The NZ Herald has another article justifying the expensive rugby world cup tickets by saying that they are better or comparable to the football WC tickets.
I for one are getting tired of the NZ media always viewing everything football through a rugby prism. The whole One Shot for Glory weekend was highjacked by the media taking a "what does this mean for rugby" slant.
The facts are the football WC is the greatest show on earth...and the ticket prices reflect that.
The Rugby WC is not...as we are constantly told, the 3rd biggest sporting event on the planet.
The potential ticket buyers for the football WC include just about everone on the planet.
The potential ticket buyers for the rugby WC EXCLUDE...anyone from the middle east, Africa(except for white South Africans), Asia, Nth America, Sth America(except for a few dozen rich Argies) and continental Europe(except for a few Frenchies)
The Rugby WC is a gig for a bunch of rich hooray henrys from the UK and handful of white English speaking ex colonies.
The official TV audience globally for the last rugby WC final was 18 million.....yes eighteen million. More people globally would have watched the last FA cup final in the UK.
The point of this rant......well, don't accept for a moment the bias crap from the NZ media about the "global game of rugby" . A recent survey showed that just over 40% of kiwis were either interested or very interested in football. We should expect and demand that NZ sports media reflect that interest.
Permalink
Permalink
FA Cup 2005 Final viewing figures = 484 Million
Permalink
Permalink
New Zealand rugby fans received a rude shock this morning, with the announcement of ticket prices for the 2011 World Cup which it is hosting.
Organisers say there are a lot of fans and limited seats to the tournament which is played every four years.
Tickets to the final at Auckland's Eden Park will cost between $300 and $980 and New Zealanders will have to go into a draw for the 25,000 seats available to locals.
All Blacks fans will also have to pay nearly twice as much for tickets as those following other teams.
Tournament boss Martin Snedden says high demand is the obvious reason for the inflated prices.
"The reality is I think there'll be more people interested in following the All Blacks and the demand for that will be higher," he said.
Mr Snedden says people will be able to pay off their tickets in instalments. At the 1987 Rugby World Cup, fans paid $6 to watch the opening match.
Mr Positive
Permalink
Permalink
Rugby is struggling to gain world wide attention. Its struggling with its rules. Players dont even understand them. And what cracks me up is that they keep saying that rugby is the 3rd most popular sport in the world. What a load of Sh*t martin sneddon!!
Permalink
Permalink
england has the largest player base for eggball and its less than 1% of there population. Only four countries have over 100k players and fiji has the 5th most registered. 3rd biggest sport in a few old boys heads nowhere else
rojas, so special
Permalink
Permalink
here's another interesting 'coincidence'
on the day of the World Cup draw, the Dom Post's editorial is about rugby
I do reckon the nzrfu is leaning on its mates in the old media
Permalink
Permalink
well the all blacks loss to the baabaas just adds fuel to the fire
rojas, so special
Permalink
Permalink
A recent survey showed that just over 40% of kiwis were either interested or very interested in football. We should expect and demand that NZ sports media reflect that interest.
They do, but in a distorted fashion. The media are big businesses, most of them with significant investments in Rugby Union. Naturally, they promote their investment at every turn. Realising the changing public interest, journalists are encouraged to mention Rugby in Football stories.
It's unclear how explicitly that's spelled out by different editors. But a sports journalist in NZ would have to be dead not to understand the rules.
Stripes2009-12-06 13:48:44
Permalink
Permalink
Agree 100% what you just said.
Even when TVNZ use to have a Basketball story, they always had to have a rugby reference.
For example they did a story on NBA play Shaquille O'Neal and started the story by saying.
"Basketballs answer to Johan Lomu, Shaquille ONeal"
There have been so many occasions when there has been a big sports story on the news and TVNZ have just thrown in a rugby reference for the sake of it.
Even when TVNZ use to have a Basketball story, they always had to have a rugby reference.
For example they did a story on NBA play Shaquille O'Neal and started the story by saying.
"Basketballs answer to Johan Lomu, Shaquille ONeal"
There have been so many occasions when there has been a big sports story on the news and TVNZ have just thrown in a rugby reference for the sake of it.
Permalink
Permalink
england has the largest player base for eggball and its less than 1% of there population. Only four countries have over 100k players and fiji has the 5th most registered. 3rd biggest sport in a few old boys heads nowhere else
This has been going on since the 1970's.
Would love to know which four countries have 100,000 players.
Oz has 60000 and is 4th in the football codes.
If you are old and wise you were probably young and stupid
Permalink
Permalink
I don't think this article is an example of the "NZ media always viewing everything football through a rugby prism." I think it is more the writer viewing the RWC prices through a football prism. This seems a sensible approach given that the FWC is the most prominent teamsport competition available as a reference point.
If you think the Herald shouldn't be discussing the RWC ticket prices during the week that they are announced for a tournament that is being held in this country then I don't really know where you are coming from.
"The point of this rant......well, don't accept for a moment the bias crap from the NZ media about the "global game of rugby" "
I don't think there is any widespread delusion about the situation. In football NZ is a little fish in a big pond. In rugby NZ is a big fish in a little pond. I don't think it's surprising that rugby gets so much attention under these circumstances. I've lived in Britain & read the local papers with 90% football in the sports pages. That coverage is not because they know that there are a lot of footballers in Asia and South America but is because the locals are keen on it. Vice versa NZ.
stevenivan2009-12-06 17:42:52
If you think the Herald shouldn't be discussing the RWC ticket prices during the week that they are announced for a tournament that is being held in this country then I don't really know where you are coming from.
"The point of this rant......well, don't accept for a moment the bias crap from the NZ media about the "global game of rugby" "
I don't think there is any widespread delusion about the situation. In football NZ is a little fish in a big pond. In rugby NZ is a big fish in a little pond. I don't think it's surprising that rugby gets so much attention under these circumstances. I've lived in Britain & read the local papers with 90% football in the sports pages. That coverage is not because they know that there are a lot of footballers in Asia and South America but is because the locals are keen on it. Vice versa NZ.
stevenivan2009-12-06 17:42:52
Permalink
Permalink
I don't think this article is an example of the "NZ media always viewing everything football through a rugby prism." I think it is more the writer viewing the RWC prices through a football prism. This seems a sensible approach given that the FWC is the most prominent teamsport competition available as a reference point.
If you think the Herald shouldn't be discussing the RWC ticket prices during the week that they are announced for a tournament that is being held in this country then I don't really know where you are coming from.
"The point of this rant......well, don't accept for a moment the bias crap from the NZ media about the "global game of rugby" "
I don't think there is any widespread delusion about the situation. In football NZ is a little fish in a big pond. In rugby NZ is a big fish in a little pond. I don't think it's surprising that rugby gets so much attention under these circumstances. I've lived in Britain & read the local papers with 90% football in the sports pages. That coverage is not because they know that there are a lot of footballers in Asia and South America but is because the locals are keen on it. Vice versa NZ.
If you think the Herald shouldn't be discussing the RWC ticket prices during the week that they are announced for a tournament that is being held in this country then I don't really know where you are coming from.
"The point of this rant......well, don't accept for a moment the bias crap from the NZ media about the "global game of rugby" "
I don't think there is any widespread delusion about the situation. In football NZ is a little fish in a big pond. In rugby NZ is a big fish in a little pond. I don't think it's surprising that rugby gets so much attention under these circumstances. I've lived in Britain & read the local papers with 90% football in the sports pages. That coverage is not because they know that there are a lot of footballers in Asia and South America but is because the locals are keen on it. Vice versa NZ.
www.kiwifromthecouch.blogspot.com
Permalink
Permalink
Player numbers from IRB site
SA 488000
England 2146140
USA 81678
Argentina 96479
NZ 145293
Fiji 41017
Australia 84450
Wales 46924
Andorra 222
China 4810
SA 488000
England 2146140
USA 81678
Argentina 96479
NZ 145293
Fiji 41017
Australia 84450
Wales 46924
Andorra 222
China 4810
Permalink
Permalink
i dont believe there are more than 2 million rugby players in England. Rubbish. 200,000 maybe.
it would mean they have roughly the same number (maybe more) rugby players per capita as us.
thats either wrong or creative pr counting from somebody.
Marius Lacatus2009-12-06 22:48:46
Permalink
Permalink
What's the population of England - about 50 mil? Assuming the vast majority of players are male that would mean roughly 1 in 12 males of all ages plays rugby.
Which probably means someone has accidentally added an extra digit.
Permalink
Permalink
Yeah "of all ages" is key there. Makes it far far less than 1 in 12 if you shorten that to those who are of an age to be able to play rugby. Very creative i suggest.
Allegedly
Permalink
Permalink
Im a bit bored,so shall investigate...
These guys suggest there is only 2 million worldwide?
Sport
2002 Estimates of Participants Worldwide
Number of Affiliated National Federations
998 Million
218
400 Million
211
300 Million
186
242 Million
204
200 Million
147
60 Million
191
60 Million
110
50 Million
51
18 Million
147
3 million
118
2.5 Million
187
2 Million
97
600,000
160
They seem to have a bit of a "sporting bodies exaggerate figures" approach and site that volleyball claimed 1 billion people played the sport,they approached them and said this was one in every 6 people in the world,and the body refined it back to 33 million and said there definelty isnt 4 times more players than soccer 
The BBC in 2007 said: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/6263221.stm
The RFU estimates that overall participation in all club rugby has risen from 567,000 to 677,000 over the same period, representing growth of 19%.
Adding participants in schools (1.56m), leisure rugby (35,000) and members of the armed forces and students (32,000) means that around 2.25m people took part in the game in season 2005/06.
This is pretty much bang on with the earlier 2 million figure. There is 1.5 million playing at schoolboy level,this seems very high. You have to wonder whether some of these are crossed over between other groups such as club rugby. Or if kicking the ball around during lunchtime constitutes 'participation'. 2 million does seem an awful lot in a population of 60 million (The population of the United Kingdom in the 2001 census was 58,789,194. This has since risen to 60,587,300 according to mid-2006 estimates by the Office for National Statistics)
36 million of these were between the ages of 15 and 64,of both genders being about equal in 18 million each. And males between 0 and 14 being 5 million. So id estimate maybe 26 million as a potential playing demographic. 2 million out of 26 million being 1 in 13 who play a sport,play rugby. But as i said,that is a huge estimate,that is probably even a little high.
Also found a website saying 267000 adults participate in rugby more than once a month. Which according to figures,leaves 1.75 million kids left playing rugby...unlikely?
Allegedly
Permalink
Permalink
Wikipedia has the number of Rugby Union players in England at 716,505. Though I cannot find the source behind this figure. It does seem more plausible than over two million. But one thing to remember about Rugby in England is that it has traditionally been considered a purely participation sport as oppose to a spectator sport. This could explain suprisingly large player numbers yet little media coverage.
As for countries with over 100,00 players; Don't forget Japan who have 122,598 and Ireland who have 152,830. So in total NZ, SA, Japan, Ireland, France, England. While Argentina have just under. (All of these according to IRB)
I'm suprised not to see Cricket in the list given by the post above. With India and Pakistan the participation figures would surely be quite high? Don't know though.
Permalink
Permalink
They seem to have a bit of a "sporting bodies exaggerate figures" approach and site that volleyball claimed 1 billion people played the sport,they approached them and said this was one in every 6 people in the world,and the body refined it back to 33 million and said there definelty isnt 4 times more players than soccer
But the top four sports does have some logic - all indoor sports so less space required and therefore more appealing to places that either don't have the space/conducive climate/resources or infrastructre (mostly developing countries).
Of course that doesn't preclude countries where those factors do not apply - it just means the sport is more readily available to more people than football.
"Phoenix till they lose"
Posting 97% bollox, 8% lies and 3.658% genuine opinion.
Genuine opinion: FTFFA
Permalink
Permalink
Country Population # of Registered Rugby Players
England 60,094,648 634,460
South Africa 42,768,678 361,302
France 60,180,529 252,638
Australia 19,731,984 140,000
Japan 127,214,499 129,626
New Zealand 3,951,307 121,928
Fiji 868,531 60,000
Wales 2,900,000 59,900
Argentina 38,740,807 57,000
Ireland 3,924,140 53,500
Italy 57,998,353 39,856
USA 290,342,554 37,429
Canada 32,207,113 16,500
Tonga 108,141 15,000
Samoa 178,173 14,263
Scotland 5,100,000 13,721
Namibia 1,927,447 11,500
Romania 22,271,839 4,500
Uruguay 3,413,329 2,692
Georgia 4,934,413 1,410
England 60,094,648 634,460
South Africa 42,768,678 361,302
France 60,180,529 252,638
Australia 19,731,984 140,000
Japan 127,214,499 129,626
New Zealand 3,951,307 121,928
Fiji 868,531 60,000
Wales 2,900,000 59,900
Argentina 38,740,807 57,000
Ireland 3,924,140 53,500
Italy 57,998,353 39,856
USA 290,342,554 37,429
Canada 32,207,113 16,500
Tonga 108,141 15,000
Samoa 178,173 14,263
Scotland 5,100,000 13,721
Namibia 1,927,447 11,500
Romania 22,271,839 4,500
Uruguay 3,413,329 2,692
Georgia 4,934,413 1,410
here are some much more realistic numbers guys. That 2mill figure for england sounds like a bad marketing scam. anyways i exagerated a little there 6 counties with over 100k
these are registered players too, not guys who toss the ball round at lunch and are used to make numbers more impressive
bringbacksmeltz2009-12-07 13:02:18
rojas, so special
Permalink
Permalink
Doesn't Japans total include about 30,000 ex pat kiwi ex 1st 15 failures playing 2nd teir and getting paid as much as an All Black?
Its no longer a problem.
Permalink
Permalink
About 1% of the population of each country,except NZ. Confirms we're the only country who plays it 
Allegedly
Permalink
Permalink
Sauce?
have to get back to you on that. I cut and pasted from another forum i used it on to silence a few eggheads. Will do a trawl after work and let u know. Must be recent 2 going off populations.rojas, so special
Permalink
Permalink
We are only a country of 4million so the debate about rugby v football is stupid. The critics should just shut up and support any code that does well in this country. Thats my 10cents worth. Positive all the way
Permalink
Permalink
In what way is, "you're dumb, shut up," positive?
Permalink
Permalink
Nah i agree,why even try to make it a competition. The whole participation numbers thing just interested me. Dont get me wrong just because of that
Allegedly
Permalink
Permalink
We are only a country of 4million so the debate about rugby v football is stupid. The critics should just shut up and support any code that does well in this country. Thats my 10cents worth. Positive all the way
to paraphrase the Pythons : "there is nothing more dangerous dull than a clever nationalistic sheep
Permalink
Permalink
Country Population # of Registered Rugby Players England 60,094,648 634,460 South Africa 42,768,678�� �361,302 France 60,180,529 252,638 Australia 19,731,984 �� 140,000 Japan 127,214,499 129,626 New Zealand 3,951,307 121,928 Fiji 868,531 60,000 Wales 2,900,000 �� 59,900 Argentina 38,740,807 57,000 Ireland 3,924,140 53,500 Italy 57,998,353 � 39,856 USA 290,342,554 37,429 Canada 32,207,113 �� 16,500 Tonga 108,141 15,000 Samoa 178,173 14,263 Scotland 5,100,000 13,721 Namibia 1,927,447 �11,500 Romania 22,271,839 �� 4,500 Uruguay 3,413,329 �2,692 Georgia 4,934,413 1,410
here are some much more realistic numbers guys. That 2mill figure for england sounds like a bad marketing scam. anyways i exagerated a little there 6 counties with over 100k
these are registered players too, not guys who�toss the ball round at lunch and are used to make numbers more impressive
That figure for Oz is wrong, It is only about 70000.
If you are old and wise you were probably young and stupid
Permalink
Permalink
Country Population # of Registered Rugby Players England 60,094,648 634,460 South Africa 42,768,678 361,302 France 60,180,529 252,638 Australia 19,731,984 140,000 Japan 127,214,499 129,626 New Zealand 3,951,307 121,928 Fiji 868,531 60,000 Wales 2,900,000 59,900 Argentina 38,740,807 57,000 Ireland 3,924,140 53,500 Italy 57,998,353 39,856 USA 290,342,554 37,429 Canada 32,207,113 16,500 Tonga 108,141 15,000 Samoa 178,173 14,263 Scotland 5,100,000 13,721 Namibia 1,927,447 11,500 Romania 22,271,839 4,500 Uruguay 3,413,329 2,692 Georgia 4,934,413 1,410
here are some much more realistic numbers guys. That 2mill figure for england sounds like a bad marketing scam. anyways i exagerated a little there 6 counties with over 100k
these are registered players too, not guys who toss the ball round at lunch and are used to make numbers more impressive
That figure for Oz is wrong, It is only about 70000.
rojas, so special
Permalink
Permalink
We are only a country of 4million so the debate about rugby v football is stupid. The critics should just shut up and support any code that does well in this country. Thats my 10cents worth. Positive all the way
when the eggheads stop with the soccers for fags line i will leave there sport alone
rojas, so special
Permalink
Permalink
Doesn't Japans total include about 30,000 ex pat kiwi ex 1st 15 failures playing 2nd teir and getting paid as much as an All Black?
You have to remember how large Japan's population is, so the number may seem large yet is a small proportion of the total population. And I think it is similar to England in that it is more of a participation sport as oppose to a spectator sport, its widely played at school and especially at Universities, but not that widely followed compared to Baseball and Football etc.
But yeah I agree with above, I support both codes and have played both codes. Each has strengths and weaknesses over the other. But who really cares, the games are vastly different and appeal to different people. Support the silver fern in any form I say.
Its hard not to get drawn into these debates though haha....I guess thats part of the problem
Permalink
Permalink
Sauce?
Tomato
even if you've kept it in the fridge Seb, that's so old it will have gone off
Permalink
Permalink
If some train spotter has the time....what are the playing numbers for football for some of the eggball countries?
I remember reading in the French sports magazine L'Equipe that there were more registered adult football players in France alone than there were rugby players on the whole planet. Which does not surprise me at all. 2million rugby players in the world....I'll be there would be more than 2 million football players in lots of countrie
What about NZ? what are the player numbers for football vs eggball? including juniors?
I am guessing(and hoping) that in NZ now more play football than eggball
Permalink
Permalink
It's nothing compared to the sh*t being generated this side of the ditch by commercial media over NRL & AFL having to possibly "move" scheduling in 12 years time if the FFA is successful in it's WC bid.
Sports Radio shows have been banging on about it all day how NRL would go broke & AFL will outright refuse to cooperate at all.
Sports Radio shows have been banging on about it all day how NRL would go broke & AFL will outright refuse to cooperate at all.
"Sharing rewards the weak"- Steven Colbert
Permalink
Permalink
the Aussie government will just have to show a bit of initiative then if it wants the economic (and cultural) benefits
Permalink
Permalink
It's nothing compared to the sh*t being generated this side of the ditch by commercial media over NRL & AFL having to possibly "move" scheduling in 12 years time if the FFA is successful in it's WC bid.
Sports Radio shows have been banging on about it all day how NRL would go broke & AFL will outright refuse to cooperate at all.
From what I've read, the NRL has been a bit more co-operative - more along the lines of "The FFA put forward a proposal, we don't like it, but we're meeting them this week anmd we'll discuss other options"
Sports Radio shows have been banging on about it all day how NRL would go broke & AFL will outright refuse to cooperate at all.
Meanwhile, the AFL have chosen to spread misinformation to try and turn the public against real football.
(Then again, I'm from NSW so I may be biased when it comes to the eggball codes 
)
)The AFL is more at risk though - NRL matches can be moved much easier. Even without the Warriors they could get some decent crowds in NZ, maybe in the Pacific Islands and PNG. There'd be problems surrourding Origin, but hopefully that can be sussed. Auckland has talked about bidding to host an Origin match at Eden Park, perhaps 2022 would be a good year for that to happen? Whereas pretty much nobody outside of MelbourneAustralia cares about AFL and thus wouldn't turn up. Ireland is pretty much the only country that could generate interest but they don't have the oval stadia.
Permalink
Permalink