Jersey Gone??

[Margin__Walker]

Uncertainty over structure and funding is a factor in Jersey's demise, but ultimately they were a bit of a poster boy for an unsustainable club. They've been lurching from bailout to bailout since 2016 on an island with a limited market and still paying for one of the best squads in the league.

They were heavily reliant on investors and thus vulnerable to investor fatigue. There's obviously a blame game going on after where the RFU are the target, but they shouldn't be absolved of responsibility here. They've given players absolutely no indication that there was an issue and left them out of a job with no pay and a day's notice.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

The RFU are hands-off here because that's exactly what the club owners wanted in the first place. Professional club rugby in this country is largely run by people who are pouring their own cash into the clubs and demanding more control as a result. Largely, they've got it. But on the flip side that means it's up to them to ensure it's sustainable. And unfortunately, for a number of reasons, it isn't. No use crying about the RFU because that's just not how the sport operates in England.

(Also, "EPL" is football, there's very few top English players playing in France, but I agree it's a very steep cost for what it is)

I don't think that's entirely true and if it were, it would be even more shambolic given that the RFU must be the single largest source of funding in toto in the English game, although the funding per individual club will be exceeded (not in all cases) by the club owners.

Therefore, unless the RFU's funding has no meaningful value to the clubs, for the RFU to be "hands off" and provide uncertainty over both structure and funding (which seems to be the root cause of Jersey's demise) is criminally negligent. They are the governing body of the game in England and if they don't want that role and wish to behave as you have claimed, hand the entire thing over to a committee run by the clubs.

This would suggest you haven't grasped the structure of the game in England, or what negligence is, or criminality for that matter

[JM2K6]

The RFU are hands-off here because that's exactly what the club owners wanted in the first place. Professional club rugby in this country is largely run by people who are pouring their own cash into the clubs and demanding more control as a result. Largely, they've got it. But on the flip side that means it's up to them to ensure it's sustainable. And unfortunately, for a number of reasons, it isn't. No use crying about the RFU because that's just not how the sport operates in England.

(Also, "EPL" is football, there's very few top English players playing in France, but I agree it's a very steep cost for what it is)

I don't think that's entirely true and if it were, it would be even more shambolic given that the RFU must be the single largest source of funding in toto in the English game, although the funding per individual club will be exceeded (not in all cases) by the club owners.

Therefore, unless the RFU's funding has no meaningful value to the clubs, for the RFU to be "hands off" and provide uncertainty over both structure and funding (which seems to be the root cause of Jersey's demise) is criminally negligent. They are the governing body of the game in England and if they don't want that role and wish to behave as you have claimed, hand the entire thing over to a committee run by the clubs.

How many clubs do you think there are in the country, Torq?

Also anyone who believes the structure is why Jersey are unable to pay their players is kidding themselves. A club that has overspent for years, lurched from crisis to crisis, blaming the lack of clarity over the structure for the 2025/26 season for running out of money? It doesn't take a lot of critical thinking to realise that's not the whole story.

[Fonz]

2) Sort some shit out over international windows with the RFU. I get REALLY hacked off when the top players from my club aren't available for over 1/3 of the season when away with England, particularly when England are playing such dire rugby. I like watching Marcus Smith play rugby. Last season I mostly didn't as he wasn't playing for Quins and he also mostly wasn't playing for England.

It always blows my mind when this is brought up. So, so mindnumbingly stupid. It's times like this I'm glad no one else plays American sports.

I'm certainly not suggesting the club game should take precedence over the international game and that we turn rugby into soccer (not that there's a real possibility of that anyway), but I DO think that a healthy and attractive domestic league is essential for sustaining and popularizing the game, because ultimately it's the best agreement between accessibility for the fans (due to number and proximity of fixtures; national teams play in the capital a few times a year, clubs play down the street every other week for months) and quality of play. But why would anybody but diehard fans pay to watch their own second string? And that's compounded when X team comes into town also missing Y player who's similarly on national team duty. In general, it just evinces a lack of seriousness toward the league as a whole...and while I'm sure there's many other factors at play, I have to think this is part of the reason why there's apparently a sizable portion of rugby fans in Britain and Ireland that watch the national teams play, and little other rugby. There NEEDS to be a sexy pro comp that everybody takes seriously.

This is why I used to bang on on the old bored about a big time B&I league+rejigging the schedule a bit to make it so that you'd have 18-20 uninterrupted weeks where everybody's available, no questions asked. But (since this would likely mean axing or at the very least rethinking how internationals are scheduled, particularly as to the November window), such changes would likely need to be undertaken with the understanding that it's short term pain, long term gain. So, ain't happening.

Unless I become a billionaire, of course.

[Margin__Walker]

International clashes with the Premiership have been almost (completely?) eliminated with the reduction to a ten team league iirc.

Everything else is screwed, but that's less of an issue now.

[Paddington Bear]

2) Sort some shit out over international windows with the RFU. I get REALLY hacked off when the top players from my club aren't available for over 1/3 of the season when away with England, particularly when England are playing such dire rugby. I like watching Marcus Smith play rugby. Last season I mostly didn't as he wasn't playing for Quins and he also mostly wasn't playing for England.

It always blows my mind when this is brought up. So, so mindnumbingly stupid. It's times like this I'm glad no one else plays American sports.

I'm certainly not suggesting the club game should take precedence over the international game and that we turn rugby into soccer (not that there's a real possibility of that anyway), but I DO think that a healthy and attractive domestic league is essential for sustaining and popularizing the game, because ultimately it's the best agreement between accessibility for the fans (due to number and proximity of fixtures; national teams play in the capital a few times a year, clubs play down the street every other week for months) and quality of play. But why would anybody but diehard fans pay to watch their own second string? And that's compounded when X team comes into town also missing Y player who's similarly on national team duty. In general, it just evinces a lack of seriousness toward the league as a whole...and while I'm sure there's many other factors at play, I have to think this is part of the reason why there's apparently a sizable portion of rugby fans in Britain and Ireland that watch the national teams play, and little other rugby. There NEEDS to be a sexy pro comp that everybody takes seriously.

This is why I used to bang on on the old bored about a big time B&I league+rejigging the schedule a bit to make it so that you'd have 18-20 uninterrupted weeks where everybody's available, no questions asked. But (since this would likely mean axing or at the very least rethinking how internationals are scheduled, particularly as to the November window), such changes would likely need to be undertaken with the understanding that it's short term pain, long term gain. So, ain't happening.

Unless I become a billionaire, of course.

Honestly I think club rugby has a ceiling in Britain (Ireland a separate case), and we’re not a million miles away from it in terms of attendances/attention. Truth is England and Scotland in particular, and being edgy but true Wales as well, are football countries and you get very healthy attendances a long way down the pyramid. This town ain’t big enough for the both of us, fundamentally.

You’re right - most rugby fans here just watch the 6N. I’m the same with golf, I watch the majors and the Ryder Cup and switch off to it otherwise. There isn’t a format change that would alter that, that’s just the way it is.

This specific case is an unusual one. I spend a lot of time on Jersey and my understanding had been the club’s rise had been essentially as a plaything of some of the offshore millionaires there, making them very stable. That hasn’t proved the case, obviously, which raises the question of how viable a pro sports team was ever going to be without financial support on an island of 110,000 people. Their attendances were actually higher in lower leagues when there were still islanders in their side, and I’ve often struggled to get locals to go to games because they cba without a connection.

[Fonz]

You’re right - most rugby fans here just watch the 6N. I’m the same with golf, I watch the majors and the Ryder Cup and switch off to it otherwise. There isn’t a format change that would alter that, that’s just the way it is.

While I take the point in the first paragraph as to ceiling, I mean, theoretically we're already preaching to the converted here when we're talking about drawing in rugby fans...l'll put my cards here on the table by saying - as a fellow converted - there is nothing that makes me want to watch Prem rugby.

On the other side of things, look how the NFL draws people into the game who've got no business ever giving a damn about American football, solely based on the sheer entertainment value the league just naturally provides. I've seen this stateside too with the EPL, which brings in far greater viewer numbers than American soccer to this day; the product is undeniable. There needs to be a rugby version of that, and not just a couple weeks every year or every 4 years. That's step A1 of any serious growth plan.

[PornDog]

Please dont' take this as an "Hey everyone look at how awesome we are doing things and you're wrong not to copy our model" type of shit posting. We obviously have gotten a lot right (so far at least), but I'm posting more on a rugby philosophy jaunt, which is of course highly influenced by what it is that we have gotten right.


The idea of a First XV of players, like a clearly defined first team that should play every game if they are fit, has been part of the problem in England. It has lead to those players being played into the ground, being more highly valued and thus highly (over) paid, to the detriment of building a proper squad.

Player A may be subjectively a better player than Player B, but if A has played 4 games in a row and is carrying a bunch of knocks, then you are going to get a better performance out of B who is raring to go. Proper squad management seems to be a lesson only now being learned in PRL.

Player rotation has always been an absolute necessity for us, with the IRFU not only holding back players for internationals, but also defining additional rest periods. So the question became, how do we best manage this? It has never been a question of fighting against the concept, because that was impossible. Proper squad rotation and squad development is a vital skill that coaches need to learn and develop - a lack of which was one of the reasons that cost Matt O'Connor his job at Leinster and really should have long ago cost JvG his job at Munster.

The management of that squad isn't just about managing fitness, having players peak at the right times and all of that, but also the financial and public side of the squad.

Players missing for international duty is a known known and yet PRL clubs are in denial and fightback regarding it all the time. They don't seem to have properly embraced the reality of it and planned for it accordingly. That planning should reflect in their wages (Farrell and Itoje each earn over £1M a year when you factor in England payments - over payment of at least £250k, if not more), but also in the preparation of the rest of the squad. The latter part does I'm sure happen, but when the organisations themselves are constantly fighting back against the very concept, you'd wonder how much, and how well, it is embraced.


The rugby version of the "flagship entertainment" competition was absolutely already in place and thriving, before it was completely fucking murdered by incompetent arseholes! It was the Heineken European Cup. There is no question that it was the single biggest factor in the explosive growth in popularity of rugby in Ireland and maybe not to the same extent, but it was successful in growing the club game in the UK and France as well.

It has gone from THE prestige tournament to the equivalent of the Carabao Cup, something that most clubs feel is a nuisance where fixtures must be fulfilled, but chuck out a mixture of 2nd string and youngster to do so! By far the biggest own goal in the sports history (I guess Super Rugby might have a thing or two to argue that point).

This specific case is an unusual one. I spend a lot of time on Jersey and my understanding had been the club’s rise had been essentially as a plaything of some of the offshore millionaires there, making them very stable. That hasn’t proved the case, obviously, which raises the question of how viable a pro sports team was ever going to be without financial support on an island of 110,000 people. Their attendances were actually higher in lower leagues when there were still islanders in their side, and I’ve often struggled to get locals to go to games because they cba without a connection.

This is a vital point and one that I am surprised, even with the sheer size of the sport, hasn't damaged the EPL yet. Rugby is never going to have the overseas fans flying in to mask over the alienation of local fans that football has though and its local businesses, not multi-nationals that rugby clubs need to be courting.

How many schoolboys attend EPL games these days? They have mortgaged their future fanbase for a bunch of fickle corporate and overseas fans that will not stay loyal should any bump in the road appear. Rugby cannot afford to alienate its local populations in the same way. PRL really should bring in something akin to the JIFF system that France uses.

[sockwithaticket]

I don't disagree that an expectation of seeing the best players week in week out is stupid and that over-paying international players is detrimental to squad depth and strength.

The problem is popularity of the sport and I've got no fucking clue how you get people to actually like rugby.

PRL really should bring in something akin to the JIFF system that France uses.

Not sure about that. The idea that we're awash with foreign players and that's an issue is ages out of date. The RFU have given financial bonuses to teams who average 16 EQP in their matchday squads for several seasons and it certainly feels like we've never had so many young kids coming through from academies for clubs.

Even in our problem positions like tighthead or hooker, we don't lack qualified options, we lack quality ones. We have 10+ tightheads getting regular game time for their club and yet the best of them remain geriatric Cole and way off his peak Sinckler

[PornDog]

The problem is popularity of the sport and I've got no fucking clue how you get people to actually like rugby.

Not actively destroying our best and most high profile competitions would be a good start! Honestly though I don't know if there's any way back for the European Cup.

Point taken on the 16EQP players in a squad, but that's still 30% furreners. Bringing it down to 4 or 5 players, with punishments rather than incentives (like JIFF) would be better.
More to the specific point though, is to incentivise local players, not just English ones (though that in itself SHOULD be its own incentive).

[Simian]

The NBA and NFL model works because their week in week games sit at the top of the pile (are the highest level they play at) and because the tier down from the pros involves a huge number of players, is already ultra ‘professional’ and an incredibly high standard. That will never be the case with rugby. So, like porndog says, the pro game needs to develop players because it’s very rare that players arrive ready to play at that level, necessitating rotation.

Fucking up the European competition has just stripped away what was the pinnacle of the ‘club’ game.

[sockwithaticket]

The problem is popularity of the sport and I've got no fucking clue how you get people to actually like rugby.

Not actively destroying our best and most high profile competitions would be a good start! Honestly though I don't know if there's any way back for the European Cup.

Point taken on the 16EQP players in a squad, but that's still 30% furreners. Bringing it down to 4 or 5 players, with punishments rather than incentives (like JIFF) would be better.
More to the specific point though, is to incentivise local players, not just English ones (though that in itself SHOULD be its own incentive).

It's potentially 30% non-EQPs. For most teams it's a much smarter decision to look to advance players from the Championship and academy than sign the kind of middling journeymen who used to plague the league. The genuine top class international talent is welcome, but mostly out of budget. It's maybe something we have to look at with the collapse of three teams, but we still don't have a paucity of available English talent. A for local, there are very few sides that don't have a strong core of academy graduates in their side, so I'm not sure what the issue is there.

While the last couple of years with the round of 16 and two massive pools is definitely destructive bollocks, along with the inclusion of the Saffas, I don't buy the idea that the European tournament was drastically different in the years beforehand than during it's alledged peak and it wasn't a driver of growth in England in the same way you say it was for Ireland.

For as long as I can remember Premiership interest in Europe has been tangential. For better or worse it's an incredibly competitive league and Europe was often an obstacle to sides being able to make the playoffs or a potential drain on resources that could see a team enter the relegation bun fight. Getting somewhere in Europe for all but one or two sides was always a nice to have and nothing more.

As time goes on I'm increasingly of the opinion that we've fucked pro rugby in England. Despite our population it is a niche sport and a region model with 4 or 5 sides participating in a British and Irish league would probably suit the finances better, but it's too late for that.

[Slick]

You’re right - most rugby fans here just watch the 6N. I’m the same with golf, I watch the majors and the Ryder Cup and switch off to it otherwise. There isn’t a format change that would alter that, that’s just the way it is.

While I take the point in the first paragraph as to ceiling, I mean, theoretically we're already preaching to the converted here when we're talking about drawing in rugby fans...l'll put my cards here on the table by saying - as a fellow converted - there is nothing that makes me want to watch Prem rugby.

On the other side of things, look how the NFL draws people into the game who've got no business ever giving a damn about American football, solely based on the sheer entertainment value the league just naturally provides. I've seen this stateside too with the EPL, which brings in far greater viewer numbers than American soccer to this day; the product is undeniable. There needs to be a rugby version of that, and not just a couple weeks every year or every 4 years. That's step A1 of any serious growth plan.

I think the vast majority of rugby people would rather go down to their local club on a Saturday than go and watch a pro game. I’m certainly one.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Not actively destroying our best and most high profile competitions would be a good start!

You invited the Safes, live with it

[Simian]

You’re right - most rugby fans here just watch the 6N. I’m the same with golf, I watch the majors and the Ryder Cup and switch off to it otherwise. There isn’t a format change that would alter that, that’s just the way it is.

While I take the point in the first paragraph as to ceiling, I mean, theoretically we're already preaching to the converted here when we're talking about drawing in rugby fans...l'll put my cards here on the table by saying - as a fellow converted - there is nothing that makes me want to watch Prem rugby.

On the other side of things, look how the NFL draws people into the game who've got no business ever giving a damn about American football, solely based on the sheer entertainment value the league just naturally provides. I've seen this stateside too with the EPL, which brings in far greater viewer numbers than American soccer to this day; the product is undeniable. There needs to be a rugby version of that, and not just a couple weeks every year or every 4 years. That's step A1 of any serious growth plan.

I think the vast majority of rugby people would rather go down to their local club on a Saturday than go and watch a pro game. I’m certainly one.

And yet they don’t

As I saw it expressed on another forum it’s like when people swear they watch a second 6Ns when there is one already

[Slick]

While I take the point in the first paragraph as to ceiling, I mean, theoretically we're already preaching to the converted here when we're talking about drawing in rugby fans...l'll put my cards here on the table by saying - as a fellow converted - there is nothing that makes me want to watch Prem rugby.

On the other side of things, look how the NFL draws people into the game who've got no business ever giving a damn about American football, solely based on the sheer entertainment value the league just naturally provides. I've seen this stateside too with the EPL, which brings in far greater viewer numbers than American soccer to this day; the product is undeniable. There needs to be a rugby version of that, and not just a couple weeks every year or every 4 years. That's step A1 of any serious growth plan.

I think the vast majority of rugby people would rather go down to their local club on a Saturday than go and watch a pro game. I’m certainly one.

And yet they don’t

As I saw it expressed on another forum it’s like when people swear they watch a second 6Ns when there is one already

What? All the clubs I watch at different levels in England and Scotland have a very decent turnout on a Saturday afternoons

[Simian]

I posted more elsewhere but I really don’t think it is helpful for folk to pint to pro D2 as a model for a second a fully pro second tier comp. There are loads of reasons for this, bit (imo) is the owners/investors getting on board signing up to spending restrictions that force them to spend within their means. In the type of model people say would help jersey, jersey would have been the poster boys for being unsustainable.

[Simian]

I think the vast majority of rugby people would rather go down to their local club on a Saturday than go and watch a pro game. I’m certainly one.

And yet they don’t

As I saw it expressed on another forum it’s like when people swear they watch a second 6Ns when there is one already

What? All the clubs I watch at different levels in England and Scotland have a very decent turnout on a Saturday afternoons

Enough to sustain pro rugby? I find that very very hard to believe.

Do you think it’s the type of turnout that wilier it face if they pay for players? Or the type of attendance broadcasters will oay to out on tv?

This is why pro d2 works. It’s why (at least in Europe) it is not a model that we can make work

[Slick]

And yet they don’t

As I saw it expressed on another forum it’s like when people swear they watch a second 6Ns when there is one already

What? All the clubs I watch at different levels in England and Scotland have a very decent turnout on a Saturday afternoons

Enough to sustain pro rugby? I find that very very hard to believe.

Do you think it’s the type of turnout that wilier it face if they pay for players? Or the type of attendance broadcasters will oay to out on tv?

This is why pro d2 works. It’s why (at least in Europe) it is not a model that we can make work

I think we are talking at cross purposes here. I’m talking about lots of people preferring to go down to their local “grass roots” amateur clubs on a Saturday and that’s a reason pro rugby won’t work

[Simian]

In the context of the US versus other sports model, I works at UM and their college football team sell out a 100K+ capacity stadium for pretty much every game. Like, my long term contract didn’t run for long enough for it ti be worth me getting on the list.

For rugby and jersey, how the fuck do you think paying what they did was sustainable without TV money? And you won’t get tv money to broadcast empty Stadia

[Simian]

What? All the clubs I watch at different levels in England and Scotland have a very decent turnout on a Saturday afternoons

Enough to sustain pro rugby? I find that very very hard to believe.

Do you think it’s the type of turnout that wilier it face if they pay for players? Or the type of attendance broadcasters will oay to out on tv?

This is why pro d2 works. It’s why (at least in Europe) it is not a model that we can make work

I think we are talking at cross purposes here. I’m talking about lots of people preferring to go down to their local “grass roots” amateur clubs on a Saturday and that’s a reason pro rugby won’t work

I don’t think we’re taking past each other at all. If people are more invested in the game locally than at pro level, that’s lovely. But it’s not a model that has worked at the pro level, and I’d say it demonstrably doesn’t work at a pro level, so I do t quote get your point?

[Slick]

Enough to sustain pro rugby? I find that very very hard to believe.

Do you think it’s the type of turnout that wilier it face if they pay for players? Or the type of attendance broadcasters will oay to out on tv?

This is why pro d2 works. It’s why (at least in Europe) it is not a model that we can make work

I think we are talking at cross purposes here. I’m talking about lots of people preferring to go down to their local “grass roots” amateur clubs on a Saturday and that’s a reason pro rugby won’t work

I don’t think we’re taking past each other at all. If people are more invested in the game locally than at pro level, that’s lovely. But it’s not a model that has worked at the pro level, and I’d say it demonstrably doesn’t work at a pro level, so I do t quote get your point?

OK mate, May well be me as I’m tired, bit I’m completely baffled by this conversation

[Simian]

I think we are talking at cross purposes here. I’m talking about lots of people preferring to go down to their local “grass roots” amateur clubs on a Saturday and that’s a reason pro rugby won’t work

I don’t think we’re taking past each other at all. If people are more invested in the game locally than at pro level, that’s lovely. But it’s not a model that has worked at the pro level, and I’d say it demonstrably doesn’t work at a pro level, so I do t quote get your point?

OK mate, May well be me as I’m tired, bit I’m completely baffled by this conversation

me too. I'm particularly puzzled by (what I've understood) your argument that we could build a progame on club support? I was playing at that level pre 'big change' and my take would be big 'no' (I'd have had to go to less than 10% my salary in my job).

to be viable, the game needed to ditch the idea of building on club support. took them a while, but as soon as SRU stopped focusing on club support, we've done ok, no?

[Simian]

don't get me wrong, that's shit.

[Dogbert]

I think we are talking at cross purposes here. I’m talking about lots of people preferring to go down to their local “grass roots” amateur clubs on a Saturday and that’s a reason pro rugby won’t work

I don’t think we’re taking past each other at all. If people are more invested in the game locally than at pro level, that’s lovely. But it’s not a model that has worked at the pro level, and I’d say it demonstrably doesn’t work at a pro level, so I do t quote get your point?

OK mate, May well be me as I’m tired, bit I’m completely baffled by this conversation

The trouble is particularly in Scotland with only 2 pro teams, if you don't have pro Teams you don't have International Rugby.

And that would be a shame, the game has moved on from the amateur days , and it will never go back

Rugby has to compete with so many other sports / Pastimes these days , you need a pinnacle of the sport to help attract new blood , rather than restricting it to the current usual suspects

[Slick]

I don’t think we’re taking past each other at all. If people are more invested in the game locally than at pro level, that’s lovely. But it’s not a model that has worked at the pro level, and I’d say it demonstrably doesn’t work at a pro level, so I do t quote get your point?

OK mate, May well be me as I’m tired, bit I’m completely baffled by this conversation

me too. I'm particularly puzzled by (what I've understood) your argument that we could build a progame on club support? I was playing at that level pre 'big change' and my take would be big 'no' (I'd have had to go to less than 10% my salary in my job).

to be viable, the game needed to ditch the idea of building on club support. took them a while, but as soon as SRU stopped focusing on club support, we've done ok, no?

My original post was in reply to Paddington and Fonz where they were talking about support for pro teams bottoming out. I was agreeing saying that most folk would rather go and watch their local grass roots team on a Saturday than go and watch a pro team.

[Hugo]

Re. The challenges rugby faces being financially viable, you just can't discount the fact that rugby union was an amateur sport for over 100 years and professionalism goes against the sports grain.

The ethos of the sport is 19th century gentleman amateur, rugby is not a made for TV entertainment product like the NFL.

[PornDog]

As time goes on I'm increasingly of the opinion that we've fucked pro rugby in England. Despite our population it is a niche sport and a region model with 4 or 5 sides participating in a British and Irish league would probably suit the finances better, but it's too late for that.

I think ultimately this is where we will end up, though I'd imagine it would be more than 4 or 5. Wont be on the cards with the Spiv owners though, there is zero trust there after their European coup and then running it and their own teams into the ground. It would also mean abandoning the Italians (not cool) and the Saffas (meh, but they've been good partners when we most needed them).

Not actively destroying our best and most high profile competitions would be a good start!

You invited the Safes, live with it

That may be the final nail in the coffin, but it was brain dead and on life support for a long time before hand.

[Paddington Bear]

Re. The challenges rugby faces being financially viable, you just can't discount the fact that rugby union was an amateur sport for over 100 years and professionalism goes against the sports grain.

The ethos of the sport is 19th century gentleman amateur, rugby is not a made for TV entertainment product like the NFL.

The bigger point on this is that football hasn’t been amateur and isn’t going anywhere. Rugby’s a very entertaining sport, it is just that its ethos is designed around the social occasion that is ‘international day’, to an extent that would still be recognisable to my Grandad and his contemporaries who’d travel to Twickenham a couple of times a year back in the day. Football’s ethos is much more based around the league calendar, for some the rhythm of the cup run etc. Football is a club based every week style sport in this country, rugby is an every so often occasion.

How many teams across the British Isles could get a gate of 5,000 regularly before professionalism? Leicester?

[Simian]

OK mate, May well be me as I’m tired, bit I’m completely baffled by this conversation

me too. I'm particularly puzzled by (what I've understood) your argument that we could build a progame on club support? I was playing at that level pre 'big change' and my take would be big 'no' (I'd have had to go to less than 10% my salary in my job).

to be viable, the game needed to ditch the idea of building on club support. took them a while, but as soon as SRU stopped focusing on club support, we've done ok, no?

My original post was in reply to Paddington and Fonz where they were talking about support for pro teams bottoming out. I was agreeing saying that most folk would rather go and watch their local grass roots team on a Saturday than go and watch a pro team.

go for it. I get the appeal. but you must accept it's barely sustainable at that level.

who do you watch?

[Simian]

Re. The challenges rugby faces being financially viable, you just can't discount the fact that rugby union was an amateur sport for over 100 years and professionalism goes against the sports grain.

The ethos of the sport is 19th century gentleman amateur, rugby is not a made for TV entertainment product like the NFL.

The bigger point on this is that football hasn’t been amateur and isn’t going anywhere. Rugby’s a very entertaining sport, it is just that its ethos is designed around the social occasion that is ‘international day’, to an extent that would still be recognisable to my Grandad and his contemporaries who’d travel to Twickenham a couple of times a year back in the day. Football’s ethos is much more based around the league calendar, for some the rhythm of the cup run etc. Football is a club based every week style sport in this country, rugby is an every so often occasion.

How many teams across the British Isles could get a gate of 5,000 regularly before professionalism? Leicester?

I would contest the point that 'rugby's a very entertains sport"

all sports have nuances in the laws. rugby is unique in those laws being central to watching the game

we have a sport where the nuance in the laws is central and you need to know them for the game to make sense

edit: this is why folk I know watching rugby fir the first time love NRL

[Margin__Walker]

me too. I'm particularly puzzled by (what I've understood) your argument that we could build a progame on club support? I was playing at that level pre 'big change' and my take would be big 'no' (I'd have had to go to less than 10% my salary in my job).

to be viable, the game needed to ditch the idea of building on club support. took them a while, but as soon as SRU stopped focusing on club support, we've done ok, no?

My original post was in reply to Paddington and Fonz where they were talking about support for pro teams bottoming out. I was agreeing saying that most folk would rather go and watch their local grass roots team on a Saturday than go and watch a pro team.

go for it. I get the appeal. but you must accept it's barely sustainable at that level.

who do you watch?

Slick's talking about preferring to watch local amateur rugby. Which is sustainable.

He's not pitching solutions for pro rugby.

[Simian]

My original post was in reply to Paddington and Fonz where they were talking about support for pro teams bottoming out. I was agreeing saying that most folk would rather go and watch their local grass roots team on a Saturday than go and watch a pro team.

go for it. I get the appeal. but you must accept it's barely sustainable at that level.

who do you watch?

Slick's talking about preferring to watch local amateur rugby. Which is sustainable.

He's not pitching solutions for pro rugby.

fine. it was barely sustainable in the same country slick' from when it was an amateur game. it was propped up by FPs. The idea it was sustainable is kinda hilarious.

[Simian]

if you think you can grow a sport when it's basically a charity, good luck

[Paddington Bear]

Re. The challenges rugby faces being financially viable, you just can't discount the fact that rugby union was an amateur sport for over 100 years and professionalism goes against the sports grain.

The ethos of the sport is 19th century gentleman amateur, rugby is not a made for TV entertainment product like the NFL.

The bigger point on this is that football hasn’t been amateur and isn’t going anywhere. Rugby’s a very entertaining sport, it is just that its ethos is designed around the social occasion that is ‘international day’, to an extent that would still be recognisable to my Grandad and his contemporaries who’d travel to Twickenham a couple of times a year back in the day. Football’s ethos is much more based around the league calendar, for some the rhythm of the cup run etc. Football is a club based every week style sport in this country, rugby is an every so often occasion.

How many teams across the British Isles could get a gate of 5,000 regularly before professionalism? Leicester?

I would contest the point that 'rugby's a very entertains sport"

all sports have nuances in the laws. rugby is unique in those laws being central to watching the game

we have a sport where the nuance in the laws is central and you need to know them for the game to make sense

edit: this is why folk I know watching rugby fir the first time love NRL

To enjoy the sport in the ‘it’s on in the pub’ sense, you need to know very little about the laws. Indeed half an hour in any stand in the country will reveal it’s perfectly possible to invest a lot of time into the sport without understanding the laws

[Simian]

The bigger point on this is that football hasn’t been amateur and isn’t going anywhere. Rugby’s a very entertaining sport, it is just that its ethos is designed around the social occasion that is ‘international day’, to an extent that would still be recognisable to my Grandad and his contemporaries who’d travel to Twickenham a couple of times a year back in the day. Football’s ethos is much more based around the league calendar, for some the rhythm of the cup run etc. Football is a club based every week style sport in this country, rugby is an every so often occasion.

How many teams across the British Isles could get a gate of 5,000 regularly before professionalism? Leicester?

I would contest the point that 'rugby's a very entertains sport"

all sports have nuances in the laws. rugby is unique in those laws being central to watching the game

we have a sport where the nuance in the laws is central and you need to know them for the game to make sense

edit: this is why folk I know watching rugby fir the first time love NRL

To enjoy the sport in the ‘it’s on in the pub’ sense, you need to know very little about the laws. Indeed half an hour in any stand in the country will reveal it’s perfectly possible to invest a lot of time into the sport without understanding the laws

really? I find watching with folk who're newbies find the breakdown utterly baffling!

[Slick]

go for it. I get the appeal. but you must accept it's barely sustainable at that level.

who do you watch?

Slick's talking about preferring to watch local amateur rugby. Which is sustainable.

He's not pitching solutions for pro rugby.

fine. it was barely sustainable in the same country slick' from when it was an amateur game. it was propped up by FPs. The idea it was sustainable is kinda hilarious.

Amateur rugby was perfectly sustainable, it sustained itself for 100 years. Most clubs had some kind of sugar daddy that pumped in a few quid when needed but clubs ran for decades on subs, bar receipts, local sponsors and entry tickets. Even now amateur clubs are generally getting along OK despite player numbers plummeting.

Re your other question, the clubs I’m currently involved with - ie, play subs to, are Amersham & Chiltern, Beaconsfield, Musselburgh and Edinburgh Accies

[Slick]

if you think you can grow a sport when it's basically a charity, good luck

I have zero interest in growing the game, zero. Everything I hate about modern rugby comes from trying to grow the game

[Slick]

My original post was in reply to Paddington and Fonz where they were talking about support for pro teams bottoming out. I was agreeing saying that most folk would rather go and watch their local grass roots team on a Saturday than go and watch a pro team.

go for it. I get the appeal. but you must accept it's barely sustainable at that level.

who do you watch?

Slick's talking about preferring to watch local amateur rugby. Which is sustainable.

He's not pitching solutions for pro rugby.

Thanks, I thought I was going fucking nuts for a while there

[Simian]

if you think you can grow a sport when it's basically a charity, good luck

I have zero interest in growing the game, zero. Everything I hate about modern rugby comes from trying to grow the game

how strange. cos everything you comment on here wouldn't exist if you had your way, no? we'd be in a play off with Romania