Sports Marketing

[Tommygilf]

4 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

This is based mainly on a couple of members of my family. -

Blokes who follow motor sports are a strange breed. They don`t like games of any sort. It doesn`t matter how predictable Formula 1 is. They`re just obsessed with cars. And they tend to have a penchant for things like Red Dwarf and Blake`s 7.

So I doubt promotional techniques that engage them would work on normal people who enjoy real sports.

Well I'll take the opportunity to point out how that is fundamentally flawed and should be ignored without further consideration.

[DC77]

On 10/11/2021 at 17:00, Dave T said:

To take this to its logical conclusion, I find it a shame that you think Football and Rugby Union are such superior sports to RL as shown by their greater crowds, TV figures and investors. 

*I wouldn’t agree with him putting RU in as a comparison.

Sports are different. They have different characteristics in their gameplay. The difference in popularity is not simply just down to marketing. 

The two biggest sports on Earth, football and basketball, have barely changed in the fundamentals of their gameplay. Individuals still stand out as before (in football it’s only got even more so with pristine pitches to play on and deliberately taking players out long since penalised). They are continually breaking scoring records (Salah the latest one to do so).

The fault with RL I feel is it’s best quality, the running (especially solo runs with dummies etc), that generate the most excitement, number far less than they should. 

I won’t keep harping on about what I feel needs to change as I’ve said it multiple times as Dunbar rightly points out, but I think RL (and RU even more so) is it’s own worst enemy as it doesn’t showcase its best self. It’s just one example but Rangi Chase being showcased on Sky Sports News after that behind the back pass he pulled off, that type of stuff goes viral. I don’t think I’d ever heard of him until I’d seen that move, which he re-enacted on the news. He elevated himself. Multiply that kind of stuff, solo runs etc. and those players will make themselves known. They need to be given the platform on the field to do that though, as the big names in the distant past were. Chucking some unknown on Question of Sport, that’s not going to change things one iota. What he does on the field will.

Lomu had a statue in Madame Tussaud’s as he lit up the field in RU. He’s the last to do so in Union (and will be for the foreseeable as it’s impossible now in the game of giants). He was a money making machine for the whole sport. He was put on posters, adverts etc. his image sold the game, got people tuning in. A draw. Who would either rugby code put on the cover of a video game today? That’s the crux of the whole advertising/marketing issue. 

[unapologetic pedant]

3 hours ago, DC77 said:

*I wouldn’t agree with him putting RU in as a comparison.

You keep insisting that RU has never been worse to watch than at present. It depends how far back you go. In the 80s, for the most part, it was truly dire. Five Nations rarely involved anything more than penalty kicks, high kicks, and kicks into the crowd.

 

3 hours ago, DC77 said:

The fault with RL I feel is it’s best quality, the running (especially solo runs with dummies etc), that generate the most excitement, number far less than they should.  

There are many other qualities that generate equal excitement. My impression is that your current knowledge of RL only enables you to appreciate the obvious.

 

4 hours ago, DC77 said:

I won’t keep harping on about what I feel needs to change as I’ve said it multiple times as Dunbar rightly points out, but I think RL (and RU even more so) is it’s own worst enemy as it doesn’t showcase its best self. 

Here, I agree. But not with your oft-repeated "gym monkeys and giants" diagnosis.

My explanation (also oft-repeated) is that a culture has evolved in RL that despises looseness and unpredictability. And the malaise manifests itself most conspicuously in the instinct of officials to stop the game when they see the ball go to ground. This happens because they`re frightened something unusual and exciting might follow - such as a dynamic player scoop the ball up and beat several defenders on a long run upfield. They don`t want to cop the blame if the media subsequently find a "little bobble" on the replay.

The bulk of attacking play will always consist of executing patterns and systems and when these are effective they create opportunities for talented players to shine. But those players are losing out on similar opportunities that arise accidentally. That potential is too often gratuitously stamped out by the ref`s whistle.

The general outcome of respecting the methodical while deploring the random is that our most skilful and exhilarating players spend too many of the 80 minutes grinding out metres on basic carries.