Are the Barbarians badly marketed?

I hear lots of people say the Lions are a throwback to the amatuer days and have no place in the modern game. However we have seen the Lions gain a new lease of life under professional rugby and through shrewd marketing has become one of the biggest events in the game. It is making money for the suits, the fans love it and the players and rowing in behind it.

The same can't be said about the Barbarians. Once an honour, a great type of exhibition match - it has now become all but an irritation in the rugby calendar. Many fans would rather watch their team play a midweek game against a top club side or else get another test match. The ones who are happy to watch the Baabaas moan and groan about how it pales in contrast to the epic Barbarians games of old.

It short it is limping on ahead. With better marketing could the Barbarians be salvaged and turned into a big sporting event?

The issue is now about getting meaningful matches that the public want to see. A really strong Baabaas side that beats international opposition would be attractive to see, but the game is now very professional and the rugby calendar extremely full. Getting the best players released is nigh on impossible. And watching weak baabaa teams is no fun.

If an almost Lions type Baabaas team was picked to take on the All Blacks that would be great to see. But it won't happen.

The last match was a poor one. A lot of geriatrics in the side. A younger more powerful BaaBaas side and the fixture will sell itself.

Might as well scrap it. It would be better for everyone if we just played some real test matches against Georgia or Romania

No I don't think so to be honest.

Wales often throw them a game but the numbers don't lie, the fans just aren't interested in them.

In theory you bring the best players from all over the world to play in a high quality game. In reality you bring in a load of famous players who are in their mid 30's and well past their best.

Personally I'd rather Wales play Romania, Russia or Japan instead of the Barbarians each season.

Hell Wales would do better to bring in Fiji because the fans always turn up to see them.

The irony here for me is that the Barbarians IMO were more of a professional outfit in the amatuer era. They now play like amateurs in the professional era. The 1973 test match v The A;ll Blacks for example was a REAL 5th test match - Nowadays it tends to be show pony heaven with not much on it - I actually can't be bothere to watch most Baa Baas games unlike the edge of the seat real tests before "professionalism" - Then the matches tended to market themselves

I think when the Barbarians were famous back in the 70's they were basically the British Lions.

The British Lions went on tour abroad, but when a big nation toured the Uk, they'd play each individual Uk nation, then finish off with playing a combined team of the best players.

So in effect the Barbarians were the Lions when they were playing within the Uk.

Personally I'm in favour of scrapping both Lions and Barbarians, because every time there is a Lions tour, it decimates Wales, and ruins our momentum.

Both in 2005 and 2009 half the Welsh team came back injured from Lions duty and it ruined any chance Wales had in the following 6 nations, because we just don't have the depth of England and France.

In fact if you look at the stats for the following 6 nations after a Lions tour, you will see France nearly always win it.

2009 Lions tour = 2010 Six Nations = France Grand Slam
2005 Lions Tour = 2006 Six Nations = France win Championship (lost away to Scotland)
2001 Lions tour = 2002 Six Nations = France Grand Slam
1997 Lions tour = 1998 Five Nations = France Grand Slam

The fact is the Lions and Barbarians are a massive problem to British rugby.

If that's the case Alyn fill the Baa baas full of french players

RubyGuby wrote:If that's the case Alyn fill the Baa baas full of french players

I think the Barbarians are uniquely British though to be honest, most players from other countries who play for them are British based.

I wonder what French fans think of the Barbarians?
How many times have the Barbarians played in France for example?

I have two issues with it.

firstly the busy rugby schedule the players have already makes it very difficult to put a team together. I have heard a number of times of south African players that are supposed to go and last minute they withdraw for whatever reason.

Secondly it seems like an afterthought. No hype, no intensity or anything remotely close to the anticipation of a Lions series.

To be honest I would rather see a British & Irish Lions type of team from SA, OZ and NZ travel to europe every 4 years to play a series against the six nation countries.

If it is done on the same principal every 4 years a different country, it would be great.

I agree the teams can be a bit hit and miss sometimes, but generally they've had some very good players pass through the club. Last time out they had young Tomkins from Rugby League, so I don't necessarily think you could say their marketing/effort isn't quite up to scratch.

Perhaps if the Baa Baas played a bit more of a mini series that might encourage more spectators. As far as performances go they really have been pretty good. Here are the most notable results since 2007:

Beaten South Africa twice (12/2007 + 12/2010)

Beaten New Zealand once (12/20009 - the only time they've played them since '07)

Beaten England twice (05/2009 + 05/2011)

Beaten Ireland once (06/2010)

Beaten Wales (06/2011)

I hardly think you could say that they're all past-it players on the receiving end of hidings. There have been about two matches in that period (both against OZ) where it became a bit of a cricket score. But frankly if you're going to pick Danny Cipriani that really is no wonder.

And also picking southern hemisphere players who have no real desire to play after a long season

By contrast Wales did not win a single game against South Africa, New Zealand or Australia in that period. (Excepting a 3 point win over OZ in November '08)

Yeah I don't think the countries take the match serious, I know we haven't put our best team against the barbarians for nigh on 10 years

AlynDavies wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:If that's the case Alyn fill the Baa baas full of french players

I think the Barbarians are uniquely British though to be honest, most players from other countries who play for them are British based.
I wonder what French fans think of the Barbarians?
How many times have the Barbarians played in France for example?

True in former years, AD, but much less so recently - more of a boondoggle for overseas players that fancy a trip to the NH. I think the problem in the pro era is one of player release in an already tightly packed schedule - I personally would love to see it resuscitated and to join the Lions in sporting acclaim, but I can't see what else is going to give to allow that to happen. Bye , bye Baa-Baas, I'm afraid

Chjw131,

Surely that reinforces my point. The Barbarians are a team who are good enough to beat New Zealand, England, Ireland, South Africa, Wales etc yet nobody gives a toss about them.

By contrast apart from a minority (such as Alyn Davies) most people really enjoy Lions tours. Thousands of people travel to see them, the TV companies consider it a massive occasion, tickets change hands at hundreds of euro a ticket.

Yet despite the Baabaas having a good team they are consider my post pepole to be just a nuisance.

They should be placing far greater thought on:

1) Who they play
2) Where they play
3) Who plays for them

I think the Baa Baas should represent the British Isles players and the Unions should support that. Model the Baa Baas on the Lions as they used to be not an amalgamation of contract searching Antipodeans.

The relevence of the club is very strong, they do masses for charity and for the image of the game with the Barbarian spirit of free flowing try scoring rugby.

I'd like to see a BaaBaas put out a side that has one player from each RABO and AP team

red-stag you certainly do have a point. I entirely agree that the thing could be 'PR'd' better, but I don't think it could ever compete with the Lions tours. What you're overlooking re: the popularity of Lions tours is the

a) Unity factor - we're generally so acrimonious to one another during the off season that it's a bit of a novelty to go 'hand-in-hand' with the home nations in the spirit of stuffing it up the SH.

b) Knowledge of the players - within reason most of us could name the majority of a Lions campaign and seeing those players in action along side the best talent that the Home Nations have to offer is a pretty unrivalled spectacle. I know one could have the Baa Baas along the same lines in theory, but they need to be different; and having talent from around the world is the right path.

c) The History - whilst the Baa Baas have had some truly notable games, the Lions history, to my mind, far eclipses it. The stunning tours to NZ and SA will live long in Rugby folklore. Further, the Lions play whole series with warm-up games and all. The experience is one of following along, hoping your chosen players get into the Test team, it's interactive and participatory from that point of view, whereas the Baa Baas are certainly not.

I like the Barbarians one-off games and I like their unpredictability. I do think some of the kicks for goal are a bit off considering tradition, but if it means beating the likes of NZ and SA then why not.

BOPARA Baa Baa's

Chjw131 wrote:red-stag you certainly do have a point. I entirely agree that the thing could be 'PR'd' better, but I don't think it could ever compete with the Lions tours. What you're overlooking re: the popularity of Lions tours is the

a) Unity factor - we're generally so acrimonious to one another during the off season that it's a bit of a novelty to go 'hand-in-hand' with the home nations in the spirit of stuffing it up the SH.

b) Knowledge of the players - within reason most of us could name the majority of a Lions campaign and seeing those players in action along side the best talent that the Home Nations have to offer is a pretty unrivalled spectacle. I know one could have the Baa Baas along the same lines in theory, but they need to be different; and having talent from around the world is the right path.

c) The History - whilst the Baa Baas have had some truly notable games, the Lions history, to my mind, far eclipses it. The stunning tours to NZ and SA will live long in Rugby folklore. Further, the Lions play whole series with warm-up games and all. The experience is one of following along, hoping your chosen players get into the Test team, it's interactive and participatory from that point of view, whereas the Baa Baas are certainly not.

I like the Barbarians one-off games and I like their unpredictability. I do think some of the kicks for goal are a bit off considering tradition, but if it means beating the likes of NZ and SA then why not.

But the problem is the the Baba squads hardly every have any northern hemisphere players. Its usually filled with SH players and NH based SH players!

At the last game the Baa Baas had 11 of the XXII as NH players.

I'm not sure that it's just about marketing. The atmosphere at the ML last summer was terrible.

The Lions are not a throw back, I think the Baa Baas are. No space left now in the busy professional calendar. I'd rather play more tests with the emerging nations.

Let me say at the outset that I am still a big Barbarians fan. The concept is fantastic. And as said before was originally almost a Lions team who played at home (as opposed to the Lions playing away). Sadly, the whole concept has lost the plot.

The idea of having the best players of the Home Nations, and in the world, lining up against a single nation is still one of the ultimate concepts in Rugby.

The challenges are many.
First is the number of matches played. We must reduce the workload on our players.
Second is calendar itself. So crowded, so congested, so long, no time for things like this (In the US, baseball, ice hockey, and basketball break the season for their all-star games).
Third is committment from all Unions, but especially the Home Unions. Players must be available.
Fourth is marketing. They need to rebuild their identity, making the matches events to attend. Properly done, this can big a huge growth engine for Rugby.

To me its worth saving.

The problem with the Barbarians is that teams in the amateur years embarked on rugby tours that involved a lot of games. Although NH teams are encouragingly returning to 3 match series in the SH this year, the same cannot be said for SH teams touring up north. We have had the occasional club fixture which has been well received.

I think though the Barbarians works as a concept in response to a long series in a particular nation. Now it seems one week we play in Scotland, the next in Italy and the next in England. Where do the Barbarians fit into that higgledy-pigglediness? There´s no draw in for the fans to watch a composite side playing a side that´s invariably been in your country for just one week.

The Lions on the other hand have the advantage of a traditional full tour with fixtures against club sides as well as the national side.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:Where do the Barbarians fit into that higgledy-pigglediness? There´s no draw in for the fans to watch a composite side playing a side that´s invariably been in your country for just one week.

Leave it to me. I might just be the last of the Barbarians 'true believers'. I will figure it out. Because I don't think there really is anyone out there to evangalise for them. Sad.

I love the Barbarian matches but it does'nt have the same draw for me now as what it did 20+ years ago.

I like them too doc. Particularly the socks. But I think club commitments and lack of quality players being released for the games is hurting the appeal.