RL could end up like Speedway in 5 years

[ckn]

I fear that Murdoch News Corporation has both codes of Rugby by the balls and will look to merge them in around 20 years or so. Murdoch funds both games in the UK and has alot of power in Australasia.Who owns the Broncos and the Storm? Who runs the NRL at present? Who controls the media in Australia?

Laurel and Hardy (Woods and Lewis) at the RFL are trying to expand the game at all costs and have succeeded in upsetting a large section of fans with franchising. Rugby League professionally is probably at its weakest it ever has been. St.Helens, Hull KR, Wakey, Quins, Crusaders are losing money. Others like Huddersfield and Warrington are living off a sugar daddy-but for how long? The RFL have no money, no power and no control over the game. The Media has control of what Murdoch and his organization wants. So because League is the weaker of the codes it can easily strangle its growth or at least have more say in what it does.

Union in the UK is kept going in many cases by Sky (same as most other sports) Sky can say to League and Union to merge or they will drop both games and whilst Union could probably survive to some degree it would be a lot weaker and likely would have to go back to part time. League at Pro level would disappear and the clubs that do survive would maybe forced in to playing Union to survive at a Semi pro level. Sky saved Rugby League to an extent in the late 90s. But now it can kill off Rugby League very easily and by not reporting Rugby League it can slowly kill off League. Soccer is pumped down the throats of the Youth alongside Union. League cant cope with that sadly.

Union has bitten back against their Murdoch paymasters by jumping into bed with ESPN this season. Next time round, Sky will pay far more for union to stop ESPN taking "their" sport away from them permanently, especially given how little it actually costs them compared to football.

It has probably cost the RFU money from losing "exclusivity" but then it gives them a much bigger bargaining chip next time by showing Sky they're serious about walking away if they don't get enough money.

[paley]

Union has bitten back against their Murdoch paymasters by jumping into bed with ESPN this season. Next time round, Sky will pay far more for union to stop ESPN taking "their" sport away from them permanently, especially given how little it actually costs them compared to football.

It has probably cost the RFU money from losing "exclusivity" but then it gives them a much bigger bargaining chip next time by showing Sky they're serious about walking away if they don't get enough money.

Sky were aware the RFU had split the GP up into two packages, they only bid for one of them so there is nothing to suggest they will be paying far more to get both packages next time. The 2 packages together cost more than the single one the previous time.

Edited August 18, 2010 by paley

[ckn]

Sky were aware the RFU had split the GP up into two packages, they only bid for one of them so there is nothing to suggest they will be paying far more to get both packages next time. The 2 packages together cost more than the single one the previous time.

In the past though Sky have just demanded exclusivity and got it. In the past there was no really credible competitor but ESPN has the credibility and finances that the likes of Setanta could only dream of having. The RFU have done well to spread their exposure while making Sky acutely aware that they no longer have exclusivity.

Rugby league gets stiffed by Sky to the point that more than a few Premiership footballers get paid more than a rugby league club's entire salary cap. It would take incredible balls to tell Sky to pay more "or else" though.

[Manx RL]

Thank you Eddie Warring. If only the 1895 club had got their way the game would have a more respected standing.

[Blind side johnny]

in the same sort of way that Greyhound racing has all but lost all its London tracks. Wimbledon i suppose in the only track left in London if we are talking London postal codes. Romford is Essex and Crayford is Kent. despite what certain people say we do need Rugby League in London, and we do need a Super League club there as well.

So speedway has died in London, as has greyhounds. RL is struggling and RU has diminished enormously. Yet still the problem lies with the individual sports. Maybe the problem actually lies with London.

Just a thought!

[RP London]

So speedway has died in London, as has greyhounds. RL is struggling and RU has diminished enormously. Yet still the problem lies with the individual sports. Maybe the problem actually lies with London.

Just a thought!

yes it does aboslutely.. london is apathetic towards London.. it is said a lot on here, but that doesnt mean it cannot work and it doesnt mean that you cannot crack it you just have to get it right.. the right area helps a bundle and they havent done that yet..

not only that but the term success has to be defined,... the junior development and growth in participation levels is fantastic.. yes the main team isnt doing great and needs to do better, but the london team people seem to expect is one the size of saints in crowds etc and this is not oging ot happen for a long long time.. it has to be sustainable and needs to be better than now but what is happenign underneath it is why the main club is worth persveiring with.

London though is a tough nut to crack due to the amount of other options available for your free time.

[RP London]

I fear that Murdoch News Corporation has both codes of Rugby by the balls and will look to merge them in around 20 years or so. Murdoch funds both games in the UK and has alot of power in Australasia.Who owns the Broncos and the Storm? Who runs the NRL at present? Who controls the media in Australia?

Laurel and Hardy (Woods and Lewis) at the RFL are trying to expand the game at all costs and have succeeded in upsetting a large section of fans with franchising. Rugby League professionally is probably at its weakest it ever has been. St.Helens, Hull KR, Wakey, Quins, Crusaders are losing money. Others like Huddersfield and Warrington are living off a sugar daddy-but for how long? The RFL have no money, no power and no control over the game. The Media has control of what Murdoch and his organization wants. So because League is the weaker of the codes it can easily strangle its growth or at least have more say in what it does.

Union in the UK is kept going in many cases by Sky (same as most other sports) Sky can say to League and Union to merge or they will drop both games and whilst Union could probably survive to some degree it would be a lot weaker and likely would have to go back to part time. League at Pro level would disappear and the clubs that do survive would maybe forced in to playing Union to survive at a Semi pro level. Sky saved Rugby League to an extent in the late 90s. But now it can kill off Rugby League very easily and by not reporting Rugby League it can slowly kill off League. Soccer is pumped down the throats of the Youth alongside Union. League cant cope with that sadly.

if we're going by making money as a club then pro sport in this country is in dire trouble.. RU, RL, Football and the cricket counties rarely make money at the moment.., look at all athe clubs in debt in football, all the cluibs in debt in RU the Counties in cricket rely on the ECB handouts etc.. Pro sport does not make a huge amount of money any more in this country, it all comes from the TV ... RL needs a better international game to help support the domestic game in the way RU does and Cricket does.. IMO

but dont judge the game on the profitabnlity of the pro clubs.. as if we do that every sport is in trouble..

[no13benny]

In my opinion, there are too many thousands of people who love this sport for it do become scaled to that level. The here & now of marketing and media is in blogs, podcasts, and status updates on social networking sites, and servics like youtube.

The more people vocally support the game through these avenues, the more it will attract public attention.

I update my facebook every weekend on what I think about the Super League games, and at my work place in Plymouth have had comments along the lines of,

"I've never known someone be so passionate about their sport, reading what's going on I've become really interested in it."

and from someone who when they joined the company saying "no one cares about rugby league" they came to me the other week and said "I was watching some of that Australian rugby league the other morning, it was crazy. I think rugby league's better than rugby union. It's faster and has more going on all the time"

So, that's two people who either had no interest, or were blinkered with a adverse view of the sport without really having watched it, who have now become interested, just by me putting posts like, "What game of Super League! Last minute try saving tackle from England's Tom Briscoe gives Hull the win in the massive Hull rugby league derby" on Twitter, which is linked to Myspace, and Facebook, that's one post of 25 words, broadcast over three networking sites.

What I think we should do, is have a Facebook arm for TotalRL, and other rugby league forums, where people who are willing to, can add the other members that put their names forward as friends.

Then when we put these updates, all of us can "like" them or comment on them, which then posts the updates on our updates for our friends to see, and so on.

I have posted as much before, but how many people on this forum do it, and if they do, lets pool our voices and start the snowball effect.

[tonyXIII]

Oh for the days when English RL actually had dominant influence over the direction of the game's rules and the style of game that delivered - one suited to natural and instinctive footballing skill over athleticism and set plays.

I can't see how England will ever catch the Kangaroos & the NRL-bred Kiwis whilever the game's rules encourage athleticism over talent. The same for every other aspiring RL nation. Everyone in RL across the globe is playing (and struggling) by RL rules evolved to suit the needs of the NRL athletes game.

Why does RL put this 'athleticism' requirement (via the game's rules) onto every current and prospective RL player? It doesn't help tp expand the game, nor does it engender competitiveness (unless you call 2 teams struggling for 80 minutes as 'competition').

The RFL needs to be exercising greater influence at the rules table, and pushing for changes that suit your footballers' attributes.

Not saying that will be easy to achieve, nor that the Aussie and Kiwis players aren't talented (they obviously are), but by getting the 'athleticism' angle reduced, it becomes more of a fair fight on the playing field.

A competitive and winning England side is the best means for RL to gain wider media.

Very well put indeed!

I might even be coming round to accepting the last sentence.

[tonyXIII]

In my opinion, there are too many thousands of people who love this sport for it do become scaled to that level. The here & now of marketing and media is in blogs, podcasts, and status updates on social networking sites, and servics like youtube.

The more people vocally support the game through these avenues, the more it will attract public attention.

I update my facebook every weekend on what I think about the Super League games, and at my work place in Plymouth have had comments along the lines of,

"I've never known someone be so passionate about their sport, reading what's going on I've become really interested in it."

and from someone who when they joined the company saying "no one cares about rugby league" they came to me the other week and said "I was watching some of that Australian rugby league the other morning, it was crazy. I think rugby league's better than rugby union. It's faster and has more going on all the time"

So, that's two people who either had no interest, or were blinkered with a adverse view of the sport without really having watched it, who have now become interested, just by me putting posts like, "What game of Super League! Last minute try saving tackle from England's Tom Briscoe gives Hull the win in the massive Hull rugby league derby" on Twitter, which is linked to Myspace, and Facebook, that's one post of 25 words, broadcast over three networking sites.

What I think we should do, is have a Facebook arm for TotalRL, and other rugby league forums, where people who are willing to, can add the other members that put their names forward as friends.

Then when we put these updates, all of us can "like" them or comment on them, which then posts the updates on our updates for our friends to see, and so on.

I have posted as much before, but how many people on this forum do it, and if they do, lets pool our voices and start the snowball effect.

I agree with the idea. My problem is that I find these social networking sites rather uninviting. I haven't mastered Facebook (my wife uses it a bit) and can't pluck up enough interest to bother trying. I think your idea is good, but shouldn't it be co-ordinated by a RFL publicity and communications department? It could be a cheap and effective way of gaining publicity. Will it ever replace the national media, though?

[no13benny]

I agree with the idea. My problem is that I find these social networking sites rather uninviting. I haven't mastered Facebook (my wife uses it a bit) and can't pluck up enough interest to bother trying. I think your idea is good, but shouldn't it be co-ordinated by a RFL publicity and communications department? It could be a cheap and effective way of gaining publicity. Will it ever replace the national media, though?

Well, newspapers are already becoming a thing of the past, with the new iPad an example where people are more likely to read online, rather than in print even on their travels. If they are more likely to read online, it is extremely likely they will 'check Facebook' or an equivalent, and in doing so, will be exposed to this kind of publicity.

Lets say someone checks Facebook, and just 20 updates from their hundreds of friends express how interested/excited they are about rugby league this weekend, and then they read in the times that no ones interested, who would you believe? Your friends? Or a journalist in a rag?

Edited August 19, 2010 by no13benny

[BulldogBurt]

I agree with the idea. My problem is that I find these social networking sites rather uninviting. I haven't mastered Facebook (my wife uses it a bit) and can't pluck up enough interest to bother trying. I think your idea is good, but shouldn't it be co-ordinated by a RFL publicity and communications department? It could be a cheap and effective way of gaining publicity. Will it ever replace the national media, though?

Engage Super League have an official page HERE and so do the RFL OVER HERE

Main problem with these pages on FB as far as I'm concerned is that once you 'like' them, it's true that all your friends see the message, and many will 'like' it too, however, you then get loads of random messages from said page on your wall, which if you're not an avid fan will soon become tedious and you will just click the 'hide messages from...' button and it's out of your conciousness. So although many people may be followers of such a page, it's not really a viable news outlet yet IMO

[no13benny]

Engage Super League have an official page HERE and so do the RFL OVER HERE

Main problem with these pages on FB as far as I'm concerned is that once you 'like' them, it's true that all your friends see the message, and many will 'like' it too, however, you then get loads of random messages from said page on your wall, which if you're not an avid fan will soon become tedious and you will just click the 'hide messages from...' button and it's out of your conciousness. So although many people may be followers of such a page, it's not really a viable news outlet yet IMO

No random messages come up for me, just messages about Super League?

The messages don't go on my wall either, they go on my news feed, which is supposed to be a rolling feed that you can dip in and out of, rather than being permanently fixed on your profile.

Anyway, the idea isn't so much to look at these updates, though you can do that too, but more to link with others and post your updates on what you think, and see what others think too - exchange comments etc. Much like this forum, but more in the public eye.

[BulldogBurt]

No random messages come up for me, just messages about Super League?

The messages don't go on my wall either, they go on my news feed, which is supposed to be a rolling feed that you can dip in and out of, rather than being permanently fixed on your profile.

Anyway, the idea isn't so much to look at these updates, though you can do that too, but more to link with others and post your updates on what you think, and see what others think too - exchange comments etc. Much like this forum, but more in the public eye.

Sorry, I meant the news feed, which is where I browse most of the time. By 'random messages' I was trying to comment on the liking of pages in general, not necessarily ones which you have an interest in. I love RL so enjoy the updates, but if someone can take it or leave it and only like the page (as a result of me liking it and them seeing it on their news feed) the messages will probably be a mild annoyance (as has happened with me in the past with pages I've only a passing interest in)

My post was more about spreading the news to the uninitiated and outside of our usual audience, rather than the likes of ourselves, who will actively seek out the RL news anyway.

[no13benny]

Sorry, I meant the news feed, which is where I browse most of the time. By 'random messages' I was trying to comment on the liking of pages in general, not necessarily ones which you have an interest in. I love RL so enjoy the updates, but if someone can take it or leave it and only like the page (as a result of me liking it and them seeing it on their news feed) the messages will probably be a mild annoyance (as has happened with me in the past with pages I've only a passing interest in)

My post was more about spreading the news to the uninitiated and outside of our usual audience, rather than the likes of ourselves, who will actively seek out the RL news anyway.

I see your point, but when I see things on the news feed that I'm not interested in, I just scan over it and carry on reading. I don't go out of my way to delete things.

In that respect, people who are uninitiated will subliminally see Super League, even if they just scan over it and dismiss it. This should help put it in the consciousness of people who are uninitiated, so when big events come around, or an opportunity to stop the remote on a live game arises, they might do it with some familiarity, rather than a foreign eye.

Edited August 19, 2010 by no13benny

[thirteenthman]

The problem with any online source of RL material, or any material for that matter, is that you really have to be looking for it to find it. Goto the BBC site, and to find the RL news you goto the RL section. Apart from the main sports page, everything is seperate. Pick up a newspaper and the RL stories are thrown in with stories about other sports. The reader will have looked at the page, even if they then choose to ignore it. Go online and you can easily ignore the game. It's the same with papers like League Express. If you didn't like RL you wouldn't buy it. So the game isn't being exposed to people with no interest in the game. The facebook idea is a good one, but again I fear you may end up preaching to the converted, or a tiny proportion of the unconverted.

An earlier poster mentioned the finances of the club game. If we had a vibrant international game it would have a knock on effect for the rest of the sport in terms of sponsorship, spectators and more importantly participation numbers. The club game would benefit enormously. Look at Cricket. The counties only survive on the handouts from the ECB. They get their money from the TV deals and sponsorships for England matches. Rugby Union has made its fortune entirely off the back of internationals.

And to reply to another post, England are already competitive. We made the final of the 4N last year, and with players like Ellis, Burgess, Morley and Tomkins there's no reason we can't do the same this year. NZ showed in 2008 what a bit of self belief can do. An England win could start the ball rolling, with increased publicity for the game. Next year the RFL could be a bit more imaginative with the 4N stadiums. Bigger crowds, more media coverage and so on. Let's hope so.

[Maximus Decimus]

I see your point, but when I see things on the news feed that I'm not interested in, I just scan over it and carry on reading. I don't go out of my way to delete things.

In that respect, people who are uninitiated will subliminally see Super League, even if they just scan over it and dismiss it. This should help put it in the consciousness of people who are uninitiated, so when big events come around, or an opportunity to stop the remote on a live game arises, they might do it with some familiarity, rather than a foreign eye.

The only problem with your idea's are that they would require a great deal of organising and there's nothing to stop a rival sport, say Rugby Union from doing exactly the same on a bigger scale.

Then we're just in the same boat as we are now.