Quote LondonRobster="LondonRobster"What I don't understand, is why the game doesn't get a bigger following. As you can tell from my name I am a softy Southerner (granted lived in the NW for a good while) and was brought up on Union.
To watch and to play League is far more entertaining. Doesn't matter if you think that its a simple game and the facets of Union make it better. For shear action League is miles in front.
I have mates down hear who love the game. Took me a while to get them into it but they love far more than Union now.
A blind man can see its more entertaining, so why does it still struggle to increase the following even if its only tv and not in the grounds.
is it the coverage? The commentators? The lack of marketing? Not enough quality sides?
I base this on the fact I don't think the game needs improving as a spectacle'"
Although Sky money had without doubt helped the game I’m not sure their coverage has, they seem intent on portraying it as a northern stereotype and creating controversy rather than focusing on the positive.
The national press are clearly not interested which IMO filters down to the general public. Whether that’s the fault of RL or a prejudice from the southern based press I don’t know.
Born a Wiganer I live on the south coast now, I know a lot of people who follow RU, all of which are aware of league but none of which have the slightest interest in watching it, maybe they are worried they would like it?
Our biggest issue IMO is the international game, or rather lack of it. The interest in RU grew exponentially after their WC win, they have a regular international calendar which creates the interest which then filters down, both in support and finances to the domestic game.
I’ve said for years we need a RL equivalent of the 6 nations, England would walk it initially but over time, with the promise of regular fixtures it would become more competitive.