League crowds were always loads bigger than union crowds but in the last few years Union has overtaken League and they've done it while charging higher gate prices at the same time. We need to find a way of doing what they are. I do agree with you that they are not compeing with us for spectators but we do need to be competing with them in order to get similar sponsorship deals that they get. Just look at the billboards around the grounds. They have luxury car companies and computer firms and we have local builders and Uncle Joe's Mint Balls.

wasps and bath are over 100 miles apart!

This is ridiculous though. Rugby League is a sport which cannot be compared to Rugby Union off the field, to do so is to take the sport completely out of its own context. RL has achieved in its own right excellent top flight attendance averages in the past decade, yet it is being beaten up on here because of things happening in another sport, a sport itself riddled with problems on and off the field.

RU's success has always been driven by its international games. RL has not had that luxury for some time; comparing dick sizes with Rugby Union will only lead to a conclusion of RL failure. That's an inevitable result - and a convenient result for anyone who is looking to belittle Rugby League no matter what the reason. Are people claiming to have just noticed Rugby League's defining characteristics and limitations? Don't claim to be disgusted or outraged that Rugby League is a battling minority and regional sport, it has been for the past 117 years, did you never notice before? It's not a case of accepting that as a fact forever, but all this self-loathing is getting a bit pathetic; as far as I can see so-called RL fans looking to beat RL up for RU's perceived successes are just looking for any excuse to attack the sport for their own reasons.

I haven't said anything of the sort. I was merely responding to the previous poster's question.

Don't let the Union calculator distort things....firstly these are season to date figures- which will fall away as the season goes on and their normal gates pull the figure down, as the wasps and saracens figures are vastly exageratted by their 80k game at Wembley with cheap / given away tickets!

In addition, by the look of those figures, not only have they exaggerated one average attendence by including the Wembley figure, the union boys have doublely counted the wembley game as a home game for both teams, and so counted all fans TWICE as a home fixture for both Sarries and Wasps (Couldn't make it up!....its akin to us putting 60k down as a home crowd for EVERY team in the magic weekend!)

Both Saracens and Wasps home 'averages' (sic) vastly exceed their home ground capacities (16k and 10k respectively) and so both are CLEARLY not pulling these figures- both average circa 6k and 8k respectively.

Take away the wembley game (as shown amended as actual figures in red above) and their attendances are roughly the same as ours....Both leagues average around 10k, and they only slightly outstrip us due to the fact they no longer have a team outside of their heartlands (Leeds /Newcastle) pulling 2k, to compare with our London Broncos, pulling the averages down!

How can you take away a "real" game?

Sorry but did those people turn up or not?

Talk about bitter!!

That has nothing to do with the relative numbers of people attending games. It is all about the type of person attending, which should be rather obvious.

We should except that rugby League is dying in Great Britain and the more we look at Rugby Union the more depressed we will get. Also lets stop calling Union as it makes us look stupid. Saying we have the better game makes no sense now. If it’s so great why are people stopping watching it.
Why do we play with 1 ref and Australia have 2.
Why do we put players on TV giving interviews that can hardly talk.
Why do Stevo and Co always dwell on any mistakes in the game by players and the ref. how is this promoting the game.

We certainly should 'except'(sic) that Rugby League is dying as it clearly is not.

Union is a bigger game internationally and always will be. That helps their domestic game. Cricket is a huge game internationally but in the UK the county game is watched by few people, but you don't see the ECB planning to end it . Even the great satan soccer struggles to balance its books financially.

For all its flaws, I've loved RL since I first saw a match in 1968 and frankly I'm not bothered by what happens to other sports.

I know that, but which game is recieving bigger sponsorship payments?

The one with the wealthier fans.

Once more you come onto our board and spout utter tripe.

By your reckoning Football would therefore receive less sponsorship money than Polo.

But that's just it, the Wembley fixtures are part of their overall gates. You cannot simply exclude them. They took place. They happened.

I also think we are missing the point if we focus purely on attendances.