@Balmain Boy said:League couldn't have more than a minor following in SA in the next 50 years. The people are very proud and also quite reluctant to change in certain ways. Rugby is by far the national sport and anything which is seen as a threat to that will get a lot of hostility thrown at it by the public, politicians etc.
Football is easily number two, but as Rugby is a predominantly white sport, football is a predominantly black sport. Cricket is another predominantly white sport but isn't seen as a threat to rugby due to different seasons. Even then it has a smaller following than the other two. Most people stick to the sports which have been 'theirs' for generations. If league could get the interest of the black communities then it may have a chance, as many blacks still consider rugby to be a white person sport, league is new and doesn't have those connotations - so they could potentially embrace it more than they do rugby. BTW, I don't like to discuss race in this manner, but SA is one country where it is still very pertinent having spent a fair bit of time there over the years.
League while being a more entertaining sport to watch would struggle big time to get interest from a country who's fans love scrums, tough forwards and their pride in their rugby history. But it's worth putting some feelers out there.
As for the other countries mentioned, they will always be minority sports, well outside the top 4-5 in each country, but some have populations big enough for a decent sized semi-pro league.
that could definitely work for RL i reckon, some good points there.
union is very popular in RSA, but in certain areas. Just like RL is very popular in Aus but only in certain areas. I think we'd be better off targetting nations in the british isles, france, the islands near us and NZ. THEN focusing on the states, canada and RSA.