Why does rugby league have trouble expanding internationally compared to other codes

[LeagueXIII]

I'll add one more: perception. The Kangaroos & All Blacks are basically the equivalent of each other in their respective sports.

Scotland are ranked 8th on the IRB & RLIF rankings

In Union: Scotland vs Australia 9 wins, 20 loses, 0 draws 11.5 to 24.3 avg pts
In Union: Scotland vs New Zealand 0 wins, 28 loses, 2 draws 11 to 30 avg pts

So Scotland lose by 19 points on average to the All Blacks and have never won a game. Yes, Scotland have won games against other Union countries but so have the League side. In terms of the number of competitive countries Union still has the advantage but things like the All Blacks dominance are treated with awe whereas the Kangaroos are treated with disdain...

Excellent post, you can throw Ireland in also as they have never beaten the All Blacks in over 100 years of trying and Wales haven't beaten them for 63 years.

Saying union is global is really just a marketing strategy. All union people sing from the same page constantly saying it's global and world rugby, like back in the amateur days they use to spew out that they play for "love not money".

The game is not huge in India, China, Brazil, Pakistan, Indonesia etc. Yes it is bigger than league. Even their claims of European rugby are pretty empty, take out the southern French teams and the British teams and it looks pretty small fry.

Even in England and Scotland where are the big city clubs from Sheffield, Leeds, Birmingham, Liverpool, Manchester, Glasgow and Newcastle etc.

Why do the Wallabies always go to the UK and France if the game is global?

What union has done effectively is grown their world cup since 1987 to fund the growth of their code, which is exactly what rugby league is now trying to do. Remember the union WC semi in 1987 was played at Concord Oval. RL is at about the early 90's RUWC level but we have had the news recently that the 2025 RLWC is likely to be played in North America which has huge growth possibilities for our sport. Look at the growth financially and organisationally of our WC tournament from 2000 to 2013.

 

[roughyedspud]

I take issue with the statement that we struggle to expand...

Compared to 10-15 years rugby league has exploded imo

 

[Knownothing]

Why do the Wallabies always go to the UK and France if the game is global?
.

They also always go to South Africa, Argentina, and New Zealand every year, and those countries send teams to Australia. Which does not prove that rugby union is "global", any more than a Japanese team being admitted to the "Super Rugby" competition proves much, or the fact that the Wallabies also played the American Eagles in Chicago last year, or that they played a Test against New Zealand in Hong Kong a couple of years ago. But it is a lot better than nothing,


And, by the way, they go to the UK for money.

 

[Stewbum]

Lack of investment and total focus on club football above what's good for the game

You mean Sydney club football....

 

[Stewbum]

Good post, but there is one bigger factor you have missed....the fans attitude. Not one of my mates in Australia truly gave a f**k about the four nations matches over the weekend. To me, that is the biggest obstacle.

Agree. I used to love the Kangaroo tours though. The whole alignment of ESL with the NRL time-wise has effed that up forever. We need the Poms and the Frogs over here in winter and the Roos there in the off-season.

http://www.rugbyleagueproject.org/tours/kangaroos-tour-1986/summary.html

 

[gUt]

Lots of interesting thoughts in this thread. Some impressions:

State of Origin and International footy do not have to be in contest. Not wanting to get into the eligibility debacle here but as a kid (80s), it was understood that SOO was awesome but it was definitely underneath playing for the Kangaroos. Seeing Mal, Wally etc play for Qld was one kind of rad, but watching the combined might of all Australia was even better. This was a natural assumption and it shouldn't be hard to resurrect it.

Whatever resistance there is in private schools to allowing RL will be steadily eroded by the laws of supply and demand. Rich schools used to be able to offer sporting scholarships to talented kids and this is/was a pathway to playing professional rugby. Professional rugby is withering and dying in this country and if these schools want to continue to be able to attract the best sporting talent they are going to need to build partnerships into RL, simply because this is a more viable pathway into a professional career. (This in turn should lead to a higher standard - increase expansion opportunities etc).

For mine, the biggest loss to RL has been a competitive French team but this could be more than offset by the continuing rise of PNG and the pacific islands teams. This should be the focus for IRL from here on imo.

 

[Stallion]

There is not a "world private schools system". Each country is different. Indeed, even in Australia, there is huge diversity in what you call the "private school system". Apart from the GPS schools, there are a heap of other private schools and private schools systems. And just in case you are not aware of it, despite rugby league being an "outcast", the broadcast revenues of the game in Australia are booming, and far outstrip anything that the so-called establishment sport of rugby union can attract. Why is this so?





Rugby league is already popular in Australia, the reason that it is not as popular internationally has to do with a whole lot of factors, none of which have anything to do with the "top end of town" in Australia.





A sweetheart deal between the AFL and ARU to invite the AFL to take over in private schools? That is the silliest thing I have ever read on the internet, bar none.


Firstly, the ARU has no power over what private schools (or public schools, for that matter) do. If they did, all schools would be playing rugby union, and not soccer, AFL, rugby league, or anything else.


Secondly, the AFL is attacking "junior weekend ranks" of all ot its competitors, including rugby union. Why would the ARU want to give them more power?

Quite aptly named Knownothing!
I have commented in general terms and you have decided to knit pick to the nth degree. If you believe that RU has no influence upon establishment based schools systems. like GPS, then why does RL have no access. Other codes do have such access. Such access for other codes and nor RL has been happening over the past half decade.

Given rugby league's pre eminent position in popularity amongst the states of NSW & QLD and given the fact that RU is trying to bolster its ranks in the public schools system with rugby league still on the outer in the RU dominated private schools, I would suggest my generalization is on the money!

RU would rather see the code of rugby league decline and have AFL , a sport that will not go international, be a direct benefactor of rugby league's demise. RU would be the indirect benefactor of rugby league losing its junior ranks. Remembering that RU will stop at nothing to see the demise of rugby league, its better
looking and more palatable younger brother! Until you acknowledge this we differ completely.

 

[Valheru]

I wouldn't say that RL has struggled to expand any more than the likes of RU, cricket or even soccer. We have expanded in to multiple places but their national sides are just not competitive and likely never will be.

In the case of RU, the sport really is about the international game, the players are hired and paid by the ARU and receive additional payments from their provincial franchises. the club level is park football at best and has no real penetration to most civilians. it is like cricket in that respect.

RL on the other hand is more like the likes of the NBA i.e. the club level is what the sport is about and anything beyond that is gravy. The players and administration can say that SOO and Internationals are the pinnacle all they want but it just isn't, a NRL premiership is the number 1 goal for any player as opposed to a world cup which is the number 1 goal for a RU payer.

 

[Stallion]

I wouldn't say that RL has struggled to expand any more than the likes of RU, cricket or even soccer. We have expanded in to multiple places but their national sides are just not competitive and likely never will be.

In the case of RU, the sport really is about the international game, the players are hired and paid by the ARU and receive additional payments from their provincial franchises. the club level is park football at best and has no real penetration to most civilians. it is like cricket in that respect.

RL on the other hand is more like the likes of the NBA i.e. the club level is what the sport is about and anything beyond that is gravy. The players and administration can say that SOO and Internationals are the pinnacle all they want but it just isn't, a NRL premiership is the number 1 goal for any player as opposed to a world cup which is the number 1 goal for a RU payer.

Rugby league has had massive barriers limiting its growth on a world wide scale. Quite simply this code has all the qualities of supreme rugby at its best with more tackling and running with the ball, which most fans prefer to see.. If you look at where RL is in the big scheme of things, its clear something is not allowing it to expand. Reasons such as lack of access in the private & public schools(world wide) is a major barrier and the resultant lack of influence in government agencies(which enable recognition & funding) plus reluctant big business favors prevail.
Rugby league has not reached anywhere near its potential world wide as it has been held back big time for many years. Its the truth and its still occurring.

 

[Stewbum]

Rugby league has had massive barriers limiting its growth on a world wide scale. Quite simply this code has all the qualities of supreme rugby at its best with more tackling and running with the ball, which most fans prefer to see.. If you look at where RL is in the big scheme of things, its clear something is not allowing it to expand. Reasons such as lack of access in the private & public schools(world wide) is a major barrier and the resultant lack of influence in government agencies(which enable recognition & funding) plus reluctant big business favors prevail.
Rugby league has not reached anywhere near its potential world wide as it has been held back big time for many years. Its the truth and its still occurring.

You left out short-sighted piss-heads running the clubs and game.

 

[Knownothing]

Quite aptly named Knownothing!
I have commented in general terms and you have decided to knit pick to the nth degree.

I thought it was worth bringing a bit more fact into the debate.

If you believe that RU has no influence upon establishment based schools systems. like GPS, then why does RL have no access. Other codes do have such access. Such access for other codes and nor RL has been happening over the past half decade.

The parents pay the fees for these schools, I would assume if the parents want a particular sport in a particular school that, over time, that sport would get a foothold.

Given rugby league's pre eminent position in popularity amongst the states of NSW & QLD and given the fact that RU is trying to bolster its ranks in the public schools system with rugby league still on the outer in the RU dominated private schools, I would suggest my generalization is on the money!

He who pays the piper calls the tune. As I said, if the fee-paying parents want a particular sport, they will get it, one way or another. As for the state schools, organised sport of all kinds is under challenge in most of them, particularly the academically intensive ones.

 

[Stallion]

I thought it was worth bringing a bit more fact into the debate.




The parents pay the fees for these schools, I would assume if the parents want a particular sport in a particular school that, over time, that sport would get a foothold.





He who pays the piper calls the tune. As I said, if the fee-paying parents want a particular sport, they will get it, one way or another. As for the state schools, organised sport of all kinds is under challenge in most of them, particularly the academically intensive ones.

You assume wrong and disturbingly happy about the money pulling the strings bit?. It's not the payer at all! It's the idealistic preference/bigotry of the private school system harnessed by RU influences. Money shouldn't buy and propagate "crap"(RU) but unfortunately the powers that be are calling the shots with ostracizing the code of rugby league in such schools.

Just read the article concerning Laurie Daley's son whereby he (the son) had no choice but to play rugby union at the private school he was attending despite wanting to play rugby league. This sort of scenario is repeated everywhere in such schools and reeks of consistent bigotry.
In your scenario, a genuinely popular sport such as rugby league is being treated as an outcast with other sports getting the favors associated with the private school domain and in turn the top end of town. Something that reeks of inequity and unfairness!

 

[RedVee]

You assume wrong and disturbingly happy about the money pulling the strings bit?. It's not the payer at all! It's the idealistic preference/bigotry of the private school system harnessed by RU influences. Money shouldn't buy and propagate "crap"(RU) but unfortunately the powers that be are calling the shots with ostracizing the code of rugby league in such schools.

Just read the article concerning Laurie Daley's son whereby he (the son) had no choice but to play rugby union at the private school he was attending despite wanting to play rugby league. This sort of scenario is repeated everywhere in such schools and reeks of consistent bigotry.
In your scenario, a genuinely popular sport such as rugby league is being treated as an outcast with other sports getting the favors associated with the private school domain and in turn the top end of town. Something that reeks of inequity and unfairness!

They (ime) generally demand that the kids only play for the school sports teams and no longer play for clubs on weekends.

 

[Valheru]

Rugby league has had massive barriers limiting its growth on a world wide scale. Quite simply this code has all the qualities of supreme rugby at its best with more tackling and running with the ball, which most fans prefer to see.. If you look at where RL is in the big scheme of things, its clear something is not allowing it to expand. Reasons such as lack of access in the private & public schools(world wide) is a major barrier and the resultant lack of influence in government agencies(which enable recognition & funding) plus reluctant big business favors prevail.
Rugby league has not reached anywhere near its potential world wide as it has been held back big time for many years. Its the truth and its still occurring.

I know there is some of that happening in some places but I just don't buy it as the main reason for the lack of expansion.

Simply put, other sports are too far ingrained in various cultures for rugby league to ever have a chance. Can anyone seriously see RL being as remotely as popular as the NFL in the states or soccer in any South American country?

 

[docbrown]

With all due respect to the Kangaroos, the All Blacks are a global brand. That's why they are playing internationals in New York (against Ireland) or Hong Kong (against Australia).

One reason that they are so well respected, is that they have built up a long tradition of competitiveness in the game.

To use Scotland as the counterpoint, in rugby union Scotland has been playing internationals regularly for 100 or more years, and they have had some wins against some good teams. Again, there is a long tradition there.

It takes time to build up a tradition.

You're kind of arguing with yourself there. No one is saying Union doesn't have a longer history or is denigrating the All Blacks global branding -- I'm actually saying that's a positive for Union in terms of perception.

When you say that the All Blacks "have built up a long tradition of competitiveness in the game" -- surely the same can be said about the Kangaroos. Yet, one is lauded and the other is denigrated so you've confirmed my point about perception. You only have to look at the one sided Bledisloe Cup. If that were happening in Rugby League people would be talking about cancelling internationals, origin etc.

If you're going to cast a critical eye on Scotland perhaps you should ask - given that Union started in 1873 - why is there a total disconnect between support for the national team and domestic clubs/grassroots? Union is slowly but surely going backwards in Scotland.

 

[Knownothing]

I won't quote your post in full, Doc.


I enjoy arguing with everybody, including myself.


As for the point about the All Blacks' "tradition of competitiveness", I think the big difference between them and the Kangaroos is not longevity, but content. The All Blacks go out into battle every season, home and away, in maybe fifteen fixtures. Every year. The Kangaroos? Now and then. In the context of this thread, this is an important reason that rugby league struggles in terms of international expansion. Maybe if the Kangaroos had a similarly busy schedule to the All Blacks people could stop blaming some sort of conspiracy (in Australian private schools, according to one poster) for whatever problems rugby league has in establishing itself in som countries.


The use of the name "rugby" has been covered in other threads, ad nauseam. But it is the other huge factor.


I did not raise Scotland, another poster did, in the context of competitiveness as between Scotland in both codes.


Rugby union has struggled in Scotland, that's for sure. But the Scottish national team beat the Wallabies in Australia a couple of years ago, and all but beat them again the the quarter-finals of the RUWC. If something like that happened in rugby league it would be a shot in the arm. Will it happen, do you think, and if so, when?

 

[magpie_man]

You left out short-sighted piss-heads running the clubs and game.

This is the single greatest factor that has held the game back as far as I am concerned.
The sardonic disdain of the rugby union fraternity has played a part, no doubt, but a united and forward-thinking rugby league administration should have been able to use the game's sheer popularity and financial clout to bust through this a long time ago.
For a game birthed on flair and innovation it has certainly grown into a conservative, clunky curmudgeon.
Israel Folau wants to play for Parramatta - scrapped.
Canberra and Manly want to take a game to China - scrapped.
It's excruciatingly frustrating to observe.
The resurgence of Apple and the emergence of Google seems to have been the best thing to have happened to Microsoft as it shook them out of their catatonic state of cynical complacency; I wish we could say the same for Rugby League.

 

[docbrown]

Excellent post, you can throw Ireland in also as they have never beaten the All Blacks in over 100 years of trying and Wales haven't beaten them for 63 years.

Saying union is global is really just a marketing strategy.

Exactly. No one is saying that league is bigger than union. Rather, that union is still essentially like cricket - there's a handful of countries that play at a competitive level and niche support (mostly amateur) in the others. But union have been better at their branding to create the perception that they are bigger than what they are.

They also always go to South Africa, Argentina, and New Zealand every year, and those countries send teams to Australia. Which does not prove that rugby union is "global", any more than a Japanese team being admitted to the "Super Rugby" competition proves much, or the fact that the Wallabies also played the American Eagles in Chicago last year, or that they played a Test against New Zealand in Hong Kong a couple of years ago. But it is a lot better than nothing

It is better than nothing (i.e. AFL) but think about when they first played against those sides:

First matches vs Wallabies:
South Africa (1933)
Argentina (1979)
New Zealand (1903)
Japan (1975)

It's not like this is new expansion for rugby union.

Here's the list of places the Wallabies have/will play:
2016: Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth, Auckland, Wellington, Pretoria, London, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Paris, Dublin.
2006: Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth, Auckland, Christchurch, Johannesburg, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Rome, Dublin
1996: Sydney, Brisbane, Wellington, Bloemfontain, Padova, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Dublin
It's pretty much the same countries as 20 years ago. You can chuck in Argentina now but it's effectively only 10 countries - similar to cricket. They were playing in these same countries back in the 1930s-1970s...

It's true that the Wallabies play exhibition matches against strong teams in other countries with rich expats but why don't the Wallabies go around to the other World Cup countries like Japan, United States, Namibia, Uruguay, Canada, Georgia, Romania, Fiji, Samoa, Tonga and play matches in those countries?

Other than the United States match last year the previous time the Wallabies played one of those sides in their home country was 1995 - it took them 20 years to try it again...

Again I'm not saying they have NO international presence, I'm just saying it's not as big as what they make it out to be. Again, it's about perception.

 

[docbrown]

As for the point about the All Blacks' "tradition of competitiveness", I think the big difference between them and the Kangaroos is not longevity, but content. The All Blacks go out into battle every season, home and away, in maybe fifteen fixtures. Every year. The Kangaroos? Now and then.

So you think that if the Kangaroos played more matches like in union - say 15 matches a year and won all of them like the All Blacks (who have won their past 18 games straight) that the perception that international rugby league is one-sided will somehow dissipate?

I agree that the Kangaroos should play more matches (5 to 7 a year) in order to build up the profile of the international game but your assertion that it will somehow overcome the one-sided perception issue is illogical.

What I'm talking about comes down to the on-field competitive success of other nations against Australia, marketing & branding. If England & New Zealand start competing regularly it will happen -- New Zealand winning 3 of the past 5 matches is a step in the right direction. My first step would be to scrap the Anzac Test (which is one-sided) and play it every year (regardless) 2 weeks after the NRL GF. Then from that you'd have 3-game series every 4th year. As England become more competitive, do likewise with the Ashes brand.

Rugby union has struggled in Scotland, that's for sure. But the Scottish national team beat the Wallabies in Australia a couple of years ago, and all but beat them again the the quarter-finals of the RUWC. If something like that happened in rugby league it would be a shot in the arm. Will it happen, do you think, and if so, when?

If the Scottish team beating the Wallabies did anything for Union in Scotland it was negligible at best. If Union want to reverse the trend in Scotland they - like rugby league has to - grow the support at the grassroots levels. If they don't, 30 years from now the Scottish Union side will be on par with Nimibia.

 

[docbrown]

In the case of RU, the sport really is about the international game, the players are hired and paid by the ARU and receive additional payments from their provincial franchises. the club level is park football at best and has no real penetration to most civilians. it is like cricket in that respect.

The strengths and weakness of the major codes are quite interesting:
AFL: Strong domestic league but joke internationals
Soccer: Strong internationals but domestic A-League will always be park football compared to overseas
Union: Internationals that are waning in interest, a butchered together Super domestic comp with 5 teams (maybe 4 soon)
Cricket: Strong internationals but domestic except for Big Bash is dying off. Needs to find a way of balancing internationals with a MLB type domestic comp.
Netball: Strong internationals & growing domestic but it's for a specific market
RL: Strong domestic league + origin. Needs to expand into the other markets though. If they ever get their act together with a competitive England & New Zealand within a proper international format, it's liking icing on the cake.