Jump to content

TV viewing figures


Recommended Posts


  • Replies 245
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Just now, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

So England’s Women football got a record 7.6 million watching their recent game on the BBC. 

How does this compare to England internationals on the BBC or even Challenge Cup Finals?

What are our record viewing figures?

I think we were getting a couple of million during the last World Cup.

I'd hope with a proper level of promotion and more games on terrestrial to build up a narrative that we could beat this 2m in 2021 by some distance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This might go some way to answering your question:

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/no-helmets-required/2018/dec/11/rugby-league-power-free-to-air-tv-bbc-england-team

Quote

Alongside director of sport Barbara Slater and rugby league correspondent Dave Woods, lead editor Alastair McIntyre – who also edits Sports Personality, Wimbledon, the London Marathon and the Olympics – admitted that the audience for this year’s Challenge Cup was the lowest on record. Just 4.5 million watched the seven ties on BBC TV, down from 7.9 million in 2011.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We got 1.3 million for the Challenge Cup final.

The article above also states the following...

"Instead, the RFL should be putting their chips on England. Year on year, the BBC get almost as many viewers for the handful of international matches as they do the whole domestic season, double in World Cup years. More than 4 million watched the three England v New Zealand Tests this autumn."

While I agree with the sentiment of England RL being the right vehicle for awareness of our sport, the phrasing is at best ambiguous.  Is this 4 million for each game in the series or 4 million cumulatively across the three in which case each game was about on par with the cup final?

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I have been through the article again and pieced the numbers together.  It is written in such a way that the numbers are really spun to emphasis the writers agenda.

At one point it states that 8.5 million viewers watched RL on the BBC last years and so 8.5M minus the 4.5M for the Challenge Cup coverage is 4M for the test series in total... and so that is just over 1.3M per game - the same as the Challenge Cup final.

I am surprised that the Challenge Cup final on the worst day of viewing for the year (August bank holiday Saturday) drew as many viewers as the live England games in the Autumn.

Also, while the article states that the Challenge Cup coverage fell from 7.9 million BBC viewers in 2011 to 4.5 million in 2018 this in part is due to the fact that 2011 was the last time the BBC had exclusive live coverage of the games and showed 9 ties on BBC TV while in 2018 it was 7 live games on the BBC as some ties were shown on SKY.  Now, there is still a drop off for the BBC games between 2011 and 2018 but without referencing the actual number of games in the aggregate figure the article is misleading.

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Mattrhino said:

If we got even a slightest crumb of the marketing push the beeb is giving to tge womens world cup we could maybe compare.

I am no cheerleader for the BBC but we have seen the Challenge Cup final broadcast live on the BBC for the last 60 years.  That is a decent amount of exposure to showcase our sport.

If over those 60 years we have arrived at a point where the final now attracts 1.3 million viewers then I am not blaming the BBC.

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Mattrhino said:

If we got even a slightest crumb of the marketing push the beeb is giving to tge womens world cup we could maybe compare.

We really wouldn't. We'd do a bit better if they pumped us up more, sure, but we'd still come nowhere near because what they're promoting with the women's world cup is a concept that many people are primed to buy into: England winning games at a football World Cup. That becomes a national event, men or women. 

At best we're offering 'England winning games at a rugby World Cup', which as the other lot's comp showed in 2015 doesn't cross over into true national event territory, whatever they might like to claim. 

Rugby (of either code) just isn't anywhere as popular as football, so we shouldn't bother comparing. We have a niche sport, but it's still one that could attract better TV audiences from a wider geography, and its obvious that a coherent, high quality international program is the only way to achieve that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, DoubleD said:

Who are all these people watching the Women's Football World Cup? I literally haven't met one person who's watched a game or heard anyone speak about it....................maybe I move in the wrong circles

Same here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I am delighted that the Lionesses are doing well in the tournament and that a lot of the nation are getting behind them.

For two reasons. 

One, they are clearly talented footballers and they are representing their country in a major tournament with worldwide exposure which must be a great feeling.

And secondly, it is a template for how important the women's Rugby League participation we have seen improve massively in the last few years could be invaluable to the growth of our sport.

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Dunbar said:

OK, I have been through the article again and pieced the numbers together.  It is written in such a way that the numbers are really spun to emphasis the writers agenda.

At one point it states that 8.5 million viewers watched RL on the BBC last years and so 8.5M minus the 4.5M for the Challenge Cup coverage is 4M for the test series in total... and so that is just over 1.3M per game - the same as the Challenge Cup final.

I am surprised that the Challenge Cup final on the worst day of viewing for the year (August bank holiday Saturday) drew as many viewers as the live England games in the Autumn.

Also, while the article states that the Challenge Cup coverage fell from 7.9 million BBC viewers in 2011 to 4.5 million in 2018 this in part is due to the fact that 2011 was the last time the BBC had exclusive live coverage of the games and showed 9 ties on BBC TV while in 2018 it was 7 live games on the BBC as some ties were shown on SKY.  Now, there is still a drop off for the BBC games between 2011 and 2018 but without referencing the actual number of games in the aggregate figure the article is misleading.

So, very very broadly, that's @500,000 for regular rounds and 1.3m-ish for the final?

I'm sure we can all come up with theories about why they are good or bad figures, and what can be done to improve them but there are two things I think we always need to keep in mind:

(1) For all the faults we have with the RFL and the Challenge Cup, that competition is still the most visible club competition we have and for a lot of people it will be their only connection with rugby league

and

(2) It's more internationals we need

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

When we can have a World Cup and have England,Norway,USA,Germany,France,Netherlands,Italy and Brazil in the Quarters we'll get much better viewing fixtures imo

Bingo.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Eddie said:

I work in an office absolutely full of football fans and none that I know of are watching the women’s World Cup.

They're missing out.

It's been an excellent tournament so far.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Eddie said:

I work in an office absolutely full of football fans and none that I know of are watching the women’s World Cup. Obviously that’s not a massive sample but the figures might be inflated. 

I’ve never watched women’s football, until this tournament. The women’s game (and women’s sport in general) has been promoted over the last three to four years so the huge increase in viewing figures is not a surprise, especially for football which is mainstream. The game last night was screened at Glastonbury, unthinkable for this to have happened in the past.

40 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

When we can have a World Cup and have England,Norway,USA,Germany,France,Netherlands,Italy and Brazil in the Quarters we'll get much better viewing fixtures imo

No question. Think this also applies to RU and the six nations, an event which has a high profile in the media for six weeks as RU has a significant footprint and status in all four home nations. RL needs to gain a foothold in a country first, which in turn will increase exposure/media interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've watched more of the ladies soccer WC than I did any of the last 3 or 4  men's but then that's not much anyway, it's watchable in small doses/on in the background, more so than male soccer.

As for the claim about the viewing figures, the BBC can pretty much put out whatever number they like but whatever. Ladies soccer has been promoted massively for quite a few years now, the BBC has pushed it to the nth degree, It's on the prime time slot on BBC1, the amount of build up for the tournament has been massive, the media coverage has been massive, on a par if not more so than the men's version. It's the only all female England international team that is being shown on free to air since when, well the last England women's soccer match, and the one before that, in fact aside from soccer/rugby union when was the last time an all England team had all that in its favour?

Not even the GB and NI ladies field hockey had that exposure, promotional wise for the 2016 olympics, I stayed up and watched that, it was sensational.

There's simply no comparison and there should not be any comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, gingerjon said:

So, very very broadly, that's @500,000 for regular rounds and 1.3m-ish for the final?

I'm sure we can all come up with theories about why they are good or bad figures, and what can be done to improve them but there are two things I think we always need to keep in mind:

(1) For all the faults we have with the RFL and the Challenge Cup, that competition is still the most visible club competition we have and for a lot of people it will be their only connection with rugby league

and

(2) It's more internationals we need, dummy.

Sorry, can I just check why you are calling me 'dummy'?

Look back as long as you want on these boards and all you will see is me saying that the international game is the best vehicle for growing our game.

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Sorry, can I just check why you are calling me 'dummy'?

A very poorly worded joke reference that has failed. I wasn't calling you dummy and apologise if you took it that way.

I'll edit the post to remove.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

A very poorly worded joke reference that has failed. I wasn't calling you dummy and apologise if you took it that way.

I'll edit the post to remove.

Cool. I agree with the sentiment, just took it personally. 

No need to edit it, it's all good.

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

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...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.