Ladies British and Irish LIONS TOUR?

I have just been reading that they are thinking about setting up a British and Irish Lions tour for women after 2019.

I think this will be  great idea for the womens game.

What do you think?

Dicuss.

Yes

Its a silly idea. Nobody is interested in womens rugby and the men's game will have to fund it.

It would increase the awareness of the women's game so I think it is a great idea. So what the women's game relies on men's game cash? It is surely an investment.

You mean I could go watch rugby and drink beer following a lions tour every 2 years rather than 4?
I'm in

profitius wrote:Its a silly idea. Nobody is interested in womens rugby and the men's game will have to fund it.

The semi-final between France and England set a new tournament record of a peak audience of 3.2 million on French television station France 2, while a peak of 2.65 million tuned in to ITV to watch the final - the largest single audience for a Women’s Rugby World Cup final and almost half of the audience for the men’s final at the 2015 Rugby World Cup. The 2017 tournament also set new social media records with 45 million views across official tournament platforms, the best-performing World Rugby event of the year and the biggest since Rugby World Cup 2015.


Nobody is interested.

Sport governing bodies need to have an eye on more than just financials. People need to play a sport at all levels to provide a base of interest. Investment in the womens game doesn't provide a positive financial return, and probably won't for a long time, if ever.

The number of people in England playing golf on a monthly basis is down about 30% since 2000. No mainstream sport is guaranteed to maintain it's attraction to future generations, so it makes sense for rugby to keep cultivating new areas.

If they do, lets get the name right from the start... It cant be the Ladies British and Irish LIONS, it has to be the British and Irish Lionesses.

But I think it has as much chance of getting off he ground as I have in Gatland calling me up for the rest of the 6 Nations.

Pot Hale wrote:

profitius wrote:Its a silly idea. Nobody is interested in womens rugby and the men's game will have to fund it.

The semi-final between France and England set a new tournament record of a peak audience of 3.2 million on French television station France 2, while a peak of 2.65 million tuned in to ITV to watch the final - the largest single audience for a Women’s Rugby World Cup final and almost half of the audience for the men’s final at the 2015 Rugby World Cup.  The 2017 tournament also set new social media records with 45 million views across official tournament platforms, the best-performing World Rugby event of the year and the biggest since Rugby World Cup 2015.


Nobody is interested.  

Thats one game. the womens 6 nations probably makes about 3% of the money the mens does. Thats the real measure of interest.

The Lions concept makes sense for the women's game. It is more cost effective to fund one team touring than 4. That's why the Lions came to be in the men's game. If successful, it can start to generate more revenue for the women's game for itself, and may increase interest in the women's 6 Nations.

It's a good idea, hopefully it goes ahead and succeeds.

profitius wrote:Its a silly idea. Nobody is interested in womens rugby and the men's game will have to fund it.

I have to agree. Women's rugby is garbage. Its like we have to pretend to like it because gender equality.

That said if a tour is self funding then why not. If not forget about it.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:

profitius wrote:Its a silly idea. Nobody is interested in womens rugby and the men's game will have to fund it.

I have to agree. Women's rugby is garbage. Its like we have to pretend to like it because gender equality.

That said if a tour is self funding then why not. If not forget about it.

Well that's your opinion and your entitled to hold it.
I don't agree at all mind.

So you enjoy watching womens rugby? Id say under 20s or even schoolboy rugby is a far higher standard.

GunsGermsV2 wrote:So you enjoy watching womens rugby? Id say under 20s or even schoolboy rugby is a far higher standard.

The game isn't fully professional, whereas in men's under 20 rugby most of the players from all nations will have pro-contracts.

I think the England ladies produce some good stuff, but it isn't competitive enough. England and France have both got maximum points after 3 games, England have scored 22 tries and conceded 15 points, while France have scored 16 tries and only conceded 3 points.

Such disparity every week doesn't make for a great spectacle unfortunately. If Scotland, Wales and Ireland could all benefit financially from a Lions tour, then maybe that would help drive up the quality.

Ladies rugby is not something I would personally be interested in but it certainly has its place and I believe has a growing fan base. A ladies Lions tour would be great in helping generate more interest and fan base.

There are very few concepts that are successful and generate money immediately so ladies rugby will have to receive some funding and support from the men's game. Give it time to develop.

Just because some people think its garbage and a waste of time does not mean that it does not have its place.

robbo277 wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:So you enjoy watching womens rugby? Id say under 20s or even schoolboy rugby is a far higher standard.

The game isn't fully professional, whereas in men's under 20 rugby most of the players from all nations will have pro-contracts.

I think the England ladies produce some good stuff, but it isn't competitive enough. England and France have both got maximum points after 3 games, England have scored 22 tries and conceded 15 points, while France have scored 16 tries and only conceded 3 points.

Such disparity every week doesn't make for a great spectacle unfortunately. If Scotland, Wales and Ireland could all benefit financially from a Lions tour, then maybe that would help drive up the quality.

The womens national rugby team would struggle to beat a national U12 boys team.


A few years ago the Australian womens soccer team - who were ranked number 2 or 3 in the world - were preparing to go to the womens world cup so they organised a game against Newcastle (Aus) Jets U15 boys team. The women lost 7-0!

profitius wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:So you enjoy watching womens rugby? Id say under 20s or even schoolboy rugby is a far higher standard.

The game isn't fully professional, whereas in men's under 20 rugby most of the players from all nations will have pro-contracts.

I think the England ladies produce some good stuff, but it isn't competitive enough. England and France have both got maximum points after 3 games, England have scored 22 tries and conceded 15 points, while France have scored 16 tries and only conceded 3 points.

Such disparity every week doesn't make for a great spectacle unfortunately. If Scotland, Wales and Ireland could all benefit financially from a Lions tour, then maybe that would help drive up the quality.

The womens national rugby team would struggle to beat a national U12 boys team.


A few years ago the Australian womens soccer team - who were ranked number 2 or 3 in the world - were preparing to go to the womens world cup so they organised a game against Newcastle (Aus) Jets U15 boys team. The women lost 7-0!

Good point, let's ignore women's rugby then because a women's football team lost one game.

I'm not saying with professionalism they'd compete with the men's teams, or even the Under 20s teams. But the game is a product in its own right. The World Cup was a good showcase for the game, the Six Nations isn't so much because of the disparity between the teams. And until all 6 Nations are professional, that can't be helped.

robbo277 wrote:

profitius wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

GunsGermsV2 wrote:So you enjoy watching womens rugby? Id say under 20s or even schoolboy rugby is a far higher standard.

The game isn't fully professional, whereas in men's under 20 rugby most of the players from all nations will have pro-contracts.

I think the England ladies produce some good stuff, but it isn't competitive enough. England and France have both got maximum points after 3 games, England have scored 22 tries and conceded 15 points, while France have scored 16 tries and only conceded 3 points.

Such disparity every week doesn't make for a great spectacle unfortunately. If Scotland, Wales and Ireland could all benefit financially from a Lions tour, then maybe that would help drive up the quality.

The womens national rugby team would struggle to beat a national U12 boys team.


A few years ago the Australian womens soccer team - who were ranked number 2 or 3 in the world - were preparing to go to the womens world cup so they organised a game against Newcastle (Aus) Jets U15 boys team. The women lost 7-0!

Good point, let's ignore women's rugby then because a women's football team lost one game.

I'm not saying with professionalism they'd compete with the men's teams, or even the Under 20s teams. But the game is a product in its own right. The World Cup was a good showcase for the game, the Six Nations isn't so much because of the disparity between the teams. And until all 6 Nations are professional, that can't be helped.

I'm just giving a picture of the standard.


I can't see how all 6 nations teams will turn professional unless it has to be subsidised by the mens game. England and France the exception.

It will basically be England and a few players from other countries. Not much point really as England as so dominant in the ladies game.

As someone who has been to a fair few women's matches, and reffed even more, I have always enjoyed the experience.

The skill level is indeed some way below mens, and physicality much lower again. However having seen training sessions run by Sarah Hunter and Maggie Alphonsi, I reckon anyone thinking that the elite women are unskilled and unphysical knows very little. In many ways the average recreational player would learn much more from watching elite Women than Elite men.

Should the men's game subsidise the Women's? Well should the elite game subsidise any level? Again just an opinion but anything that can encourage more teenage girls to participate in sport the better. An investment well worth making.

Finally on a side note I sometimes wonder how many people on here would actually believe the spectator in this story did nothing wrong?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/43214108

Are world rugby behind this? If so it just shows how clueless they are. So next it'll be the B&I u20s, the B&I classic, the B&I veterans, the B&I minis, the B&I pro-am celebrity invitational...


It's a terrible idea but at least it will dilute the brand to help marginalise the anachronistic men's version further.

Aukster, the Irish don’t tend to get behind the Lions in any form so why does this bother you?

Cyril wrote:Aukster, the Irish don’t tend to get behind the Lions in any form so why does this bother you?

Really? Interesting that the most capped ever Lion and top Lion try scorer were both from Ireland.

Cyril wrote:Aukster, the Irish don’t tend to get behind the Lions in any form so why does this bother you?

Not bothered at all. Just an observation on how clueless World Rugby are.

The term Lions comes from the Royal crest, so why don't the ladies try to tone down the imperialist connection by calling themselves the pussycats instead - the BI pussies has a bit of a ring hasn't it?

Bit sexist but sums you up

I love watching the Red Roses - in fact I'll be at the Ricoh to watch them against Ireland in a couple of weeks. The womens championship has been steadily growing over the past 5 or 6 years and England have already been World Champs.

I think there's a few issues to sort out surrounding funding and whether the top players do 7s or 15s in the English game. I just hope that the B&I Lionesses don't end up as 14 English players and one player from the other qualifying nations.

I would think the Lionesses would be England plus a couple of others. From that point of view not good. However from a spreading the word / raising interest point of view I like the idea. I also like watching womens rugby - less kicking

No 7&1/2 wrote:Bit sexist but sums you up

No more sexist than calling them lionesses.

The Great Aukster wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Bit sexist but sums you up

No more sexist than calling them lionesses.

It'll be impossible to know what to call them considering words such as mankind is now considered offensive in places such as North America. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/07/justin-trudeau-tells-woman-to-say-peoplekind-not-mankind.

Lionesses would not be sexist

Changing the term Lions to Lionesses is undoubtedly sexist. A lioness is a lion but is gender specific - both male and female can be lions but only females are lionesses.

Down in our part of the World the women often play curtainraiser games, before the main fixture.