davieG Posted 5 January 2011 Posted 5 January 2011 http://www.skysports...6635849,00.html London Wasps and Harlequins have confirmed that their LV= Cup game on January 30 will be held in Abu Dhabi.It is the first time a competitive English fixture has been taken overseas, with the game set to be played under floodlights at a specially-constructed 5,000 capacity stadium at the Emirates Palace hotel. Wasps board director Lawrence Dallaglio said: "To be the first club to take a competitive game of rugby overseas really reflects Wasps desire to be innovative and try new things. "We want to ensure that Wasps has a long-term future and it is steps like this that strengthen the club and develop a global brand. "We know that there will be some disappointment for those fans that cannot travel, but we know our supporters want long term success and stability and one-off opportunities like these can only help build our profile, appeal and reach." There's no doubting that sometime soon we'll see English League or Cup games played abroad - to benefit the fans of course
Fosse Boy Posted 5 January 2011 Posted 5 January 2011 Sport is going to hell in a handcart. Yet more corporate kidology form men in suits with delusions of grandeur
davieG Posted 5 January 2011 Author Posted 5 January 2011 Sport is going to hell in a handcart. Yet more corporate kidology form men in suits with delusions of grandeur ...and ££££££s to fill their bank balances in their eyes.
Fosse Boy Posted 5 January 2011 Posted 5 January 2011 No doubt we'll be hearing from a certain Mr Scudamore soon about how this is a great example of "expanding the brand" in another sport so he can push the 39th game again. Yeah, I'm sure half of the Arab world will soon be wandering around in Harlequins replicas...
Edmund Posted 5 January 2011 Posted 5 January 2011 Hopefully one day the 35th Bundesliga game will come to England.
davieG Posted 5 January 2011 Author Posted 5 January 2011 Hopefully one day the 35th Bundesliga game will come to England. Well we're about as financially secure as many developing 3rd world nations, mind you I think these games are targeted at rich developing nations so maybe not.
FoxyPV Posted 5 January 2011 Posted 5 January 2011 I didn't think rugby was as crass as football but they seem to have out done it.
DB11 Posted 5 January 2011 Posted 5 January 2011 I wonder if they'll transfer an English referee out there or if it will be a foreign one...
samjohnson Posted 5 January 2011 Posted 5 January 2011 http://www.skysports...6635849,00.html There's no doubting that sometime soon we'll see English League or Cup games played abroad - to benefit the fans of course Undoubtedly Man United off to the far east...
The Doctor Posted 5 January 2011 Posted 5 January 2011 I wonder if they'll transfer an English referee out there or if it will be a foreign one... you get a few referees from france doing games in the rugby premiership at the moment so i doubt they'll care and just send whoevers available.
Finnegan Posted 5 January 2011 Posted 5 January 2011 Mh. Mixed feelings about this, really. On the one hand I agree with the sentiment that it's disappointing for the clubs resident, British fans. On the other hand I think it's very, very easy to be a smug supporter of a pretty big English football club that's owned by powerful businessmen and is well supported, not just in it's own city, but globally. Rugby is a small game, domestically. And in England it's a struggling game. English clubs are slowly losing power, first to France and now, bit by bit, to the Magners' League as well. The wage cap that exists within the sport isn't there for any moral integrity, it's there because clubs are so desperately close to the brink through a lack of local interest that they'd probably bankrupt themselves trying to find the players to compete if the salary restrictions were removed. Rugby needs to grow, it needs to be clever, it needs to explore new avenues to generate interest and if this works in doing so then fine. You can't treat rugby like football and you can't judge it by the same standards. In England, only Northampton and Leicester are particularly fiscally secure - everyone else is under threat and if the rest of them go then Saints and Tigers will be looking pretty lonely, eh? I'd wave your judgemental wand elsewhere, to be honest. It might be fashionable to roll your eyes and get all leftist about "moderno" sport but not every institution is one of complete evil.
Corky Posted 5 January 2011 Posted 5 January 2011 I wonder if they'll transfer an English referee out there or if it will be a foreign one... Stuart Attwell can ref it. And stay there.
ajthefox Posted 5 January 2011 Posted 5 January 2011 Stuart Attwell can ref it. And stay there. great shout, hopefully they'll take that tosspot dallaglio out with him.
Fosse Boy Posted 5 January 2011 Posted 5 January 2011 Mh. Mixed feelings about this, really. On the one hand I agree with the sentiment that it's disappointing for the clubs resident, British fans. On the other hand I think it's very, very easy to be a smug supporter of a pretty big English football club that's owned by powerful businessmen and is well supported, not just in it's own city, but globally. Rugby is a small game, domestically. And in England it's a struggling game. English clubs are slowly losing power, first to France and now, bit by bit, to the Magners' League as well. The wage cap that exists within the sport isn't there for any moral integrity, it's there because clubs are so desperately close to the brink through a lack of local interest that they'd probably bankrupt themselves trying to find the players to compete if the salary restrictions were removed. Rugby needs to grow, it needs to be clever, it needs to explore new avenues to generate interest and if this works in doing so then fine. You can't treat rugby like football and you can't judge it by the same standards. In England, only Northampton and Leicester are particularly fiscally secure - everyone else is under threat and if the rest of them go then Saints and Tigers will be looking pretty lonely, eh? I'd wave your judgemental wand elsewhere, to be honest. It might be fashionable to roll your eyes and get all leftist about "moderno" sport but not every institution is one of complete evil. But I simply do not see how something like this is doing that? As you say yourself, you can't judge rugby and football by the same standards. Football is the most popular sport in the world and so places such as Dubai/Qatar/wherever on the planet are open to grabbing a slice of the action at any opportunity, because there is a mass demand for it in terms of both the public and commercial interest produced in those countries by football. Rugby as a sport is not at that stage in its *shudder* marketability. This game is being played in a 5,000 seater stadium. I really fail to see how that's going to "expand the brand " in any way, shape or form. Just comes across as a few in the boardrooms of the two respective clubs out to make a couple of quid for themselves, possibly disillusioning some of their core support in the process. Could see where you were coming from if this game was being moved to somewhere like Japan, where there does seem to be a growing interest in rugby (as well as Japan having at least some sort of rugby playing heritage), but Dubai? Let's not kid ourselves, this will do nothing for the sport there.
Finnegan Posted 6 January 2011 Posted 6 January 2011 You're missing the point. The point is that just because it's a blatant money making venture it doesn't mean it's inherently evil or that it's out to fill the pockets of the clubs owners. Wasps might be a successful club but these aren't the rugby equivalent of Man City and Chelsea going off to Dubai to sun it up with their fellow billionaires. They're two very small sports clubs looking to expand their brand, fiscally, to generate enough income to keep them competitive. Not just with their fellow English clubs but with the entire Northern hemisphere, especially the French. Where do you think the English game will be, domestically and internationally, if the financial featherweights of the Guinness Premiership keep losing their best players abroad?
Thracian Posted 6 January 2011 Posted 6 January 2011 While I can well understand the idea of exploratory tournaments in such places to expand interest in the game and develop the brand name of clubs I find it hard to condone this sort of decision unless the clubs had stated their intent before season tickets were sold. Rugby already has a serious problem with at least some of the fans I've spoken to already. a) In devaluing the league championship for financial reasons by having the contest decided not on the basis of whoever wins the most points after home and away against all the others but on a silly play-off involving the top four clubs, thus meaning the fourth-placed team in the league proper could actually take the title. b) The salary cap that means top English teams are unfairly handicapped in competing with French teams in attracting international-standard players. c) The situation where top sides like Leicester have to field reserves teams for a good part of the season due to international call-ups meaning that some fans complain they are obliged to watch what are effectively second choice teams for their outlay. I'm not sure that affected clubs like Leicester don't benefit because of this in the long run - certainly in being able to develop potential first teamers in meangful matches - but the extent of it would still irk me. The thing is that, unless these clubs forewarned of their intentions, the fans have effectively been denied a fixture when they might gain some if, say, a tournament was played in the Middle East during rugby's close season or even in a winter window should the authorities decide to establish one when just such experiments might be made. I admit to only thinking out loud on this. I don't have more than a passing interest in rugby or even in The Tigers. But, as a football fan, I'd be pissed off had City had taken their Manchester City fixture to Thailand and would be pissed off having other things that happen in rugby applied to football. But some rugby people might think differently and good luck to them. It's their choice and I guess it'll only be my choice when it happens if football. The way petrol's going up lots of away games could end up costing the equivalent of a flight to Abu Dhabi anyway. No wonder cooking oil is becoming so sought after!
Steven Posted 6 January 2011 Posted 6 January 2011 Mh. Mixed feelings about this, really. On the one hand I agree with the sentiment that it's disappointing for the clubs resident, British fans. On the other hand I think it's very, very easy to be a smug supporter of a pretty big English football club that's owned by powerful businessmen and is well supported, not just in it's own city, but globally. Rugby is a small game, domestically. And in England it's a struggling game. English clubs are slowly losing power, first to France and now, bit by bit, to the Magners' League as well. The wage cap that exists within the sport isn't there for any moral integrity, it's there because clubs are so desperately close to the brink through a lack of local interest that they'd probably bankrupt themselves trying to find the players to compete if the salary restrictions were removed. Rugby needs to grow, it needs to be clever, it needs to explore new avenues to generate interest and if this works in doing so then fine. You can't treat rugby like football and you can't judge it by the same standards. In England, only Northampton and Leicester are particularly fiscally secure - everyone else is under threat and if the rest of them go then Saints and Tigers will be looking pretty lonely, eh? I'd wave your judgemental wand elsewhere, to be honest. It might be fashionable to roll your eyes and get all leftist about "moderno" sport but not every institution is one of complete evil. All of this is fair comment. However if we really want to Rugby Union to be more accessible to the masses (which I would love to see) then to start with the IRB should get rid of some Test referees and stop fooking about with the laws of the game. There is no point taking it to the Middle East if the product is flawed in the first place.
Finnegan Posted 6 January 2011 Posted 6 January 2011 I imagine the Lv cup isnt covered by their season ticket. It's worth pointing out it's the rugby equivelant of the JPT. The other points you raise are nearly all valid, though. As I said, English rugby is in a worrying place.
davieG Posted 6 January 2011 Author Posted 6 January 2011 Mh. Mixed feelings about this, really. On the one hand I agree with the sentiment that it's disappointing for the clubs resident, British fans. On the other hand I think it's very, very easy to be a smug supporter of a pretty big English football club that's owned by powerful businessmen and is well supported, not just in it's own city, but globally. Rugby is a small game, domestically. And in England it's a struggling game. English clubs are slowly losing power, first to France and now, bit by bit, to the Magners' League as well. The wage cap that exists within the sport isn't there for any moral integrity, it's there because clubs are so desperately close to the brink through a lack of local interest that they'd probably bankrupt themselves trying to find the players to compete if the salary restrictions were removed. Rugby needs to grow, it needs to be clever, it needs to explore new avenues to generate interest and if this works in doing so then fine. You can't treat rugby like football and you can't judge it by the same standards. In England, only Northampton and Leicester are particularly fiscally secure - everyone else is under threat and if the rest of them go then Saints and Tigers will be looking pretty lonely, eh? I'd wave your judgemental wand elsewhere, to be honest. It might be fashionable to roll your eyes and get all leftist about "moderno" sport but not every institution is one of complete evil. Who's being smug I'm not smug or happy being owned by powerful businessmen with no actually interest or affinity to the club I support I believe it reflects the financial mismanagement of the game. Why don't these sports/clubs try to live within their 'natural' means. Any additional increase in the fan base to bring in money just fuels higher player salaries so they then need to exploit some other source which will then go into players pockets and out of the game be it Rugby or Football none of it is used to benefit the fans. You only have to look at match admission prices for the Tigers which have escalated and are now on a par with football's extortionate rates where they've reached saturation point hence the need to seek new funds. My eye rolling was linked purely to the 'benefit the fans' statement, very little, if anything that has happened in professional sport has been to benefit the fans.
Finnegan Posted 6 January 2011 Posted 6 January 2011 I wasn't having a pop at you, davieG. And the answer to your question is because Saints and Tigers will soon be the only decent sides left in England if clubs stay 'within their means.' Sports are fragile ecosystems. You have to remember that pro rugby union is still an embryo compared to football and even Rugby League.
Edmund Posted 6 January 2011 Posted 6 January 2011 Sossers is spot on. You can't blame them for looking for extra revenue, especially as the gap between the European (French) and English rugby union leagues are growing apart rapidly.
purpleronnie Posted 6 January 2011 Posted 6 January 2011 Sossers is spot on. You can't blame them for looking for extra revenue, especially as the gap between the European (French) and English rugby union leagues are growing apart rapidly. Its a toughy, I can see both sides of the arguement, on one hand you could say its the middle finger to the fans who pay week in week out and exploiting them even more, but on the other hand if they want to be increase revenue and bring in better players it might reward the fans in the end. It really depends on how much financially they will benefit, if it means that some fans feel ostracized from the club they love is it really worth it? Most fans would be up in arms especially if it happend in the football league but those same fans only seem to want some billionaire owner to come in and help buy success. As the years role on more and more clubs from different sports seem ontent on selling their souls to the highest bidder, whether that be overseas owners or renaming stadiums. And the fans seem less and less concerned.
Finnegan Posted 7 January 2011 Posted 7 January 2011 Yeah, I mean don't get me wrong. I fully understand that it's a sad reflection of the way the sport has developed since it's professionalization and I do sympathise with fans of Wasps and Quins. But I can guarantee you that supporters of both clubs would likely rather miss the odd nothing fixture for a marketing ploy than lose more of their stars to the continent. Wasps are one of the best examples of this in play. They used to be a major player for the league and for the HC every season. Now they're a terrible mid-table side because they've lost all their best players to France and Australia because they couldn't afford to keep them.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.