RWC 2015 Organisers Consider Fan Segregation

[goodNumber10]

People said London 2012 was going to be s**t and it really really wasn't.
I have faith.

Twickenham has the potential to be a bit dull, depending on the amount of corporates vs fans that are there, but all the other games should be amazing, especially as the tickets are reasonably priced/accessible.

Agreed. I'm going to try and get along to some of the smaller games in odd venues... The Brighton SA game for example.

 

[ratsapprentice]

people said london 2012 was going to be s**t and it really really wasn't.
I have faith.

#ibelieveindebbie

 

[goodNumber10]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ru...gate-fans-after-campaign-on-social-media.html

We can all thank the telegraph!

 

[ratsapprentice]

Ughh, it's so ****ing ridiculous - this story is just that.... a ****ing story - made up by hacks to generate some controversy.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ru...gate-fans-after-campaign-on-social-media.html

We can all thank the telegraph!

Reading that is ridiculous. They act as if the decision was changed because of the backlash rather than just admitting they made a mistake/lied. Rather than saying they decided they wouldn't do it after a backlash, why can't they just say they never planned to do it and the Telegraph don't know what the hell they are talking about?

 

[Shaggy]

I wouldn't have thought tribalism would be an issue - you should have enough supporters visiting to support their teams for that.

As for segregating the crowds, the great thing is, it's not really necessary in Rugby ... you just need to look at the sevens circuit, where the fans from all of the teams are in together, to see that. Even in XV's I've seen some pretty emotional/****** off All Black and Springbok supporters, sit side by side in the stadium, giving each other verbals, but not actually coming to blows.

Crowd segregation wont fix that. Look at the GAA, there's great tribalism amongst fans despite the crowds being mixed.

I don't think there's an easy way to improve the atmosphere at a lot of World Cup games. If we're being blunt, there are a lot of pool games that are very hard to care about. Will Japan vs USA be able to get a British crowd riled up? Unlikely.

As for the atmosphere at international games in general, the problem there lies in the fact that it's a corporate gig. Too many tickets for the boys, not enough real fans.

That's largely up to how the RWC organisers approach these types of games ... I know at the last cup, they had some success with the local community encouraged to "adopt" the team that was based in their area. They also offered cheaper tickets to some of these type of matches, held them in smaller communities, and encouraged these neutral supporters to support one side if their address started with an odd number, and the other side if it started with an even number.

... not saying that if these strategies were replicated, they would work ... just suggesting that some creative thinking might be required on the organiser's part

 

[goodNumber10]

Reading that is ridiculous. They act as if the decision was changed because of the backlash rather than just admitting they made a mistake/lied. Rather than saying they decided they wouldn't do it after a backlash, why can't they just say they never planned to do it and the Telegraph don't know what the hell they are talking about?

I actually just tweeted them back saying "after campaign on twitter? Or because Gosper said it was never seriously considered?"

Doubt i'll get an answer but it's just incredibly frustrating that this rubbish gets out there - Mick Cleary wrote the original artcile... not the greatest Journo ever but blimey, that's pretty rubbish even for him.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

That's largely up to how the RWC organisers approach these types of games ... I know at the last cup, they had some success with the local community encouraged to "adopt" the team that was based in their area. They also offered cheaper tickets to some of these type of matches, held them in smaller communities, and encouraged these neutral supporters to support one side if their address started with an odd number, and the other side if it started with an even number.

... not saying that if these strategies were replicated, they would work ... just suggesting that some creative thinking might be required on the organiser's part

Tickets are already pretty reasonably priced: For example, Africa 1 vs Georgia at Sandy Park start from £15 - good price for an international game (good price for a club game, tbh) and there's enough rugby supporters to go and watch.

I think the RWC will have decent/good crowds, because of the amount of "fair weather" live rugby fans that are out there. By that I mean, the people who live/breathe club rugby, but can't/don't make pro-club games due to family commitments or work or playing etc. Like at the club I play for there are quite a few players who love rugby, love watching rugby, but don't really go to live games (apart from the odd game at twickenham is they can get the tickets) - will they be at Villa Park watching Australia vs Play-off Winner and South Africa vs Samoa? Damn straight they will.

Not sure where different international sides will be based during the RWC, but I know during the olympics the communities where countries athletes were based really took them in - also most nations in the RWC will have at least a player or two in an international side that will bring in the support. Namibia will get fans cheering because we watch Burger smashing people silly each week. Russia has(/d) Artermyev, Ostrikov and Kulemin in the premiership. Tonga, Samoa, Fiji, USA, Canada - all have at least a player or two that will get rugby fans interested. and then the likes of the Boks, Wallabies and All Blacks are big enough to draw the crowds by themselves.

 

[Shaggy]

Tickets are already pretty reasonably priced: For example, Africa 1 vs Georgia at Sandy Park start from £15 - good price for an international game (good price for a club game, tbh) and there's enough rugby supporters to go and watch.

I think the RWC will have decent/good crowds, because of the amount of "fair weather" live rugby fans that are out there. By that I mean, the people who live/breathe club rugby, but can't/don't make pro-club games due to family commitments or work or playing etc. Like at the club I play for there are quite a few players who love rugby, love watching rugby, but don't really go to live games (apart from the odd game at twickenham is they can get the tickets) - will they be at Villa Park watching Australia vs Play-off Winner and South Africa vs Samoa? Damn straight they will.

Not sure where different international sides will be based during the RWC, but I know during the olympics the communities where countries athletes were based really took them in - also most nations in the RWC will have at least a player or two in an international side that will bring in the support. Namibia will get fans cheering because we watch Burger smashing people silly each week. Russia has(/d) Artermyev, Ostrikov and Kulemin in the premiership. Tonga, Samoa, Fiji, USA, Canada - all have at least a player or two that will get rugby fans interested. and then the likes of the Boks, Wallabies and All Blacks are big enough to draw the crowds by themselves.

That's great that the games will be well attended/supported ... it doesn't really matter if you have "genuine" buy in to either of the teams in terms of support IMO. I remember going to watch Argentina V Namibia in 2003 at Gosford (about two hours north of Sydney). It was at a Rugby League stadium, mostly neutral fans, but they all got behind Namibia because they were the under dogs. They were vocal, everyone had a good time, the stadium was full, and the organisers used the big screen to explain a ruling for those that just wanted to see a match, but didn't understand the rules.

 

[SimonG]

Tribalism in it's truest form is uncivilised.

Definition; loyalty to a tribe especially when combined with strong negative feelings for people outside the group.

This is definition of a football supporter hence they have to be segregated.

Rugby on the other hand is civilised. Intense rivalry/passion do not run as deep. Fans of opposing teams can mingle and chatter among themselves. While this is great from a bonhomie point of view, it takes away an edge from the game as well as the atmosphere.

It would appear from the telegraph article that segregation was suggested at the Rugby world cup to create rivalry. In football segregation exists because of rivalry.

I believe the reason for this difference between football and rugby is the cultural differential between the two sports due to their respective core fanbases. Rugby with the more refined, educated middle/upper classes, football with the working class ruffians. Of course that's just the core fanbases as beyond that has all walks of life. The lack of tribalism definitely impacts Rugby both inside and outside of the stadium as the lack of edge makes it less newsworthy thus gets less media coverage/exposure.

 

[Shaggy]

Tribalism in it's truest form is uncivilised.

Definition; loyalty to a tribe especially when combined with strong negative feelings for people outside the group.

This is definition of a football supporter hence they have to be segregated.

Rugby on the other hand is civilised. Intense rivalry/passion do not run as deep. Fans of opposing teams can mingle and chatter among themselves. While this is great from a bonhomie point of view, it takes away an edge from the game as well as the atmosphere.

It would appear from the telegraph article that segregation was suggested at the Rugby world cup to create rivalry. In football segregation exists because of rivalry.

I believe the reason for this difference between football and rugby is the cultural differential between the two sports due to their respective core fanbases. Rugby with the more refined, educated middle/upper classes, football with the working class ruffians. Of course that's just the core fanbases as beyond that has all walks of life. The lack of tribalism definitely impacts Rugby both inside and outside of the stadium as the lack of edge makes it less newsworthy thus gets less media coverage/exposure.

I would suggest that Rugby already has a rivalry intense enough at the international level to create a great atmosphere (particularly at a world cup). I'd also question that the rivalry/passion doesn't run as deep. It's maybe the case in your part of the world, where Soccer reins supreme, but in New Zealand and South Africa, and to a lesser extent Australia, we have very intense rivalries. We hate losing to each other (or anyone for that matter), and that definitely contributes to the live atmosphere at the matches.

I like that the rivalry and passion is contained (mostly) to verbal assaults, and that you generally don't worry about getting attacked by a mob because of colour of the jersey that you wear.

 

[SimonG]

Its not the same intensity. At a Rugby ground theres no chanting, no banners, no vitriolic rivalry among fans, and there's no needle between rival coaches and players who openly detest each other. It's in a similar vein to cricket in that good behaviour is the order of the day.

This lack of edge means Rugby doesn't make headlines. Infact, the last time I recall anything outside of what happened on the field making news was Warren Gatland making some comment about Ireland...and it was pretty mild. There's almost an etiquette of good manners attached to the game, and anyone who steps out of line is frowned upon. Even place kickers get silence before taking a penalty. It's too well behaved.

 

[Shaggy]

Its not the same intensity. At a Rugby ground theres no chanting, no banners, no vitriolic rivalry among fans, and there's no needle between rival coaches and players who openly detest each other. It's in a similar vein to cricket in that good behaviour is the order of the day.

This lack of edge means Rugby doesn't make headlines. Infact, the last time I recall anything outside of what happened on the field making news was Warren Gatland making some comment about Ireland...and it was pretty mild. There's almost an etiquette of good manners attached to the game, and anyone who steps out of line is frowned upon. Even place kickers get silence before taking a penalty. It's too well behaved.

... and again ... yes, in your part of the world, that's probably true (I believe you, you are way more qualified/informed than I am on that front)... but the UK and Ireland isn't the world of rugby in it's entirety is it? ... you want vitriolic rivalry? How about South Africa's Bulls and Sharks?, Auckland V Canterbury.

I don't see why it's got to be a rivalry to the point of violence anyway ... my point remains the same, there will be more than enough traditional rivalry from the visiting fans to create enough atmosphere, without trying to artificially create it through hate/segregation

 

[Pockets]

Its not the same intensity. At a Rugby ground theres no chanting, no banners, no vitriolic rivalry among fans, and there's no needle between rival coaches and players who openly detest each other. It's in a similar vein to cricket in that good behaviour is the order of the day.

This lack of edge means Rugby doesn't make headlines. Infact, the last time I recall anything outside of what happened on the field making news was Warren Gatland making some comment about Ireland...and it was pretty mild. There's almost an etiquette of good manners attached to the game, and anyone who steps out of line is frowned upon. Even place kickers get silence before taking a penalty. It's too well behaved.

Do you watch The Football Factory before you go to bed every night or something?
Football needs segregating because it's ended up being the sport of choice for tanked up knuckledraggers to follow, no other reason.
The lack of rugby headlines is because of the relative level of interest in the sport - if the rugby stories got enough clicks/views, then they'd be drumming up some drama just as much as in football. That people don't have to be held back like some football managers is simply because they're aware of how stupid that looks.

That rivalries tend to be pretty friendly in rugby's a positive thing, and is far from an issue when it comes to atmosphere; I was living in Cardiff at the end of the time when they were building the new Wembley and during the 2007 World Cup, and the WC was far better atmosphere around the place than almost all the cup finals. There were as many Argentinians as French at that quarter final vs. NZ, but it was still absolutely crazy (I can't believe it's almost 7 years ago, ****ing hell)

 

[LittleGuy]

Its not the same intensity. At a Rugby ground theres no chanting, no banners, no vitriolic rivalry among fans, and there's no needle between rival coaches and players who openly detest each other. It's in a similar vein to cricket in that good behaviour is the order of the day.

This lack of edge means Rugby doesn't make headlines. Infact, the last time I recall anything outside of what happened on the field making news was Warren Gatland making some comment about Ireland...and it was pretty mild. There's almost an etiquette of good manners attached to the game, and anyone who steps out of line is frowned upon. Even place kickers get silence before taking a penalty. It's too well behaved.

As shaggy said, your assuming that how fans act in your part of the world is how it is everywhere. Place kickers endure untold abuse in North America and in France they get whistles and boos as well.

 

[SimonG]

... and again ... yes, in your part of the world, that's probably true (I believe you, you are way more qualified/informed than I am on that front)... but the UK and Ireland isn't the world of rugby in it's entirety is it? ... you want vitriolic rivalry? How about South Africa's Bulls and Sharks?, Auckland V Canterbury.

I don't see why it's got to be a rivalry to the point of violence anyway ... my point remains the same, there will be more than enough traditional rivalry from the visiting fans to create enough atmosphere, without trying to artificially create it through hate/segregation

Is there fan segregation in South Africa and NZ?? Are their rows of stewards keeping the fans segregated?? At full time are the away fans kept over until the home fans have gone and then escorted out of the stadium?? Any chants, banners from fans aimed at opposing teams/players/fans??

Is there bitter rivalry and open disdain by coaches, players to the opposition? Are there weekly public spats?

Theres none of this in the NH, and I've seen none of this (and haven't heard of any of it) in Southern Hemisphere Rugby.

Do you watch The Football Factory before you go to bed every night or something?
Football needs segregating because it's ended up being the sport of choice for tanked up knuckledraggers to follow, no other reason.
The lack of rugby headlines is because of the relative level of interest in the sport - if the rugby stories got enough clicks/views, then they'd be drumming up some drama just as much as in football. That people don't have to be held back like some football managers is simply because they're aware of how stupid that looks.

That rivalries tend to be pretty friendly in rugby's a positive thing, and is far from an issue when it comes to atmosphere; I was living in Cardiff at the end of the time when they were building the new Wembley and during the 2007 World Cup, and the WC was far better atmosphere around the place than almost all the cup finals. There were as many Argentinians as French at that quarter final vs. NZ, but it was still absolutely crazy (I can't believe it's almost 7 years ago, ****ing hell)

Yeah we're all knuckledraggers.

"the lack of rugby headlines is because of the relative interest in the sport".....the lack of rugby headlines is because of the lack of rugby headlines. Any coach or player let's out a peep it's frowned upon, they learn their lesson and you never hear another peep out of them again.

"friendly rivalry"...you said it, hence zero headlines.

It's all well and good having nice behaviour...but it takes away an edge from the game, means no headlines, less interest. Where are the personalities? Sport is showbusiness.

 

[Shaggy]

Is there fan segregation in South Africa and NZ?? Are their rows of stewards keeping the fans segregated?? At full time are the away fans kept over until the home fans have gone and then escorted out of the stadium?? Any chants, banners from fans aimed at opposing teams/players/fans??

Is there bitter rivalry and open disdain by coaches, players to the opposition? Are there weekly public spats?

Theres none of this in the NH, and I've seen none of this (and haven't heard of any of it) in Southern Hemisphere Rugby.
.

I don't see what your obsession is with fan segregation/the need for fan segregation, yes there's banners sledging opposition players, booing etc ... Coaches generally shy away from being overly critical of one another because of suspension and fines ... so what?

I've already given some examples of rivalries, if you want to get a gauge on how deep these rivalries run, visit some of the South African rugby websites some time and see how quickly any topic quickly becomes a verbal sledging match between rival supporters.

There's plenty of sledging, and fans still leave the stadium ****** off when their team loses.

... but so what, the interest is still there, the stadiums at internationals are full, he crowd enjoy the game and the atmosphere, Rugby manages to grab the sporting headlines (unlike Soccer in New Zealand), the rivalry is maintained ... all without the need to segregate or escort anyone.

As I have posted through out this thread, there isn't a need to generate any artificial hatred or rivalry at the RWC, because the stadiums are going to be full with people supporting their team, and enjoying the event anyway.

Pockets is right on the money when he's talking about headlines, by the way, in New Zealand it's Rugby, then Rugby League, Cricket, then other Sports including Soccer. In Australia it's Aussie Rules, Rugby League, Cricket, then other sports including Rugby and Soccer. In South Africa it seems to be Rugby and Cricket first.

... and yes the Rugby headlines are about the games, the line ups, injuries, pressure on the players and coaches.

 

[SimonG]

Shaggy with all due respect, but you are from NZ which is isolated from the rest of us, plus it's the only country on the planet where Union is the biggest sport thus whatever does occur there is an anomaly. Having said that i have seen Ireland and England tests in NZ and the fans of both are laughing and smiling in amongst NZ fans, usually waving to the camera as it pans across. It's a jovial bonhomie atmosphere. Rugby has a "friendly rivalry" as I keep hearing, it's the ethos of the game perhaps due to its public school origin and subsequent spread.

Segregation exists in football because of the rivalry, segregation doesn't exist in Rugby because of the lack of one. The Telegraph article mentioned segregation as a policy to try and "create" some rivalry in Rugby but as I said its against the ethos of the game. There is a public school snobbery at its core whereby outspoken views/personalities are frowned upon and they go quiet. Bonhomie and manners is laudable from a social point of view, but at the cost of an edge in the game.

 

[Shaggy]

Shaggy with all due respect, but you are from NZ which is isolated from the rest of us, plus it's the only country on the planet where Union is the biggest sport thus whatever does occur there is an anomaly. Having said that i have seen Ireland and England tests in NZ and the fans of both are laughing and smiling in amongst NZ fans, usually waving to the camera as it pans across. It's a jovial bonhomie atmosphere. Rugby has a "friendly rivalry" as I keep hearing, it's the ethos of the game perhaps due to its public school origin and subsequent spread.

Segregation exists in football because of the rivalry, segregation doesn't exist in Rugby because of the lack of one. The Telegraph article mentioned segregation as a policy to try and "create" some rivalry in Rugby but as I said its against the ethos of the game. There is a public school snobbery at its core whereby outspoken views/personalities are frowned upon and they go quiet. Bonhomie and manners is laudable from a social point of view, but at the cost of an edge in the game.

Hey, fair enough Simon, these are only my opinions/perspectives, and doesn't make them right or wrong ... but it's kinda what I was getting at, not everybody is from the UK or Ireland, things are different all over the world, and some of those people are coming to visit for the RWC.

I guess my points are/were:

1/ The RWC is a global event, with fans coming from all over the world (not just the UK & Ireland), so they might be a different kind of fan/crowd than what you normally get.

2/ They will bring with them their own allegiances and rivalry.

3/ Segregation and/or artificial rivalry isn't needed, because it already exists.

It's only my opinion, but, I believe that segregation exists in football because of violence, not because of rivalry ... I admit that rivalry is a component, but I suspect that for some fans, the violence is more important than the game itself.

In conclusion, you definitely can have rivalry in sport without segregation and/or violence ... it's just a different kind of rivalry ... not all sports have to, or need to be the same.

 

[smartcooky]

Well, I don't particularly want to see a vitriolic undertone creep into rugby. As for songs and chants in the GAA I think the rapid scoring nature of the game kind of makes that unworkable. If there's a point every minute or two you don't have the time to strike up a good chant. As for banners, I don't know where you get the idea that there's a shortage in the GAA. Flags and banners everywhere in my experience.

English football is an interesting example. In footballing circles the league is hardly renowned for its atmosphere. You'll find better fare on the continent or in the championship in that regard. On this season Man Utd had to bring in that singing section lark to generate a bit of noise in their 70,000+ seater stadium.

Again, I think it comes down to ticketing. For atmosphere the best league in Western Europe is the Bundesliga. It's also the cheapest. You can get a ticket for a Borussia Dortmund game for a tenner. If you want atmosphere, make it so that the actual fans can afford to go every week. Corporate types who can afford to shell out 75 quid a pop for an Ireland game aren't going to make as much noise as a bunch of (cheerfully) rowdy students. Simple as.

Crowd segregation wont fix that. Look at the GAA, there's great tribalism amongst fans despite the crowds being mixed.

I don't think there's an easy way to improve the atmosphere at a lot of World Cup games. If we're being blunt, there are a lot of pool games that are very hard to care about. Will Japan vs USA be able to get a British crowd riled up? Unlikely.

As for the atmosphere at international games in general, the problem there lies in the fact that it's a corporate gig. Too many tickets for the boys, not enough real fans.

Bloody well agree with you on this. I went to all three RWC games in Nelson in 2011 (Italy v Russia, Italy v USA, Australia v Russia). I had a friend who was out of the country until a week or two beforehand, and he couldn't get tickets a week before the first match because it was a "sellout", yet at the ground, there were about 1000 empty seats for the whole match, includng a few rows in the main stand. They were corporate tickets that were given away in junkets, and the recipients didn't bother turning up. IMO, corporate give-away tickets should be conditional; you have to be in the ground by 1hr before kickoff, or they are could be sold to any walk-ups who want them (a bit like Stand-by airline tickets).

I also agree 100% with your point regarding ticket prices; Cheaper tickets = Bigger crowds, better atmosphere and happier vendors!