Stevo V Barnes. Code Wars. Sky Anytime.

toomevara

Anyone catch this? Interesting debate on merits of RL v RU , be interested to hear your opinions.

thomond2006

Can I find this online? As in not on Sky Player.

toomevara

thomond2006 wrote: »

Can I find this online? As in not on Sky Player.

Ain't seen it anywhere, will keep looking. As I say is currently on Sky Anytime if you've got the sky+ box. It seems to have been originally an extended interview culled from Sky Sports news...

toomevara

Here we go;

http://www.skysports.com/video/inline/0,26691,12610_6757795,00.html

thomond2006

Cheers, appreciate it.

twinytwo

ru > rl

/thread :pac:

As we know RU has only been pro for a short time but in that time the world cup has become the 3rd biggest sporting event in the world (after the football wc and the olympics)... has to mean something

PhatPiggins

twinytwo wrote: »

ru > rl

/thread :pac:

As we know RU has only been pro for a short time but in that time the world cup has become the 3rd biggest sporting event in the world (after the football wc and the olympics)... has to mean something

Source and definition of sporting event would be appreciated

Podge_irl

PhatPiggins wrote: »

Source and definition of sporting event would be appreciated

I imagine it's one of those things that can be interpreted in umpteen different ways.

JustinDee

Both Stevo and Stu Barnes chatting on TV . . . time to change channel methinks. I'd rather watch a gardening programme than listen to their inevitable waft.

ormond lad

The Cricket World Cup is the premier international championship of One Day International (ODI) cricket, organised every four years by the sport's governing body, the International Cricket Council (ICC). It is the world's third largest sports event, exceeded only by the FIFA World Cup and the Summer Olympics, and will be televised in over 220 countries to more than 2.2 billion viewers.

From here

twinytwo

ormond lad wrote: »

The Cricket World Cup is the premier international championship of One Day International (ODI) cricket, organised every four years by the sport's governing body, the International Cricket Council (ICC). It is the world's third largest sports event, exceeded only by the FIFA World Cup and the Summer Olympics, and will be televised in over 220 countries to more than 2.2 billion viewers.

From here

i stand corrected

Podge_irl

ormond lad wrote: »

The Cricket World Cup is the premier international championship of One Day International (ODI) cricket, organised every four years by the sport's governing body, the International Cricket Council (ICC). It is the world's third largest sports event, exceeded only by the FIFA World Cup and the Summer Olympics, and will be televised in over 220 countries to more than 2.2 billion viewers.

From here

I'm pretty sure F1 make the same claim.

Also, 2.2 billion is the potential audience, nowhere near that many will actually watch it.

Podge_irl

I suppose I should preface my comment by saying I don't really like RL. I can see why people might enjoy it, but it's simply not for me.

That said, it's utterly impossible to deny that RU is the more global sport. If you talk about "rugby" then everyone bar those in northern England and Australia will assume you're talking about union. With this popularity comes more money and I can't help but feel that the flow of players has irrevocably reversed from union-to-leage transitions to league-to-unions transitions.

JustinDee

twinytwo wrote: »

i stand corrected

Well sit down again as you haven't been corrected.

People should take these alleged figures with a minimum second glance. They are usually compiled by the body which stands to gain the most from stating them ie. the tournament organisers. Saying 2.2 billion watche the last Cricket World Cup is clever accountancy. It involves accumulating the highest potential audience for an event and assuming it reaches its full audience for every stage.
Even given the size of that natural population of potential audiences in its own time zone, the Cricket World Cup will get nowhere near 2.2 billion viewers.
There is the FIFA World Cup, the Olympics then there is the rest by a long long shot.

JustinDee

Regarding the two codes, I love them both. The RL I played was in the CRL leagues in Far North Coast NSW. I'm also a longtime North Sydney Bears member (and opposed to the Central Coast franchise move as much as being a feeder to Rusty Crowe's Souths Bunnies) and am blue as can be when it comes to Origin time.
I don't bother with RL in the UK as I have little or no affinity to it apart from some people I know personally. I also feel the Super League season is way too long. Not to mention the Sky commentary that does my head in. Why have four guys commentating, of which two are the highly annoying Eddie and Stevo then have them on the panel too?

Stev_o

I love both. Each has their own merits and own flaws.

For what it's worth i don't really watch that much Super League much these days because honestly it is sub par to what the Aussies are playing (Though Wigan are a nice team to see play). So for reference anytime i mention the word League ill be specifically referring to the NRL and State of Origin and not Super League.

To a degree (especially last year) i found a lot of Union games to be quiet dire spectacles which went nowhere but a battle of penalty kicks. Of course there are exceptions and i did see some fantastic games not all of them from the major clubs or countries (USA vs Russia being on example of the top of my head).

League is sort of what the NFL is, a game about high scores from tries. Union isn't. Union is more what Football i guess is about the story about two teams playing each other. Again both have merits and flaws. I love seeing some of the audacious attacking sprees you ll see in games and the giant risks players will go through to get a try. However i loathe games where this simply doesn't work and it becomes a war of lesser errors.

I love Union's story based games because really stuff like the Italy Ireland match while absolutely horrible in terms of skill on display was like a best selling drama just when you thought you figured it out BAM there's a plot twist. However you often get games where you simply don't give a ****. Point in case Argentina game in November which actually made people age faster.

Where things sort of differ is when Union manages to produce a game that is purely positive offence. Limited kicking at goals and just going for it. Games like Wales vs Fiji in 2007 or literally any of the New Zealand Australia games from last years Tri-Nations. For me that was first class rugby that i would love to see week in week out.

AdeT

(I'm always careful about getting involved in this sort of thread!)

I've played and coached both. RL is clearly behind on the international stage, both in terms of marketing and also drama. There are aspects of it that are ahead of RU as well though: defensive play, ball handling/skills and conditioning (this side of things is pretty much even now but up until the last few years there has been a difference).

In terms of the league to union flow of playing talent, I think this has as much to do with the profile of RU and the opportunities to play internationals more regularly against top countries. The movement is not just player based; since RU has become 'open' alot of coaches with league backgrounds have moved across as specialist defense and skills/ball-handling coaches. This is a worry for Rugby League but can also be taken as a compliment - the only real issue is that these coaches don't then move back at some point.

The great thing about these two sports is that both are willing to take a punt on developing their sports, often with potential risks. Rules are amended with regularity so that the spectacle isn't ruined by negative play/spoiling and there have been genuine attempts to spread both throughout Europe and worldwide. In the UK the RFL are in the process of moving their amateur game from Winter over to Summer so that it is in line with the top levels of the game, giving the sport a genuine pyramid with clear routes/movements up and down. This could have massive implications on the sport but, as I said, these are the decisions that rugby (both codes) has been willing to make in the past and will continue to make. The inclusion of Italy in the 6N was controversial but has brought a lot to the competition.

So long as both codes are willing to evolve and listen to their fans/customers, both codes will flourish. Movement of players is inevitable as certain players will have a skill-set that sets them apart (like Ashton has shown with his tries and Kyle Eastmond will, injury permitting, prove)

Whatever everyone's preference, they're both better than football...

durkadurka

I think it's whatever you grew up with.
Personally I can't watch league but if you really analyse it, union is pretty daft!

But I love it.

RLfan

Despite my name on here.... I actually admire both codes. The big problem with union, and it's going to kill it as a spectator sport is RE-SETTING OF SCRUMS. It's ruining the game and has to be fixed.

With regard to the sky sports debate that I just watched (thanks for the link), it was a really good discussion in great spirit. I was pleasantly suprised at how un-arrogant (if there is such a word) Barnsy was.

toomevara

Stev_o wrote: »

For what it's worth i don't really watch that much Super League much these days because honestly it is sub par to what the Aussies are playing (Though Wigan are a nice team to see play). So for reference anytime i mention the word League ill be specifically referring to the NRL and State of Origin and not Super League.

Make sure you catch the world club challenge on Sunday Eve..Wigan V St George..should tick all your RL boxes!