Jump to content

BBC Promoting RLWC final (not)


roughyed8

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, RP London said:

 

1 - oh I am by no means saying this is easy.. but we should never stop. How much do you throw at it? everything in the locker every single time.. it is disheartening and disappointing but its like a salesman for a company, you need to just keep going and hope that you catch them at the correct time with the correct piece of info/product or as the buyer/publisher/webgeek changes and wants to make his mark (or is an RL fan).. you never know when the tide will change but if you stop rowing you will miss it. 

2 - The way we are viewing TV is changing with on demand etc.. the RFL need to catch this change in direction for example I watch the NFL show and NFL this week even though they are on at silly o'clock because I set the Sky+ for them or watch them on iplayer i like NFL but dont love it, but I watch these shows all season because the show is entertaining too.. I actually stopped watching the highlights package for RL this season because the show itself wasn't entertaining.. Osi and Jason Bell are brilliant with Marc Chapman where as I always find the RL lot a little dull. 

3 - But I do think a different channel may offer more to help with the general presence and then continue on banging news rooms doors and we will get traction... I honestly dont think the RFL do that much about it, they may produce stories etc but its not just the BBC "ignoring" them which makes me believe the RFL are not pushing this content enough out to people.

1 - In principle I think we agree, but there is not much to suggest that we aren't doing everything, but at some stage you have to make a decision how much time/finance you are going to spend on this. For me, the bigger wins are to invest in tournaments and events and work on driving exposure and media coverage of them. Looking at the RLWC2013 report it highlights unprecedented media coverage and it is international events like this that will drive the game forward, not begging bigots left right and centre. We need to work hard, and work in areas where we will get good results. Things like Social media have been great for us in recent years.

2 - I don't mind the SL Show, but by the time it's on I am looking forward to the next week rather than what has happened - I don't mind SLFT just for the tries, but often I can have seen them online. Unfortunately, Sky have really trimmed back on their stuff like this, and the BBC are just a bit naff.

3 - We have seen Cup Finals, Season Launches, World Cups 'ignored' or paid lip service - that is a decision of the media sources themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 118
  • Created
  • Last Reply
On 30/11/2017 at 12:05 AM, scotchy1 said:

There is logic to that. The BBC dont really have a stake in pushing the sport. A commercial FTA broadcaster would want to maximise viewership and such have more of an incentive to push the sport.

The issue is that our content is negligible. An hour a week at the moment maximum. If we could get an extra game per week on say ITV or C4, plus a highlights programme it would make a massive difference to our visibility. However that is unlikely due to our lack of confidence and comfortable relationship with Sky. 

The first thing any commercial broadcaster will look at before bidding to televise a sport are the current commercial partnerships that sport has. 

Remind me again of the blue chip commercial partners the RFL and their clubs have?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

The first thing any commercial broadcaster will look at before bidding to televise a sport are the current commercial partnerships that sport has. 

Remind me again of the blue chip commercial partners the RFL and their clubs have?

aren't betting sites very prolific advertisers? Wouldn't that market be interesting to commercial broadcasters?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Dave T said:

aren't betting sites very prolific advertisers? Wouldn't that market be interesting to commercial broadcasters?

For sure, there’s a start, one industry.

It has been a while since I paid any attention, but I seriously don’t know who the major commercial partners of UK RL are.

So I am happy to be enlightened as to the blue chip/ftse 100 businesses involved in our sport in the UK.

p.s. I hope when you say betting sites, you are not referring to Foxy Bingo...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sports Prophet said:

For sure, there’s a start, one industry.

It has been a while since I paid any attention, but I seriously don’t know who the major commercial partners of UK RL are.

So I am happy to be enlightened as to the blue chip/ftse 100 businesses involved in our sport in the UK.

p.s. I hope when you say betting sites, you are not referring to Foxy Bingo...

i assume you suggest that the first thing they look at is commercial partners so that they can look to sell advertising to them? Well Ladbrokes and BetFred are two key partners of RL who both advertise extensively on TV. That is probably about it though tbh. 

Interestingly, on the RFL/SL website I can't even find a page or link for partners!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, scotchy1 said:

Isnt the complaint here that we dont get on the news? When more than half of what we do isnt of broadcast quality we arent making the most of our opportunities are we.

And its an overall package that im talking about. Who is going to put the time and effort in to pushing something and getting more people to watch when the first thing they would notice is the poor broadcast quality of it.

We complain that the BBC wont show the super league show nationally but we cant even provide them with decent footage.

they do show it nationally. And they have high quality footage for at least 2 games, half the time three, and sometimes 4 per week. 

I'm just not sure game 4, 5 or 6 of the weekend is going to significantly enhance our media presence by having more cameras there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, scotchy1 said:

Isnt the complaint here that we dont get on the news? When more than half of what we do isnt of broadcast quality we arent making the most of our opportunities are we.

And its an overall package that im talking about. Who is going to put the time and effort in to pushing something and getting more people to watch when the first thing they would notice is the poor broadcast quality of it.

We complain that the BBC wont show the super league show nationally but we cant even provide them with decent footage.

I don't really get this. All of our big events and big games are certainly broadcast quality but they largely don't get on the news anyway. With that in mind a run of the mill match is never going to get on the news, broadcast quality or not.

I also don't think the Super League show is that bad and broadcast quality is certainly not the reason its not shown nationally in my opinion. If the BBC deem it good enough for half the country I don't think that is the reason they don't show it in the other half.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Damien said:

I don't really get this. All of our big events and big games are certainly broadcast quality but they largely don't get on the news anyway. With that in mind a run of the mill match is never going to get on the news, broadcast quality or not.

I also don't think the Super League show is that bad and broadcast quality is certainly not the reason its not shown nationally in my opinion. If the BBC deem it good enough for half the country I don't think that is the reason they don't show it in the other half.

Agree totally, it's  red herring. But I will highlight again, that the SLS is shown nationally. 

Begrudgingly in a rubbish slot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, scotchy1 said:

At lunchtime on a Tuesday.

It seems nuts to me that the actual quality of the show wouldnt have any correlation to its visibility. 

you have completely overstated the lack of quality of the highlights.

We can pretty much guarantee that paying for another 6 cameras at games 4, 5 and 6 each weekend will not make the BBC suddenly shift its slot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, scotchy1 said:

We can also guarantee that the BBC are not going to show nationally, in a good slot, a highlights programme where half the highlights are of poor broadcast quality.

nah, you are overstating it massively.

I am at home and just flicked on the EFL highlights show and it is just 1 camera stuff for the goals.

If you watch SLS you will see high quality broadcast stuff for the key two or three games, plus the tries - it is a standard format, it is all available in HD quality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, scotchy1 said:

We can also guarantee that the BBC are not going to show nationally, in a good slot, a highlights programme where half the highlights are of poor broadcast quality.

 

What we get now most of the time isn’t even highlights. Just tries scored and maybe a yellow or a red card

Is it not much to ask to show the set of six leading to a try at least?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Spidey said:

 

What we get now most of the time isn’t even highlights. Just tries scored and maybe a yellow or a red card

Is it not much to ask to show the set of six leading to a try at least?

The problem you can have is that showing a set in the lead-up for 9 or 10 tries can be pretty time consuming, and often not that interesting, but there is a valid point about selection of the highlights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The problem you can have is that showing a set in the lead-up for 9 or 10 tries can be pretty time consuming, and often not that interesting, but there is a valid point about selection of the highlights.

Yeah get that. But I’ve seen games with three tries with about 30s of highlights if not on sky

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Spidey said:

Yeah get that. But I’ve seen games with three tries with about 30s of highlights if not on sky

that is the same on things like Match of the Day though, some games will literally just get a few seconds as part of the goal round up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

And perhaps that is why the football league highlights are dumped away on channel 5.

along with the Aviva Prem highlights who you held up as a good example of a sport who has invested in their broadcast coverage of every game.

Football league is found on Sky Sports too, just like ours tries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

You have gone round in numerous circles on this thread Dave to try and for some reason pretend Im favourably comparing club RU to club RL when i have repeatedly stated that i dont think they do any better than we do. 

but in previous discussions you have held them up as a great example of creating increased broadcast quality content. So my challenge there is if they have created the content, have more money than us, have a far friendlier media than us, but that hasn't helped them get more terrestrial coverage - why do you think those extra few cameras are so important for us and will make such a change for us?

The evidence is that it won't be a game changer, and it isn't the broadcast quality that is the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

You are conflating separate things. I have held them up as an example (not a great one, just far better than our efforts) of creating more content. Which they have, and they have heavily used in spreading their game. 

I have also said, on this thread, that they dont get much better coverage than we do and explained the reasons why.

I have also explicitly said that the BBC have no incentive to push us, and won't and that it isnt worth it for a commercial partner to do so without live content.

I have also explained to you why having broadcast quality content is a big improvement for us, the same reasons that RU do it.

For some reason you have tried to narrow the argument so that it has become irrelevant to what was being discussed. I have never said get a couple of cameras in and it will change the game, everyone will suddenly show us and and we will be on the news every day. But i have repeatedly suggested it as one of numerous changes and improvements we need to make to make ourselves more attractive and more visibile.

ok, let's go back to the point on this thread. You have claimed that if we get better coverage of the 2 or 3 games each week that have only one camera we are likely to get more coverage across news platforms and via terrestrial broadcasters like the BBC.

I have made the point that club RU has already done this and their coverage isn't any better. 

That is the evidence I am using that suggests that a few more cameras at these games will not see a step change in our media coverage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, scotchy1 said:

At the risk of repeating myself again, i have never suggested that simply adding a few cameras is all we need to do, it is one of a package of things we need to do. You are arguing against a straw man.

Fair enough. But it was you who suggested this would make a difference.

I disagree it would be worth the cost based on what you suggest it will give us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Dave T said:

1 - In principle I think we agree, but there is not much to suggest that we aren't doing everything, but at some stage you have to make a decision how much time/finance you are going to spend on this. For me, the bigger wins are to invest in tournaments and events and work on driving exposure and media coverage of them. Looking at the RLWC2013 report it highlights unprecedented media coverage and it is international events like this that will drive the game forward, not begging bigots left right and centre. We need to work hard, and work in areas where we will get good results. Things like Social media have been great for us in recent years.

2 - I don't mind the SL Show, but by the time it's on I am looking forward to the next week rather than what has happened - I don't mind SLFT just for the tries, but often I can have seen them online. Unfortunately, Sky have really trimmed back on their stuff like this, and the BBC are just a bit naff.

3 - We have seen Cup Finals, Season Launches, World Cups 'ignored' or paid lip service - that is a decision of the media sources themselves.

1. fair enough, I'm not asking for us to beg but just flood them with info and from what I can tell/have heard we don't even do that.

 

2. but the BBC can do it and things like the NFL show show it... I think part is due to the ex pros used they just don't seem to be as relaxed it's quite staged/stayed (not sure the best word)... there are plenty of other sports that have programmes that don't enthuse either so I don't see it as anti RL bias.

3. No more so than other sports, I think we have to remember the actual size of our game sometimes, RU get a large and disproportionate amount compared to other sports of a similar size rather than us getting less IMHO... 

i just think we need to continually plug away but you cannot stop the effort, it costs no more money.. you have a press department they produce work and it needs Togo out wider.. larger email list, maybe the odd phone call or meal... 

But that's all if we want to keep the budget as is... I recon you could spend some good money on a London based media agency that would really make a difference to coverage but that is going to cost some serious cash... RU have people with pull in that sort role without having to pay that sort of money and that makes a massive difference, 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, scotchy1 said:

They can make A difference. I explained how they could make A difference. Im not suggesting they would be a panacea.

And i disagreed that it would add any worthwhile value.

The point where i see it worthwhile is if you can make it pay through selling international rights, extended highlights, subscriptions etc. I agree with chasing £xm for those things to cover costs and then you can maybe recognise some of these smaller ancillary benefits you refer to, but they are the little addons rather than the aim imho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't have much luck do we? The second Ashes test starting on a Saturday and being a day/night one - so it overlaps with the game. Then the World Cup draw takes place in late afternoon on a Friday and steals all the media attention on Friday evening. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say BBC Sport are putting a lot of Tweets out on Twitter. The little clip on the BBC web sports page (on front page too) is good but not sure to what extent it’s being promoted beyond that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing to add though ... RL fans on Twitter (and there are plenty) are pretty poor at retweeting when media outlets like the Mirror, Guardian or BBC tweet about WC. I could say the same about comments on the website stories too. If the BBC or whoever puts something out and we don’t react it reinforces the view that no one is interested. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...