Jump to content

BBC Sport website


Recommended Posts

On 08/09/2021 at 18:00, Damien said:

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.

Not in here there ain’t. Lots of sour grapes and green eyed monster though.

Besides women’s sport rightly getting a long overdue push having been held back by discriminating means in the past (thus the normal reaction is to wish them well), the sobering truth for the whingers is women’s football generates more interest than RL.

11 hours 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.

100%.

Edited by DC77
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


4 minutes ago, DC77 said:

Not in here there ain’t. Lots of sour grapes and green eyed monster though.

Besides women’s sport rightly getting a long overdue push having been held back by discriminating means in the past (thus the normal reaction is to wish them well), the sobering truth for the whingers is women’s football generates more interest than RL.

100%.

This is getting pretty tiresome now. Can we put something to bed please? There are no ‘sour grapes’ or jealousy or green eyed monsters, at least not from me.

When you say ‘womens sport’ you mean ‘women’s team sports’ which have not been much of a thing until recently (yes I’m aware they have existed but they weren’t much of note) There are numerous female sports stars in the world and always have been.

But if you take off your own blinkers and be honest, you will see that women’s football has been pushed and marketed way above its actual popularity.
I looked at the BBC sports website during this last night and the top story was about the women’s champion league and that some player has scored 100 goals. This was presented as if it was a real major story and the women’s CL was on a par with the men’s, when in fact I’d be amazed if anyone outside the clubs involved and the people into women’s football would either know the player or have a conversation about it at work or in the pub. All this is bogus….there is not currently the genuine interest that is being made out. But hey, if they continue doing this, that player *will* become well known and people on here can say that they are featured because they are famous, so get with the program dinosaur.

 I am not ancient but quite old and in all my life I have only known a handful of girls into football at all and of those, (the ones I am still in regular-ish contact with), I can’t think of one who has ever talked about the women’s game. My sister for instance is a life long football fan but has absolutely zero interest in the women’s game. Her words? “It’s bloody rubbish”

But anyway, carry on trying to tell me I think this because I’m a woman hating dinosaur or something (possibly include something about Brexit?)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my view, there is a clear link between the prominence and promotion  of a sport right across the BBC and the tv rights it has purchased. Add to that the BBCs right-on woke agenda designed to attract younger viewers who are deserting it in droves. 

Our sport is never going to fit that agenda, but we could get more prominence if we could sell some more TV rights to them above and beyond the Challenge Cup (which the BBC covers pretty well).

In the end, though , it's up to our game to push itself. Perhaps we need to find a current or past player with the charisma, presence and eloquence of Alex Scott.

The BBC have also made a commitment to showcase the league to even more viewers by showcasing 22 live games per season, with a minimum of 18 matches on mainstream, free-to-air channels, BBC One and BBC Two. Previously, games have been shown live on BBC iPlayer and Red Button.

Edited by JohnM
  • Like 1

“If you understand, things are just as they are; if you do not understand, things are just as they are.” Zen Proverb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, JohnM said:

In my view, there is a clear link between the prominence and promotion  of a sport right across the BBC and the tv rights it has purchased. Add to that the BBCs right-on woke agenda designed to attract younger viewers who are deserting it in droves. 

Our sport is never going to fit that agenda, but we could get more prominence if we could sell some more TV rights to them above and beyond the Challenge Cup (which the BBC covers pretty well).

In the end, though , it's up to our game to push itself. Perhaps we need to find a current or past player with the charisma, presence and eloquence of Alex Scott.

The BBC have also made a commitment to showcase the league to even more viewers by showcasing 22 live games per season, with a minimum of 18 matches on mainstream, free-to-air channels, BBC One and BBC Two. Previously, games have been shown live on BBC iPlayer and Red Button.

It’s a woke conspiracy I knew it!

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JohnM said:

In my view, there is a clear link between the prominence and promotion  of a sport right across the BBC and the tv rights it has purchased. Add to that the BBCs right-on woke agenda designed to attract younger viewers who are deserting it in droves. 

Our sport is never going to fit that agenda, but we could get more prominence if we could sell some more TV rights to them above and beyond the Challenge Cup (which the BBC covers pretty well).

In the end, though , it's up to our game to push itself. Perhaps we need to find a current or past player with the charisma, presence and eloquence of Alex Scott.

The BBC have also made a commitment to showcase the league to even more viewers by showcasing 22 live games per season, with a minimum of 18 matches on mainstream, free-to-air channels, BBC One and BBC Two. Previously, games have been shown live on BBC iPlayer and Red Button.

There is no right on woke agenda.

But you know that already.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

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

Just now, Eddie said:

There quite obviously is tbf. 

Because there’s a story about a woman footballer on the BBC sport site and Johnoco hasn’t heard of her?

  • 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

On 06/09/2021 at 20:36, Johnoco said:

You won't find me disagreeing on most of those points. I think RL can - and must- get it's act together. 

But none of this changes the fact that some sports are favoured more than others. That is just the way it is.

It's very much chicken and egg this. RL will not get the clicks or views without being promoted by the BBC....so does this mean there isn't demand? Or that it isn't getting the right push? We'll never know. 

I agree with this. I understand @whatmichaelsays point on this, but I think they take it a bit far.

I think RL has to work much harder than other sports to get its fair share - and that is where RL deserves the criticism, we often don't do the bare minimum. 

But I fully agree that we are not a favoured sport. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I agree with this. I understand @whatmichaelsays point on this, but I think they take it a bit far.

I think RL has to work much harder than other sports to get its fair share - and that is where RL deserves the criticism, we often don't do the bare minimum. 

But I fully agree that we are not a favoured sport. 

Yes, that’s all I am saying. Not that there is a man on a grassy knoll with RL in its sights, just that it is not a cool or hip sport. As such it will miss out on things others may take for granted and indeed, should work that bit harder and be more inventive. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

There is no right on woke agenda.

But you know that already.

Even if there was, I don't understand why we couldn't tap into that as a sport. 

Women's RL and things like PDRL and LDRL along with initiatives like State of Mind etc could absolutely leave us at risk of being criticised for being wokies by those who think it is a negative. 

Unfortunately we let ourselves down in other parts like being soft on racism and sexual assault on the pitch. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Even if there was, I don't understand why we couldn't tap into that as a sport. 

Women's RL and things like PDRL and LDRL along with initiatives like State of Mind etc could absolutely leave us at risk of being criticised for being wokies by those who think it is a negative. 

Unfortunately we let ourselves down in other parts like being soft on racism and sexual assault on the pitch. 

Some seem to think that covering those means the we're not concentrating on the men's game outside SL.

I await the big money offers for then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a pretty good article written by Karen Carney about the growth in Women’s Football.

It didn’t detail the strategy but did talk about how small crowds and stadia had hurt the perception of the sport as a TV product.

My view is we should be listening and learning from their experience as to how they’ve achieved such growth instead of crying foul play and making snidey digs.

Edited by Gerrumonside ref
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Because there’s a story about a woman footballer on the BBC sport site and Johnoco hasn’t heard of her?

Lol hardly anyone has heard about her, without the BBC giving her huge amounts of publicity that is.

Its noticeable that you keep mentioning things like ‘woke’. But I have not mentioned that angle once, I’m just pointing out the obvious fact that women’s football has been given a status that it’s popularity didn’t warrant. You’re ok with this because it makes you feel good and you can rebuke anyone who can see things differently and label them as (insert some latest political drivel name)

Well I aren’t playing old son, I object to women’s football being given such status and promotion on the BBC because it hadn’t earned it, no more no less. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

There was a pretty good article written by Karen Carney about the growth in Women’s Football.

It didn’t detail the strategy but did talk about how small crowds and stadia had hurt the perception of the sport as a TV product.

My view is we should be listening and learning from their experience as to how they’ve achieved such growth instead of crying foul play and making snidey digs.

Snide? I’m quite open in that I think a) it’s a very poor standard of football and b) it has been given very very favourable treatment. There is nothing more to it.

Edited by Johnoco
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Johnoco said:

Its noticeable that you keep mentioning things like ‘woke’. But I have not mentioned that angle once,

I used it because JohnM specifically said that there was a right-on woke agenda.

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

2 minutes ago, Johnoco said:

You’re ok with this because it makes you feel good and you can rebuke anyone who can see things differently and label them as (insert some latest political drivel name)

I'm okay with it because a couple of stories on the BBC website - none that I can see currently, incidentally - is hardly a flood and because if we were doing it by strict popularity and clicks then all 16 boxes would be filled with Premier League gossip, as pretty much happens on sites driven by the need to please advertisers.

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

2 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

I'm okay with it because a couple of stories on the BBC website - none that I can see currently, incidentally - is hardly a flood and because if we were doing it by strict popularity and clicks then all 16 boxes would be filled with Premier League gossip, as pretty much happens on sites driven by the need to please advertisers.

Yes I hate it because there have been a couple of articles about it on the BBC website. 🤔🤔

You got me, I surrender.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

Yes, snidey digs at Women’s Football are not going to get you the results that you want in terms of more coverage for RL.

Where does the snidey bit come into it though? I'm not insinuating or hinting at anything, it's quite clear I think it's very poor. 

Snide means something different completely. 

But I'm also unclear about how pretending it's earned its high profile coverage is associated with anything in relation to getting better coverage for RL?

If you care to read back, I'm highly critical of RL and it's habit of shooting itself in the foot. That's not my point in all this though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Johnoco said:

This is getting pretty tiresome now. Can we put something to bed please? There are no ‘sour grapes’ or jealousy or green eyed monsters, at least not from me.

When you say ‘womens sport’ you mean ‘women’s team sports’ which have not been much of a thing until recently (yes I’m aware they have existed but they weren’t much of note) There are numerous female sports stars in the world and always have been.

But if you take off your own blinkers and be honest, you will see that women’s football has been pushed and marketed way above its actual popularity.
I looked at the BBC sports website during this last night and the top story was about the women’s champion league and that some player has scored 100 goals. This was presented as if it was a real major story and the women’s CL was on a par with the men’s, when in fact I’d be amazed if anyone outside the clubs involved and the people into women’s football would either know the player or have a conversation about it at work or in the pub. All this is bogus….there is not currently the genuine interest that is being made out. But hey, if they continue doing this, that player *will* become well known and people on here can say that they are featured because they are famous, so get with the program dinosaur.

 I am not ancient but quite old and in all my life I have only known a handful of girls into football at all and of those, (the ones I am still in regular-ish contact with), I can’t think of one who has ever talked about the women’s game. My sister for instance is a life long football fan but has absolutely zero interest in the women’s game. Her words? “It’s bloody rubbish”

But anyway, carry on trying to tell me I think this because I’m a woman hating dinosaur or something (possibly include something about Brexit?)

What’s astounding (in addition to this post) is that two people actually liked it. 

“Take off my own blinkers and be honest, women’s football has been marketed way above its popularity”.

Is this in response to what I said on this thread?....”I think they are undoubtedly getting coverage above and beyond viewer demand, and justifiably so as I said previously.”

Ok I’ll take off my blinkers now and admit what I’ve said umpteen times before.

 

Besides this nonsense, referring to demand is pointless as their coverage in the league is not based on that. It’s self evident, so self evident it’s absurd to bring it up. 

So leaving aside the non issue that is demand, your issue (and the other whingers) is you don’t agree with women’s sport getting a push. I and most others disagree as they (in this case football) have been held back and discriminated against in the past, that their development has been hampered. Is the standard that great now? No, but that’s not the point. You have to start somewhere.

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...