game that only has its pundits one week to organise their trip there, and is only available for a few games per year. Both will probably cost a lot for one-off hires. If somewhere like Old Trafford was available for more international games at a good price, I reckon we'd use it a lot more than we do.


The size of the stadium isn't always the most important part. The location of the stadium. The history (if there is any, sometimes it's good to start fresh). The facilities, etc. will have more of an impact on how many turn up. If you play the "wait until we fill this up before we move on" game, you won't know if any of the other factors have an effect on why it hasn't filled up.

I'll give you an example:
2009 4N group game - England vs Australia @ DW Stadium, Wigan. Attendance = 23k (2k empty)
2011 4N group game - England vs Australia @ Wembley, London. Attendance = 42k

Why didn't Wigan sell out 25k if Wembley can attract nearly double that? Was it because of access? Was it because Wigan as a town doesn't have that "big event feel"? Was it because some people don't like that it's Wigan due to the RL club (there will be a few, I know there's KR fans that won't come to the KC), whereas Wembley is neutral? Was it because of the prestige that Wembley holds? I'd hazard a guess that they all contributed, and will all continue to contribute at any other ground we play at whether that be Galpharm, KC, Headingley, Odsal (latter two bring in spectator comfort as well).
What 25k ground would fit that bill, as well as being in an area where there are enough RL fans in the vicinity to not wholly rely on neutrals travelling from far and wide to fill it up (something I feel Galpharm has always struggled with)?

At the moment, there isn't any. You'd have to build one. If there were more RL fans in and around Sheffield, Bramall Lane would be a perfect place as a neutral venue, central to the country, not too huge, in a big city and no historic ties to a big RL clubs (no disrespect Eagles). But you need them neutrals to pad out the place for events that don't fill.

It isn't even England's second city FFS.

6th biggest city in England, behind Birmingham, Leeds, Sheffield and Bradford.

Notice ROBINSON's use of 'arguably'. It wouldn't be particularly difficult to argue that Manchester is higher in the England city pecking order than Sheffield or Bradford in particular.