SA Rugby investigate poor gate takings (Tri-Nations this time)

ScrubsfanChris

This was discussed alot during the Lions tour (poor attendances), well it truns out that South Africa have no one to blame but themselves this time around:

Link:
http://www.rugbyrugby.com/news/story_22709132015.php

Don't know what you might think, but I would go to any Irish game given the chance, never mind one against Aus or NZ.

[Jackass]

Yeah....I mean, what more do the fans want? If winning the world cup, having a once in every 12 year tour and competing in a tri nations series isn't going to get fans out, then there are serious feckin problems going on!

anonymous_joe

Massive stadiums + small population...?

Stev_o

They also want to rob Englands 2015 bid and bribe everyone else to get them to do it complete and other bullsh1t. :rolleyes:

T-Maxx

Stev_o wrote: »

They also want to rob Englands 2015 bid and bribe everyone else to get them to do it complete and other bullsh1t. :rolleyes:

How do you "rob" someone's WC bid?

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Massive stadiums + small population...?

49million "small" ?

thomond2006

I think the problem stems from the fact that South Africa is a poor country.

Many Afrikaners (spelling ) who are wealthy have emigrated.

A ticket for a Lions test match equated to tickets for all Confederations Cup group games. The ticket prices are extortinate to say the least.

Maybe we should get Amabokke's view on this....

Amabokke

South Africa wouldn't be a poor country by a long mile, the politicians are merely wastefull with the revenue so that the poorer gets poorer and they getting richer.

While R425 is far less for a boks test match than the cost of a ticket for Ireland test EUR90 (davin stands during 6N) it is still way too high for the average person to fork it out. For R100 you can buy beer, boerewors, biltong and make salad and invite 5 friends and you can have the time of your life at home while watching the match.

The wealth of the country has been shifted mostly to the blacks because of "affirmative action" etc. and although some of them have an interest in rugby the majority would be more into soccer.

Thomond are partly right in that the majority wealthy whites have immigrated. Therefore you will get good turnouts in Ireland, Australia, NZ, etc. from bok supporters.

Stev_o wrote: »

They also want to rob Englands 2015 bid and bribe everyone else to get them to do it complete and other bullsh1t. :rolleyes:

How does one steal a WC bid? :rolleyes: A WC in SA will and can be hosted ten times better than in rainy UK.

anonymous_joe

T-Maxx wrote: »

49million "small" ?

And how many of those 49 million are Afrikaaner? It's almost all Afrikaaners who play rugby, then the other whites, then the so-called colours. Black people prefer football to rugby.

So you've massive stadiums in areas with low populations of rugby fans.

Amabokke

anonymous_joe wrote: »

And how many of those 49 million are Afrikaaner? It's almost all Afrikaaners who play rugby, then the other whites, then the so-called colours. Black people prefer football to rugby.

So you've massive stadiums in areas with low populations of rugby fans.

While the majority of senior clubs and provincials are whites it is the exact opposite for the juniors. At the Coco-Cola Cravenweek the majority of players are coloured or black.

anonymous_joe

Amabokke wrote: »

While the majority of senior clubs and provincials are whites it is the exact opposite for the juniors. At the Coco-Cola Cravenweek the majority of players are coloured or black.

Oh really? Cool. Didn't know that.

Amabokke

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Oh really? Cool. Didn't know that.

When I was playing in school blacks/ coloureds were not allowed in same schools or to play so it's only filterting through the system now for these kids to play and will take awhile before it reach club/provincial level to see more blacks/coloureds.

anonymous_joe

Amabokke wrote: »

When I was playing in school blacks/ coloureds were not allowed in same schools or to play so it's only filterting through the system now for these kids to play and will take awhile before it reach club/provincial level to see more blacks/coloureds.

It's a shame about the delay, because until then there'll be substandard players thrown in for the sake of it, which does no-one any favours.

yimrsg

I think the fans have just voted with their pocket after the problems with attendances for the lion's tour caused by outlandish pricing and the stark contrast shown to the S.A. fans during the confederation's cup where fans were allowed in free to some matches if the stadium wasnt full. If you have 3 very large events (plus a football world cup to come) running in a short time span then obviously some of them will lose out.

During one of the matches in the confed cup the commentator was talking about saving schemes for match tickets over 12/18 months for the football world cup which were hugely popular.

Stev_o

T-Maxx wrote: »

How do you "rob" someone's WC bid?

You bribe the rest of the nations to vote for them by providing matches or in the case of France you give two nations hosting rights on their biggest game for the RWC.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/rugby_union/article6689832.ece

Amabokke

Stev_o wrote: »

You bribe the rest of the nations to vote for them by providing matches or in the case of France you give two nations hosting rights on their biggest game for the RWC.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/rugby_union/article6689832.ece

More Stephen Jones waffle. There's no evidence in that. Oh, and the hosting country aren't providing the matches. SA haven't played France, Italy or Ireland in a few years in Europe.

More money will be generated for Europe and english rugby not necessary rugby in general. It will be stupid to give it to England as with the current exodus of players in SH playing in the north this will just encourage more players if more money is avaible after WC.

Stev_o

Amabokke wrote: »

More Stephen Jones waffle. There's no evidence in that. Oh, and the hosting country aren't providing the matches. SA haven't played France, Italy or Ireland in a few years in Europe.

More money will be generated for Europe and english rugby not necessary rugby in general. It will be stupid to give it to England as with the current exodus of players in SH playing in the north this will just encourage more players if more money is avaible after WC.

So let's give it to a country that could not full one single stadium during ANY of the Lions warm up games despite the big names involved in the Lions? Is this going to suddenly change when fecking Japan play Canada there and the place is full?

RFU's plan is the step in the right direction for where rugby should be going. Rugby especially the RWC needs to be on a grand scale, at the moment SA can't offer that.

chupacabra

I think there are around 5 million White South Africans left in the country at the moment, with a constant stream leaving. This was bound to happen eventually when the economy started to "stabilize" read: Black Economic Empowerment and Affirmative action. For one i am happy that there are still more Whites than Blacks at the games, not a racist thing at all. Its those DAMN vuvuzelas. You know for a fact once the majority of the rugby support becomes black/colored the vuvuzela will come with them, and effectively ruin the game. In my opinion of course.

2040

chupacabra wrote: »

I think there are around 5 million White South Africans left in the country at the moment, with a constant stream leaving. This was bound to happen eventually when the economy started to "stabilize" read: Black Economic Empowerment and Affirmative action. For one i am happy that there are still more Whites than Blacks at the games, not a racist thing at all. Its those DAMN vuvuzelas. You know for a fact once the majority of the rugby support becomes black/colored the vuvuzela will come with them, and effectively ruin the game. In my opinion of course.

Those things are the devil's instrument. I can't think of a more annoying noise. The confederations cup was hard to watch because of them.

Celtic nations hosting the world cup ftw btw.

Amabokke

Stev_o wrote: »

So let's give it to a country that could not full one single stadium during ANY of the Lions warm up games despite the big names involved in the Lions? Is this going to suddenly change when fecking Japan play Canada there and the place is full?

RFU's plan is the step in the right direction for where rugby should be going. Rugby especially the RWC needs to be on a grand scale, at the moment SA can't offer that.

The poor attendance during Lions is to blame on SA rugby for over charged prices (IRB could not control this). The WC however is controlled by the IRB including ticket prices.

And where should rugby be going and developing? In Europe? England?

SA can in fact afford to host it with 5 major rugby stadiums where England only have 1 big stadium in Twickenham.

If IRB is making the right decisions how come NZ got the 2011? If rugby is to grow should Japan not be better than NZ, SA or England?

anonymous_joe

Amabokke wrote: »

The poor attendance during Lions is to blame on SA rugby for over charged prices (IRB could not control this). The WC however is controlled by the IRB including ticket prices.

And where should rugby be going and developing? In Europe? England?

SA can in fact afford to host it with 5 major rugby stadiums where England only have 1 big stadium in Twickenham.

If IRB is making the right decisions how come NZ got the 2011? If rugby is to grow should Japan not be better than NZ, SA or England?

Wembley, Old Trafford, Anfield (in fact the new replacement if it gets built), Emirates, Stamford Bridge, St James Park, etc. The list goes on.

Personally, I reckon the rugby WC should go to Japan, then Italy, then a Celtic bid. If you had Scotland providing Murrayfield and maybe Hamden Park and Celtic Park/Ibrox, the Millenium Stadium, Landsdowne and Croke Park you'd have 6 stadiums as good as any in the world.

Amabokke

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Wembley, Old Trafford, Anfield (in fact the new replacement if it gets built), Emirates, Stamford Bridge, St James Park, etc. The list goes on.

I didn't think they'd use the soccer stadiums for the WC when Championship leagues might be on at same time. If they do fair play as capacities are big.

I also saw somewhere IRB don't plan to make a profit out of the 2011 WC so they are not moving in the right direction.

If you had Scotland providing Murrayfield and maybe Hamden Park and Celtic Park/Ibrox, the Millenium Stadium, Landsdowne and Croke Park you'd have 6 stadiums as good as any in the world.

You do know Scotland withdraw their bid because could not reach an agreement with Ireland, England and Wales. Ireland also withdraw because of money issues.

Four-Percent

chupacabra wrote: »

I think there are around 5 million White South Africans left in the country at the moment, with a constant stream leaving. This was bound to happen eventually when the economy started to "stabilize" read: Black Economic Empowerment and Affirmative action. For one i am happy that there are still more Whites than Blacks at the games, not a racist thing at all. Its those DAMN vuvuzelas. You know for a fact once the majority of the rugby support becomes black/colored the vuvuzela will come with them, and effectively ruin the game. In my opinion of course.

I Fúcking hate those things!

shanagarry

The fact is that there is a recession on and people are feeling the pinch. It has come a bit later here, so we're right in the throes of it now. And it's not just about the price of tickets (which are quite a bit of money by SA standards) you also have to think about the geography and travelling costs. Bloem isn't the heart of rugby support, so if you've to travel from Pretoria, for example, you're looking at substantial petrol costs too.

I imagine the other game will be better attended. Although it seems full today. The other issue is ticket distribution. I went online to get tickets for the Aus game a few weeks ago and couldn't get anyway, but a few days ago there was a post on the Western Province site that there were tickets available. It was the same for the Lions - the Cape Town games were apparently sold out by February, I could only get terrace tickets, and then shortly before the games they released tons of stand tickets, way too late, and never publicised it.

siltirocker

2040 wrote: »

Those things are the devil's instrument. I can't think of a more annoying noise. The confederations cup was hard to watch because of them.

Wasn't it just!:eek:

ibuprofen

Stev_o wrote: »

So let's give it to a country that could not full one single stadium during ANY of the Lions warm up games despite the big names involved in the Lions? Is this going to suddenly change when fecking Japan play Canada there and the place is full?

RFU's plan is the step in the right direction for where rugby should be going. Rugby especially the RWC needs to be on a grand scale, at the moment SA can't offer that.

I think the average attendance for lions games was only 27,800. I thought the lions team supporters could have filled at least that much themselves....

Is it really fair to blame the SA's when there were 4 countries competing against them.....maybe it's just the concept itself...

themont85

ibuprofen wrote: »

I think the average attendance for lions games was only 27,800. I thought the lions team supporters could have filled at least that much themselves....

Is it really fair to blame the SA's when there were 4 countries competing against them.....maybe it's just the concept itself...

Yes when they could fill the 1997 test games at least. And better numbers at the provincial games too.

NZ and Australia Lions games previousely had no problems in filling.

The concept is fine. It always has been. It is testament to the concept when you have tens of thousands travelling to the SH every 4 years to support the Lions when for the whole 4 years previous to that they are 'enemies'on the pitch. It is a lot easier to get to a game in your back yard and SA Rugby has a serious problem. Not filling the tri nations game underlines that again. SA rugby may be on top[ of the world, but for how long with the poor attendences sending a poor message to the rest of the world.

No way should they host in 2015. 1) Where are the supporters going to come from? 2007 in France was a success because the local populas embraced the competition. 2) Its in NZ in 2011, twice in a row in the SH ain't fair. 3) The English know how to host an event. They have been doing it for years, centuaries even with their empire, they deserve a WC ahead of SA who have proven themselves unfit to organise the next best thing to a WC.

twinytwo

Amabokke wrote: »

South Africa wouldn't be a poor country by a long mile, the politicians are merely wastefull with the revenue so that the poorer gets poorer and they getting richer.

While R425 is far less for a boks test match than the cost of a ticket for Ireland test EUR90 (davin stands during 6N) it is still way too high for the average person to fork it out. For R100 you can buy beer, boerewors, biltong and make salad and invite 5 friends and you can have the time of your life at home while watching the match.

The wealth of the country has been shifted mostly to the blacks because of "affirmative action" etc. and although some of them have an interest in rugby the majority would be more into soccer.

Thomond are partly right in that the majority wealthy whites have immigrated. Therefore you will get good turnouts in Ireland, Australia, NZ, etc. from bok supporters.



How does one steal a WC bid? :rolleyes: A WC in SA will and can be hosted ten times better than in rainy UK.

Just like here so....

If England are serious about hosting the Wc they would have to co-host with someone ie wales/ireland

g5fd6ow0hseima

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Massive stadiums + small population...?

Im with you on that one. Perhaps its something to do with the small white population, its only roughly 4 million, and rugby, like cricket, is still very much a white mans game in South Africa. But then again, thats roughly the population of Ireland, and the stadiums hosting the tri-nations fixtures are all smaller than Croker, now im confused...

danthefan

Elizabeth Odd Interrogator wrote: »

Im with you on that one. Perhaps its something to do with the small white population, its only roughly 4 million, and rugby, like cricket, is still very much a white mans game in South Africa. But then again, thats roughly the population of Ireland, and the stadiums hosting the tri-nations fixtures are all smaller than Croker, now im confused...

It's much bigger than Ireland, people mightn't be willing to travel very large distances for games.

OldJay

themont85 wrote: »

NZ and Australia Lions games previousely had no problems in filling

With Lions supporters.
2003 was unprecedented with easily half the stadium full of Lions supporters at Lang Park for the first test.

OldJay

twinytwo wrote: »

Just like here so....

If England are serious about hosting the Wc they would have to co-host with someone ie wales/ireland

I disagree.
They're more than capable of running it on their own. They have the money, the stadia, the media clout and also the resources (staff and know-how) to do this.

shanagarry

danthefan wrote: »

It's much bigger than Ireland, people mightn't be willing to travel very large distances for games.

Exactly. Also, public transport is pretty much non-existent so you would have to drive (very long distances and lots of petrol) or fly (awkward to Bloem and flights are expensive).

anonymous_joe

Justind wrote: »

I disagree.
They're more than capable of running it on their own. They have the money, the stadia, the media clout and also the resources (staff and know-how) to do this.

England are probably the best country (along with France) to host a tournament. Great stadia, will earn a packet, etc.

But if you want to develop the game, Italy and then Japan strike me as the next best places to go. Also, a Celtic World Cup would be great, but would require a lot less fúck-wittery on the parts of the various RFU's as Amabokke previously alluded to.

Stev_o

anonymous_joe wrote: »

England are probably the best country (along with France) to host a tournament. Great stadia, will earn a packet, etc.

But if you want to develop the game, Italy and then Japan strike me as the next best places to go. Also, a Celtic World Cup would be great, but would require a lot less fúck-wittery on the parts of the various RFU's as Amabokke previously alluded to.

Italy aren't guaranteed to fill there grounds if they got hosting rights. Japan have 2019, you could be picky and say they should get 2015 but at the end of the day they are still hosting a major tournament and they will sell it out no bother.

Celtic World Cup would be a nightmare not only for the politics but for teams having to constantly travel in and out of 3 very different countries.

If your going to host a RWC it should just be your country alone not yourself and 2 or 3 other competing nations.

Amabokke

I've changed my mind.

Altough SA will be more than capable of hosting a great WC the stadiums just won't be filled. So therefore England is not a bad choice as at least they could fill it.

jumpguy

High ticket prices and interest in other sports is the cause imo. SA is being hit particularly hard by the recession. Also, South Africa is a developed country, but it still has a huge amount of poverty. Around 1/4 of the population has AIDS. Don't be fooled, it's still Africa just with less corrupt politicians and arid soil.

ScrubsfanChris

jumpguy wrote: »

High ticket prices and interest in other sports is the cause imo. SA is being hit particularly hard by the recession. Also, South Africa is a developed country, but it still has a huge amount of poverty. Around 1/4 of the population has AIDS. Don't be fooled, it's still Africa just with less corrupt politicians and arid soil.

Good point, the price of tickets was what the British media claimed to be the source of the poor turnout.

ScrubsfanChris

Update: http://www.rugbyrugby.com/news/story_27709013403.php

South Africa's World Cup bid in trouble.

OldJay

ScrubsfanChris wrote: »

Update: http://www.rugbyrugby.com/news/story_27709013403.php

South Africa's World Cup bid in trouble.

...according to a South African sunday newspaper and a website called rugbyrugby.com (whoever that is).

anonymous_joe

Stev_o wrote: »

Italy aren't guaranteed to fill there grounds if they got hosting rights. Japan have 2019, you could be picky and say they should get 2015 but at the end of the day they are still hosting a major tournament and they will sell it out no bother.

Celtic World Cup would be a nightmare not only for the politics but for teams having to constantly travel in and out of 3 very different countries.

If your going to host a RWC it should just be your country alone not yourself and 2 or 3 other competing nations.

Italy might not fill the stadiums, but it'd be lovely anyway. Any excuse to go there. :pac:

As for a Celtic WC being a bit of a clusterfcuk, I'd say so, which is a real pity.