TWP cut from Premier

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Unfortunatly it is based on the position , showing a less than perfect product on TV can do more harm than good , as I posted earler , just making up the difference for some lost revenue isnt the way the sport should be looking at the problem , the ' compensation ' should be enough to make sure the product is shown in its best possible light , that does involve more thought into who , how , where and when , and also different thinking by the clubs , the problem is the very weak posintion means poor decisions are made

I don't agree that the presentation of the game is an issue at this level. It is lower league RL, people know the score, and lower league sport in front of empty stands are accepted. I think the bigger issue is when we have games at the likes of Salford or Hudds in the top flight on tv!

[GUBRATS]

4 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I don't agree that the presentation of the game is an issue at this level. It is lower league RL, people know the score, and lower league sport in front of empty stands are accepted. I think the bigger issue is when we have games at the likes of Salford or Hudds in the top flight on tv!

Then we disagree , when you say ' people ' , who do you mean ? , the ' fans ' we are trying to entice to attend ? , if we arent doing our absolute best to get them to attend ' next time ' ,what is the point of it being televised ?

We arent discussing SL TV

 

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, GUBRATS said:

Then we disagree , when you say ' people ' , who do you mean ? , the ' fans ' we are trying to entice to attend ?

We arent discussing SL TV

 

People covers everyone. I don't think anybody who ever watched the Championship games when they used to be covered went away with a bad perception of the sport or the comp.

People understand that it is the lower tier of a minority sport. But more people watched it than watch the NRL in the UK in the main.

[GUBRATS]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

People covers everyone. I don't think anybody who ever watched the Championship games when they used to be covered went away with a bad perception of the sport or the comp.

People understand that it is the lower tier of a minority sport. But more people watched it than watch the NRL in the UK in the main.

But did we see the clubs benifit from increased attendances due to it ?

Or is it just a case of RL fans being able to watch games for free in the pub ?

 

[Dave T]

Just now, GUBRATS said:

But did we see the clubs benifit from increased attendances due to it ?

I wouldn't expect so. But then I don't think TV coverage is a marketing tool to drive crowds. 

My post referred to the presentation of the comp, which you said was an issue.

[ChoboMog]

I really don't understand the aversion to having as many games on TV as possible.  Every single Super League game, without exception, should be on TV; as should as many Championship games as possible, including the playoffs/final for each level.  Similarly, the more games on standard TV channels or online streaming services, as opposed to specialty channels/packages, the better as it expands the potential audience.

Whether a few bums in seats are lost to the idiot box is almost irrelevant, at least in any professional or semi-professional sport I've been exposed to, when you consider: The increased exposure to the game among the general public; the increased value of each league's/team's brand from said exposure, leading to ticket/merchandise sales; the fact that TV cameras lead to everything from fan videos on social media to highlight reels of news/sports casts; and, especially, the casual (or even first time) fan support the sport gains from non-RL fans who stumble upon a game or highlights while flipping through the channels and think "well, this is cool!"

Whether the Toronto Wolfpack (the original topic of this thread) are on Premier Sports (U.K.) or GameTV/SportsnetWorld (Canada) isn't really that big of deal as none have any serious penetration in the North American market.  Have the Toronto Wolfpack games start showing up on the CBC Toronto (CBLT-DT) main channel or on the non-specialty TSN/SportsNet channels, or streaming on DAZN which many subscribe to due to NFL GamePass/RedZone, Europa League, UEFA Champions League, and now Premier League football etc., and the team's support/interest will grow in leaps and bounds.

[GUBRATS]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

I wouldn't expect so. But then I don't think TV coverage is a marketing tool to drive crowds.

My post referred to the presentation of the comp, which you said was an issue.

Everything is a marketing tool , or should be when you are not awash with cash , we are businesses , we need to make money just like the SL clubs , otherwise we might as well all revert back to amateur and watch for essentially free

Maybe its just me wanting more than ' lip service ' televising of lower tier RL

[Dave T]

6 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Everything is a marketing tool , or should be when you are not awash with cash , we are businesses , we need to make money just like the SL clubs , otherwise we might as well all revert back to amateur and watch for essentially free

Maybe its just me wanting more than ' lip service ' televising of lower tier RL

I don't disagree, but TV coverage on it's own won't just magically do that. The theory is that sponsorship (comp-level and local) should be higher due to increased exposure, brand awareness should be higher, maybe increases in engagement and fan loyalty, merchandise sales etc. But clubs need to capitalise on this, it doesn't just happen. And there should be a commercial value of the actual tv rights.

I don't think as a game we are particularly good at milking any of the above.

[RigbyLuger]

Did the NCL coverage come across as a good advert? Amateurish presentation, a comedy commentator in Mick Morgan, and, coming across as one of my work colleagues said, "pub rugby"

We need to showcase the elite, not waste time and money on things no one outside the game would see and want to watch more of.

What happened to the second Origin Legends game anyway? Another waste of time.

[GUBRATS]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

I don't disagree, but TV coverage on it's own won't just magically do that. The theory is that sponsorship (comp-level and local) should be higher due to increased exposure, brand awareness should be higher, maybe increases in engagement and fan loyalty, merchandise sales etc. But clubs need to capitalise on this, it doesn't just happen. And there should be a commercial value of the actual tv rights.

I don't think as a game we are particularly good at milking any of the above.

I'm not suggesting it is TV alone , but if it isnt part of it , what IS the point of being on TV ?

Sponsorship at this level is usually done more from ' love ' than actual ROI

' Fan loyalty ' and merchandise are usually IN the ground watching the game , or are you suggesting random people or fans of other club will purchase merchandise like they do with Real Madrid and Barca due to seeing somebody on TV ?

Those things happen [ or should ] at the top level of sport , they dont at lower tier , it is a completely different ' ball game ' with different aims and requirements

 

[Spidey]

2 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

For the better ?

Well I'm guessing you were born in between then and now, so I'd say yes

[GUBRATS]

4 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Well I'm guessing you were born in between then and now, so I'd say yes

Are the crowds better ?

[Spidey]

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

Are the crowds better ?

Because you were born? Maybe you’re entertaining on the terraces?

[Kayakman]

On 12/18/2018 at 8:41 AM, Kayakman said:

Well I guess all the naysayers will be happy and give us a told you so.   Thats right, its good for all of RL NOT to televise the Wolfpack games and limit their exposure.   This is the way forward for them.  They are bright lights alright Johnny.

I'm sure Argyle will have a plan!  Bigger and better is the way to go.

Told you so.. just look at what just happened with the Skolars.   Argyle is on the move...watch out he means business (literally).

[TIWIT]

To get the fans out to the game rather than watching at home or in the pub the teams have to make the live event more of that - an event. Otherwise the fans will use the money that would have gone to buying a ticket to buying the beer at the pub. Where, surrounded by fellow fans, it becomes an event. Just maybe warmer and dryer than at the actual game.

[RobertAM]

Just hope we have the UK games on the box here...Game TV somehow?

[Harry Stottle]

13 hours ago, TIWIT said:

To get the fans out to the game rather than watching at home or in the pub the teams have to make the live event more of that - an event. Otherwise the fans will use the money that would have gone to buying a ticket to buying the beer at the pub. Where, surrounded by fellow fans, it becomes an event. Just maybe warmer and dryer than at the actual game.

 The most important event in going to the ground lasts for around 80 minutes with a comfort break at around the 40 minute mark, I suppose you may class me as a philistine for asking this but here goes, is the game itself not enough to attract the punter's to attend? 

[Dave T]

4 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

 The most important event in going to the ground lasts for around 80 minutes with a comfort break at around the 40 minute mark, I suppose you may class me as a philistine for asking this but here goes, is the game itself not enough to attract the punter's to attend? 

Clearly not in the numbers we would like.

From my personal point of view, with a young daughter time is precious so if an RL match can become part of a day out for the family then it appeals. If not, then as people grow their families they will just drift away and do other things.

Food, drink, facilities, location, music, entertainment, comfort - it is all part of the offering. Look how cinemas have upgraded their offerings with the comfy recliners and premium offerings etc. and it has just been announced that they are getting record numbers. 

There will always be a proportion of people like yourself who are just interested in heading to the ground to watch the match, great, but for me now it needs to be part of an overall event - where I can have a family day out, or catch up with mates around the RL.

[Kayakman]

Just now, Harry Stottle said:

 The most important event in going to the ground lasts for around 80 minutes with a comfort break at around the 40 minute mark, I suppose you may class me as a philistine for asking this but here goes, is the game itself not enough to attract the punter's to attend? 

The answer is 'NO' Harry...times have changed and its simply not going to make the mark anymore except for a loyal few...time to update and modernize.

The answer is a resounding 'NO'....people have already voted with their feet old buddy (sorry I've had to rock your world).

[Harry Stottle]

18 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Clearly not in the numbers we would like.

From my personal point of view, with a young daughter time is precious so if an RL match can become part of a day out for the family then it appeals. If not, then as people grow their families they will just drift away and do other things.

Food, drink, facilities, location, music, entertainment, comfort - it is all part of the offering. Look how cinemas have upgraded their offerings with the comfy recliners and premium offerings etc. and it has just been announced that they are getting record numbers. 

There will always be a proportion of people like yourself who are just interested in heading to the ground to watch the match, great, but for me now it needs to be part of an overall event - where I can have a family day out, or catch up with mates around the RL.

Thank you for the reply Dave, yep you have me typecast in just attending the match, albeit as per your very last sentance it is still treated as a social affair by those in my group, be it meeting before the game socialising in a number of local hostelries or grouping together to catch the transport to an away fixture, as you say each to their own, to take as much from the "game day" experience as they see fit, the important part is getting punters into the ground. 

[Harry Stottle]

5 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

The answer is 'NO' Harry...times have changed and its simply not going to make the mark anymore except for a loyal few...time to update and modernize.

The answer is a resounding 'NO'....people have already voted with their feet old buddy (sorry I've had to rock your world).

Hi K'man, I ain't going to change now, I did my bit with my lad, it obviously worked he still goes - went for his season pass yesterday - and he is one of my group 'home and away', I am a philistine I know that, for one I can't stand that stuff people pass for music these days, the stuff I refer to as "music for the hard of thinking' if updateing and modernising means being subjected to 30 to 60 minutes of that prior to kick off, no thanks, I will time my arrival to miss it, but as I say each to their own.

As for the "Loyal Few" I can quite happily say "I resemble that remark"

 

[Dave T]

44 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Thank you for the reply Dave, yep you have me typecast in just attending the match, albeit as per your very last sentance it is still treated as a social affair by those in my group, be it meeting before the game socialising in a number of local hostelries or grouping together to catch the transport to an away fixture, as you say each to their own, to take as much from the "game day" experience as they see fit, the important part is getting punters into the ground. 

I think there are occasions when I am very happy to just nip along to the match, watch the 80 minutes and then drive home. A couple of hours in the fresh air watching the greatest sport in the world and no more than that, but then we are all staunch fans of the game.

Where my habits have changed is probably with moving away and having a young family, meaning I rarely get to live matches nowadays, and my time is more precious.

I suspect clubs would be delighted to have more people like you who demand less from them!

[GUBRATS]

20 hours ago, Spidey said:

Because you were born? Maybe you’re entertaining on the terraces?

Grow up

[Futtocks]

The clubs are already appealing to the people who just want to go for a couple of hours - the match and the odd pint.

Trouble is, there aren't enough of these people any more, so they need to attract those who want something more than just a game of Rugby.

[GUBRATS]

19 hours ago, TIWIT said:

To get the fans out to the game rather than watching at home or in the pub the teams have to make the live event more of that - an event. Otherwise the fans will use the money that would have gone to buying a ticket to buying the beer at the pub. Where, surrounded by fellow fans, it becomes an event. Just maybe warmer and dryer than at the actual game.

Depends what you mean as an ' event ' , if you mean #### up with a beer festival then no , not really , or at least not more than the once , as others have poited out the game itself should be enough , but I would add to that , that it is the atmosphere that can and does have a dramatic effect on somebodies perception of a sporting event , to create atmosphere , you generally need more people , it is that which gives an event atmosphere