Jump to content

BBC Sport website


Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, Johnoco said:

Most of these women's football teams didn't exist until relatively recently, so how where they meant to push anything? RL gets told to build genuine demand and the coverage will follow.....but this rule definitely hasn't been applied to women's football.

Arsenal (1987), Aston Villa (1973), Birmingham City (1968), Brighton (1990), Chelsea (1992), Everton (1983), Leicester (2004), Manchester City (1988), Manchester United (2018), Reading (1988/2006 depending), Spurs (1985), West Ham (1991)

(I'd count Reading as 1988 but they count themselves as 2006.)

So the vast majority are older by far than Catalans. That you didn't notice most of them until relatively recently doesn't mean they didn't exist. That's several decades of hard graft showing some modest success in coverage.

  • Like 1

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


6 hours ago, DC77 said:

I agree with 99% of your stuff, but not on this.

I think they are undoubtedly getting coverage above and beyond viewer demand, and justifiably so as I said previously. I probably wouldn’t use the word “favouritism” to describe what is happening, but there is a feeling of women’s sport being given a long overdue push.

To me women’s sport is a separate entity and the coverage shouldn’t be critiqued nor compared to men’s sport. Doing so looks like sour grapes.

I think the point I'm stressing is that whether or not you think that the coverage of any sport or event you care to mention is "undeserved", it doesn't change the fundamental issue that RL really hasn't done all that much to deserve that coverage. 

Complaining about bias, favouritism, old school ties or whatever else you think is wrong with the world of media doesn't fix the problem. If RL has to work harder to overcome those challenges, then that's what RL needs to do. This is what the WSL and ECB are doing with women's sports - I've seen some of the activity they do and it's not surprising in the slightest why the media finds it easy to run with it. 

Even on SL's own social media channels, there really isn't a lot of content beyond in-game highlights. Not enough content building the event up, not enough content post event, not enough content during the event to really tell the story from the perspective of players, coaches and fans. If that's what the output is like on channels where SL controls the coverage, then you can only imagine what the media engagement is like. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Arsenal (1987), Aston Villa (1973), Birmingham City (1968), Brighton (1990), Chelsea (1992), Everton (1983), Leicester (2004), Manchester City (1988), Manchester United (2018), Reading (1988/2006 depending), Spurs (1985), West Ham (1991)

(I'd count Reading as 1988 but they count themselves as 2006.)

So the vast majority are older by far than Catalans. That you didn't notice most of them until relatively recently doesn't mean they didn't exist. That's several decades of hard graft showing some modest success in coverage.

As I'm sure you know, Catalans were an amalgamation of 2 existing French clubs, so definitely not the same thing. And those women's clubs will have literally been watched by the proverbial one man and the dog. 

Do you remember when we used to question why RU clubs like Wasps with attendances of 1500 got 3 x more coverage than say, Bradford on 15K? 

And yet now such imbalance is apparently acceptable? It doesn't add up. I don't even think about womens football outside this forum, it's absolutely not something I spend any time studying or caring about. But I do hear a lot about it all the same - because it's being pushed. It's clear to see. 

Edited by Johnoco
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, whatmichaelsays said:

I think the point I'm stressing is that whether or not you think that the coverage of any sport or event you care to mention is "undeserved", it doesn't change the fundamental issue that RL really hasn't done all that much to deserve that coverage. 

Complaining about bias, favouritism, old school ties or whatever else you think is wrong with the world of media doesn't fix the problem. If RL has to work harder to overcome those challenges, then that's what RL needs to do. This is what the WSL and ECB are doing with women's sports - I've seen some of the activity they do and it's not surprising in the slightest why the media finds it easy to run with it. 

Even on SL's own social media channels, there really isn't a lot of content beyond in-game highlights. Not enough content building the event up, not enough content post event, not enough content during the event to really tell the story from the perspective of players, coaches and fans. If that's what the output is like on channels where SL controls the coverage, then you can only imagine what the media engagement is like. 

Fully agree. Our output is generally pathetic. 

 

No build up on YouTube outside of their official podcast with has had guests such as Ade Gardner and Ian Blease on recently. Hardly players who we need to do more to promote and as the governing body, they should be able to speak to everyone they want to!

 

What a waste! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Today in "women's sport is definitely an enemy of rugby league" ...

 

 

That's really good news. I'm not getting into the politics of the thread but I certainly think that the game should be pushing the women's competition as much as possible. There is a lot of goodwill towards women's sport at the moment, whether you agree with that or not, and the RFL should be looking to take advantage of that.

I also think the women's game offers a much lower barrier of entry and much more scope for expansion in new areas. I would even divert a proportion of the TV deal to the women's Super League in the same manner as the Championship and League 1 to accelerate this growth.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, clogdance said:

This is the second post you've put up suggesting Women's sports big stories especially football should not be classified as big news on the BBC website. That comes across as vaguely anti women. 

Arsenal Women vs Chelsea Women,  youtube 114k views.

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at youtube Women's football that I personally find unbelievably boring, and poor quality gets huge numbers of views.

Women are totally deserving of having easy access and headline placings of their sports. The increased volume of Women's sport has probably been given a push by government's pledge to increase fitness in girls and encourage sporting activity,  but tbf if Women's sports dominated the headlines for the next 20 years it would only be righting a hitherto imbalance. 

Edited by HawkMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HawkMan said:

Looking at youtube Women's football that I personally find unbelievably boring, and poor quality gets huge numbers of views.

Women are totally deserving of having easy access and headline placings of their sports. The increased volume of Women's sport has probably been given a push by government's pledge to increase fitness in girls and encourage sporting activity,  but tbf if Women's sports dominated the headlines for the next 20 years it would only be righting a hitherto imbalance. 

Woman's football is at an amazingly low level, and more importantly is very poor to watch so doesn't deserve to be "big news" on the BBC web site. I will say though  woman's golf, cricket and tennis is at an amazingly high level so they deserve all the coverage they get.

I also think woman's RL is very good to watch and deserves more coverage and support - will be good to see what the BBC do with it in the RLWC next year.

Edited by Mr Frisky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HawkMan said:

This is the second post you've put up suggesting Women's sports big stories especially football should not be classified as big news on the BBC website. That comes across as vaguely anti women. 

Arsenal Women vs Chelsea Women,  youtube 114k views.

 

 

How dare you, but I am able to define what really is BIG sports news, and what isn't. TBF i=with the BBC they generally they only make women's football a headline story, when there aren't any 'top level' men's games currently being played. But is that hypocrisy also ? I'll let you decide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Mr Frisky said:

Woman's football is at an amazingly low level, and more importantly is very poor to watch so doesn't deserve to be "big news" on the BBC web site. I will say though  woman's golf, cricket and tennis is at an amazingly high level so they deserve all the coverage they get.

I also think woman's RL is very good to watch and deserves more coverage and support - will be good to see what the BBC do with it in the RLWC next year.

As I said I don't watch women's football but the quality of it is irrelevant to why it makes headlines. It's popular,  fastest growing women's sport, so deserves its place in the media. If popularity was about quality then RL would be numero uno. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, RigbyLuger said:

If women's sport is getting more coverage than ever, what do we do to get more for our WSL?

Same as the men's game, broaden its appeal by broadening  its relevance,  it's got to expand into new locations.  How? That is the 64 million dollar question. Imagine if RL was the dominant code , and soccer nowhere,  with its top league the North West Counties League ( sorry don't know the actual name ),  and they tried to turn that into a national league of relevance by tinkering about and adding a French team or a Canadian but keeping all the Spennymoors and Bishop Aucklands, we'd all laugh. RL SL is brilliant,  fantastic,  but it is what it is,  fantastic competition for Northern Union breakaway teams, it needs radical reform. 

Edited by HawkMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/09/2021 at 17:49, gingerjon said:

Today in "women's sport is definitely an enemy of rugby league" ...

 

 

Women have been playing sport for umpteen years, there are numerous genuinely world famous female sports stars. 

But there has never been a serious demand for women's football. It hasn't attained coverage through hard work, just piggy backing onto men's teams and competitions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Johnoco said:

Women have been playing sport for umpteen years, there are numerous genuinely world famous female sports stars. 

But there has never been a serious demand for women's football. It hasn't attained coverage through hard work, just piggy backing onto men's teams and competitions. 

The obvious example given in reply to such nonsense as your ignorant statement is to point out the 50,000+ crowds that women's football achieved prior to being banned in 1921.

But England women aren't pulling 12m viewers for World Cup matches by piggy backing but because people actually want to watch.

It's a concern for rugby league that so many of their supporters are sour old men who genuinely believe the world was better forty odd years ago.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

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

16 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

The obvious example given in reply to such nonsense as your ignorant statement is to point out the 50,000+ crowds that women's football achieved prior to being banned in 1921.

But England women aren't pulling 12m viewers for World Cup matches by piggy backing but because people actually want to watch.

It's a concern for rugby league that so many of their supporters are sour old men who genuinely believe the world was better forty odd years ago.

Lol I aren't sour about anything, although feel free to say that, I don't give a toss.

It's also a concern for RL that many of their fans hold the game in such low esteem they believe any old cobblers the BBC push at them and insist RL is not worthy.

See you around. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strange though that people don't see that pushing and promoting something, results in that thing becoming more well known. It's like there's a connection.

Of course, when RU was being pushed above it's popularity, this was bad and we didn't like it on here. But it's ok for the same thing to happen to other women team sports and as it's women we must accept our lot.

Funny old game Saint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Johnoco said:

It's also a concern for RL that many of their fans hold the game in such low esteem they believe any old cobblers the BBC push at them and insist RL is not worthy.

Nobody is saying that RL is not worthy.

We're saying the solutions to the low profile are more likely to be found within rugby league's own actions than in moaning about preferential treatment for others.

The BBC appear to be bidding to show 10 live games a year. Which would be an odd thing to do if they had no interest in rugby league.

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, gingerjon said:

Nobody is saying that RL is not worthy.

We're saying the solutions to the low profile are more likely to be found within rugby league's own actions than in moaning about preferential treatment for others.

The BBC appear to be bidding to show 10 live games a year. Which would be an odd thing to do if they had no interest in rugby league.

Another one not reading what someone has written. 
For the hard of hearing “I DO NOT THINK THE BBC HATE RL OR HAVE IT IN FOR IT”

There.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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