rugby continues to make itself irrelevant

[JohnS]

3 hours ago, hedgeybaby said:

We have the same situation with cricket here. The ECB has been happy to take the squillions from Sky, claiming they use it to grow the game but but without it being on terrestrial television, new fans will have little chance of discovering the game.

I wonder if what is happening in cricket in England mirrors what is happening for Rugby Union in Australia. I thought that when the broadcasting rights to test matches for cricket were lost to free-to-air television years ago (the BBC) in England that the game there was in trouble. I would reckon we lost Rugby Union to Pay TV around the same time.

[Ken Gargett]

2 minutes ago, JohnS said:

I wonder if what is happening in cricket in England mirrors what is happening for Rugby Union in Australia. I thought that when the broadcasting rights to test matches for cricket were lost to free-to-air television years ago (the BBC) in England that the game there was in trouble. I would reckon we lost Rugby Union to Pay TV around the same time.

the difference, to an extent, is that cricket is wonderfully entwined in the english way of life. would there be a school that doesn't have cricket teams? kids in the afternoon, weekend. pub teams, clubs. i played a heap of cricket when i was over there and loved it. in australia, we tend to play serious competition stuff with clubs etc, and then fade away and become fans. in england, so many play with small teams here and there, play just for the love of it, and play to a much older age (playing on a lovely english summer evening compared with a fierce queensland summer day may help one's longevity in the game).

with rugby here, it is played in a minority of schools, is a minor sport in the only two states where it is taken seriously. cricket in england has a massively strong base. rugby has never had that here. so putting the support they had at risk made no sense.

that said, perhaps the thin end of the wedge.

[hedgeybaby]

3 minutes ago, JohnS said:

I wonder if what is happening in cricket in England mirrors what is happening for Rugby Union in Australia. I thought that when the broadcasting rights to test matches for cricket were lost to free-to-air television years ago (the BBC) in England that the game there was in trouble. I would reckon we lost Rugby Union to Pay TV around the same time.

Cricket is certainly a much more niche game than it used to be. I'm sure we can't blame it all on the television rights but if something isn't easily accessible then you have to wonder who's going to be interested in the game going forward. That along with us all having shorter attention spans then cricket could be on a sticky wicket (excuse the pun,) going forward. We are lucky at the moment here because both cricket and rugger are generally patronised by the ABC,1's of society, so sponsors and broadcasters see it as lucrative but if the masses don't have access to the product then the future looks less than Rosie.

[JohnS]

Aah, I see. Yes, despite cricket being the national game in Australia (well, in summer it is the number one sport), you'd say in winter that Rugby Union is a minor sport in comparison to the following Australian Football League and Rugby League has.

Ken, I wasn't aware of the social aspect of the game in England. Cheers for that.

[Ken Gargett]

10 minutes ago, JohnS said:

Aah, I see. Yes, despite cricket being the national game in Australia (well, in summer it is the number one sport), you'd say in winter that Rugby Union is a minor sport in comparison to the following Australian Football League and Rugby League has.

Ken, I wasn't aware of the social aspect of the game in England. Cheers for that.

john, very much more so in england, sadly as i wish we were more like that. when i played club cricket in australia, the teams stuck together, almost never had a post game drink with the opposition, a real edge on the field. seriously competitive, nothing wrong with that, but also an aggressiveness and almost nastiness that often went too far.

in england, i ran the team at london house. made certain we had games both saturday and sunday for about 30 weeks. just loved it. played everywhere from school matting to beautiful village greens and in between. there were only two teams we did not have a drink with after the game or go for a feed with them - one was a bunch of islamic schoolkids, who were such a great bunch of kids (and so honest - i still remember one doing the ump'ing and giving his teammate out on the last ball of the game, run out. i broke the stumps and to this day, it was far too close for me to know if i got hjim or not, but his teammate had no hesitation), and the only reason was that they were underage and had school next day; and the other, embarrassingly the team of the village owned by the then patron of london house - bankers, lawyers etc and a bigger bunch of utter tossers, arrogant, stupid, racist grubs i've never met. so out of character as 50 odd other teams were all, in different ways, a joy to play against. and drink and eat with after, often for a few too many hours. sorry, i'm rambling down memory lane.

just to say that, and as an aussie this hurts, playing cricket in england was way more enjoyable than here, and i was fairly fanatical about here before i left. but it does not have that competitive edge in general, and there are times that appeals.

[hedgeybaby]

39 minutes ago, Ken Gargett said:

"would there be a school that doesn't have cricket teams? kids in the afternoon........"

Sadly not as much as it used to be. Cricket is hardly played in normal schools anymore. 

[Ken Gargett]

29 minutes ago, hedgeybaby said:

Sadly not as much as it used to be. Cricket is hardly played in normal schools anymore. 

wow. i am surprised. in which case, your comments re the money at the top and not grassroots, to paraphrase, is well warranted. very dangerous for english cricket, indeed, cricket generally.

on the other hand, anything that weakens the poms...

[frenchkiwi]

slightly off topic but - happy new year to all rugby fans.

The Thing that i am concerned about Which May Make Rugby Less Relevant is: the recent health and safety changes to the application of the Laws of the game.

the change in the last months to dishing out red and yellow cards for "dangerous play", ie high tackles and aerial collisions, is apparently motivated more by IRB lawyers concerned about being sued by injured players (as apparently happened in the NFL ... no surprises there, 'Murica) than anything to do with the spirit of the game.

If a player is genuinely "playing" the game i.e attacking the ball in the air (with "eyes for the ball") or lawfully tackling somebody (e.g. a ball-carrier jumping into the tackle who ends up on their back), they should at worst be penalised if it is deemed reckless, or not penalised at all if it is through no fault of their own (e.g. a collision involving a third player), regardless of the consequences (e.g. who lands on what part of their body). Nobody should be penalised for just playing the game, or else it just enters the realm of absurdity.

The recent edict that tackles which begin low and end up touching the head result in a red card - regardless of mitigating circumstances - is the latest example of pure madness in a collision sport with people running all over the place at top speed. It will bring soccer-style simulating and diving into the game, without a doubt. Who wouldn't duck their head into every tackle now for the chance of getting a one-man numerical advantage for the rest of the game?

England flanker Tom Wood says new tackle laws are ruining the game

This is but the latest high-profile player to speak out against it. It is worse than the usual tinkering of the laws through trials as it has not been trialled (unlike 20 variations to the law trialled in the last 5-10 years at lower levels only to be rejected - such as last year's trial to kill contesting the rucks).

I am concerned, and I willl be on my knees every night praying that the next big Test series or World Cup doesn't turn into a feast of simulations/dives and red cards.

 

 

 

 

 

[Baldy]

In light of all the tragic and life changing injuries to current and ex-players of the sport we love I think changes to the rules are appropriate even though I agree it's going to fundamentally change the sport.  All contact sports are doing this out of fear of litigation.  I doubt any of them are doing this for player's safety. Rugby is no different.  Like all the other contact sports, Rugby will have to change or be litigated out of existence.