RL on Channel 4

[Smudger06]

Figures need to be a lot higher than latest numbers on FTA considering everyone is indoors due to storms......theres a danger when spring arrives these figures decline.....

[Dallas Mead]

2 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Hull FC v St Helens had an average of 468,000 viewers and a peak of 615,000 on channel 4. I think they’ll be reasonably happy with these figures again, obviously it’s not as high as the Leeds figures, but as Leeds are the biggest club that is to be expected.

Internet back up Lebron?

[Dave T]

56 minutes ago, Smudger06 said:

Figures need to be a lot higher than latest numbers on FTA considering everyone is indoors due to storms......theres a danger when spring arrives these figures decline.....

They'll be what they'll be. Channel 4 will know that we return 150k on Sky and 750k on BBC. I'm sure these figures are where they hoped/expected. 

I don't think the selections are necessarily that great, but it's all good. 

[Eddie]

1 hour ago, Smudger06 said:

Figures need to be a lot higher than latest numbers on FTA considering everyone is indoors due to storms......theres a danger when spring arrives these figures decline.....

I think 600k is decent personally, I bet a Union club game on C4 of a Saturday lunchtime wouldn’t get any more viewers. 

[Dave T]

3 hours ago, Maximus Decimus said:

I think the revolutionary thing from our perspective is that they don't treat those watching like the same fans who've been watching for 20 years. This means they don't focus as much on referees etc

 

I'm not so sure, as I alluded to earlier, I think we are being generous to C4 (which is a very good thing), but if we were to be as critical as we are with Sky we would be criticising Pryce as 2nd commentator and the half time review of play was very clunky, far worse than Sky do with Wells. 

But they did focus on the ref plenty during the game, criticising him for things like the penalty at the scrum. 

The positivity is great around C4, but I think we are ott with sky I feel. 

[sweaty craiq]

For comparison purposes when a BIG RU derby is on BBC wales it peaks at 250k ish - they dont give figures for Premier sports PTV games - I understand Championship RL dwarves them

Sale v Leicester live on ITV peaked at 750k on the sunday prime slot.

 

Edited February 20, 2022 by sweaty craiq

[Maximus Decimus]

4 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I'm not so sure, as I alluded to earlier, I think we are being generous to C4 (which is a very good thing), but if we were to be as critical as we are with Sky we would be criticising Pryce as 2nd commentator and the half time review of play was very clunky, far worse than Sky do with Wells. 

But they did focus on the ref plenty during the game, criticising him for things like the penalty at the scrum. 

The positivity is great around C4, but I think we are ott with sky I feel. 

I completely agree that people are going overboard. I think when it comes to referees isn't the fact that decisions are questioned, but the extent to which they are emphasised on Sky.

[Dunbar]

4 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I'm not so sure, as I alluded to earlier, I think we are being generous to C4 (which is a very good thing), but if we were to be as critical as we are with Sky we would be criticising Pryce as 2nd commentator and the half time review of play was very clunky, far worse than Sky do with Wells. 

But they did focus on the ref plenty during the game, criticising him for things like the penalty at the scrum. 

The positivity is great around C4, but I think we are ott with sky I feel. 

I would tend to agree with this.

We are in the honeymoon period with Channel 4 and so some parts of their coverage that Sky would be criticized for are being forgiven.

I am just chuffed that Rugby League is on both Channel 4 and Sky and the big picture for me is that the production quality of both is fine... it's the game on the pitch that I care about.

[newbe]

They should approach Danny Ward, or Henderson both old London Broncos coach's, personally think they would be good cocommentators

[paulwalker71]

Looks like I stirred the pot a bit with my comments about Leon Pryce.

First, the term 'colour commentary' is very commonly used and anyone who even suggests I used it in any way as a racially motivated term needs to give their head a shake, frankly

My issue with Leon, and it's not his fault, is that he tends to mumble into the mic. Combine that with a fairly strong Yorkshire accent (and I'm Yorkshire myself) and you've got something that's incomprehensible to a lot of people.

I feel the same about Jamie Jones Buchanan

Kyle Amor was very good the previous week, although I fully understand why they didn't use him yesterday.

There are plenty of articulate ex-players of the sport that could be employed in that role.

 

 

 

[Niels]

6 minutes ago, paulwalker71 said:

Looks like I stirred the pot a bit with my comments about Leon Pryce.

First, the term 'colour commentary' is very commonly used and anyone who even suggests I used it in any way as a racially motivated term needs to give their head a shake, frankly

My issue with Leon, and it's not his fault, is that he tends to mumble into the mic. Combine that with a fairly strong Yorkshire accent (and I'm Yorkshire myself) and you've got something that's incomprehensible to a lot of people.

I feel the same about Jamie Jones Buchanan

Kyle Amor was very good the previous week, although I fully understand why they didn't use him yesterday.

There are plenty of articulate ex-players of the sport that could be employed in that role.

 

 

 

I like JJB but maybe I am biased as he spoke to me at a Leeds Rhinos stall and is very pleasant!

I think he is good in the studio. Jenna is very articulate and is difficult to substitute for.

I agree with you about Leo Price. I think Co-commentator is not his best role either. 

[RigbyLuger]

47 minutes ago, newbe said:

They should approach Danny Ward, or Henderson both old London Broncos coach's, personally think they would be good cocommentators

Henderson tends to shout a lot, which isn't needed.

[Damien]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

I'm not so sure, as I alluded to earlier, I think we are being generous to C4 (which is a very good thing), but if we were to be as critical as we are with Sky we would be criticising Pryce as 2nd commentator and the half time review of play was very clunky, far worse than Sky do with Wells. 

But they did focus on the ref plenty during the game, criticising him for things like the penalty at the scrum. 

The positivity is great around C4, but I think we are ott with sky I feel. 

Pryce may have not done that well I agree but he's still a damn site better than O'Connor, McDermott or JJB. There are better people to use though. 

The others, Tomkins, Sculthorpe, Priim and Amor have all shone and I have enjoyed them more than their Sky equivalents. Of course these have also shone when they've occasionally been on Sky too. In my opinion Wilson is a far better commentator than what we see on Sky and calls the game better. I also think having professional presenters in Hills and Skelton is better too, just as I think the same about Mark Chapman on the BBC. I don't think anyone claims that C4 is doing anything too revolutionary but they are following a tried and tested formula that works in other sports and it works better than what we see Sky do when it comes to RL. Indeed Sky use much the same formula in its other offerings outside of RL.

However the positivity is not just because of that. There is a lot of positivity because C4 have made a big effort in a way I haven't seen from Sky for many a year. Advertisements weeks before, the best promo I've seen for Super League, cross product placement on the likes of the Last Leg and Sunday Brunch, all their social media stuff etc. In contrast SL barely got a mention on Sky, I can't recall any advertisements and as usual tge sport didn't show up at all in its year ahead stuff and any of the email circulars that I received. There is positivity around C4 because they have created that positivity and have made SL feel like a sport they want and are proud to show rather than just an afterthought to fill its schedules.

[redjonn]

I like the C4 coverage but they are still learning me thinks as the change over's at end of game talk was very clunky this week, rather unprofessional for a major TV channel.

[Dave T]

6 minutes ago, Damien said:

Pryce may have not done that well I agree but he's still a damn site better than O'Connor, McDermott or JJB. There are better people to use though. 

The others, Tomkins, Sculthorpe, Priim and Amor have all shone and I have enjoyed them more than their Sky equivalents. Of course these have also shone when they've occasionally been on Sky too. In my opinion Wilson is a far better commentator than what we see on Sky and calls the game better. I also think having professional presenters in Hills and Skelton is better too, just as I think the same about Mark Chapman on the BBC. I don't think anyone claims that C4 is doing anything too revolutionary but they are following a tried and tested formula that works in other sports and it works better than what we see Sky do when it comes to RL. Indeed Sky use much the same formula in its other offerings outside of RL.

However the positivity is not just because of that. There is a lot of positivity because C4 have made a big effort in a way I haven't seen from Sky for many a year. Advertisements weeks before, the best promo I've seen for Super League, cross product placement on the likes of the Last Leg and Sunday Brunch, all their social media stuff etc. In contrast SL barely got a mention on Sky, I can't recall any advertisements and as usual tge sport didn't show up at all in its year ahead stuff and any of the email circulars that I received. There is positivity around C4 because they have created that positivity and have made SL feel like a sport they want and are proud to show rather than just an afterthought to fill its schedules.

I agree with all of the positivity around C4, seeing their social media and coverage being taken seriously is a real positive, its nice to see adverts and discussion on some of their other shows. 

But it is wrong for us to bag Sky for some of the things they do. Completely agree about the choice of pundits, but as I highlighted they do do some things well, Carney and Jenna Brooks are professional presenters, and the lead commentators are generally fine, particularly when they have Wilson too. They also have the video analysis and some stats (not enough for my liking personally). 

Sculthorpe was already being mocked on social media for how many times he said 'erm you know' and people will start to get fed up if he is on more as the goodwill factor dwindles. 

My genuine view is that Sky need to offload a few pundits, I share much of your view in that area, but they do a lot of good stuff (including advertising the sport and having RL guests on things like Soccer AM etc) and we shouldn't go too critical now because of a new kid on the block. 

I like what the BBC, C4 and Sky all do, but all of them could improve. My personal opinion is that the BBC deliver the best presentation nowadays, but then they let us down in so many other areas by treating us like a Northern oddity. 

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, redjonn said:

I like the C4 coverage but they are still learning me thinks as the change over's at end of game talk was very clunky this week, rather unprofessional for a major TV channel.

Yeah, I think this is sort of my point. I'm very much enjoying their coverage, and it's amazing to see RL on C4, and they deserve support, but those saying how far ahead of Sky it is are ignoring some rather major issues. 

[Niels]

4 hours ago, Dave T said:

Yeah, I think this is sort of my point. I'm very much enjoying their coverage, and it's amazing to see RL on C4, and they deserve support, but those saying how far ahead of Sky it is are ignoring some rather major issues. 

I agree with you entirely. 

[Damien]

Some nice figures here. The 16-34 stat is particularly pleasing and it's great to see the game attracting a younger audience:

The figures represent a 6% TV share for the Saturday dinner time slot, and is up 43% on the channel’s average figures at that time.

Channel 4 have also revealed that it was the most popular programme with 16-34 year olds – attracting a 13.7% share, up 117% on that usual slot.

The average audience for the whole programme, including build-up and post-match, was 468,000.

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/more-than-half-a-million-tune-in-to-channel-4-live-coverage/

 

[Man of Kent]

I see Channel 4 coverage as a two hours+ advert for rugby league on terrestrial TV. With that in mind, it has to be viewed differently from content for Sky subscribers or the connoisseur.

They seem to be doing a fine job so far, particularly their interviews, commentary and camerawork. 

Is it perfect? No. But as a vehicle for promotion of rugby league/Super League, it seems to be working.

[Gerrumonside ref]

I think most people are simply pointing out that the commentary on Channel 4 is less of a mess than the commentary team on Sky.

As for the other aspects of the Channel 4 production, it’s worth remembering that they’re only two ‘episodes’ in compared to Sky who’ve got many years of experience under their belt.

I also think they’re pitching at a slightly different audience than Sky and Jon Wells type analysis might not be appropriate for that demographic.

All in all I think people should see this as an opportunity to share best practice and ideas on the way rugby league on TV can be done.

 

 

 

Edited February 20, 2022 by Gerrumonside ref

[Man of Kent]

4 minutes ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

I think most people are simply pointing out that the commentary on Channel 4 is less of a mess than the commentary team on Sky.

As for the other aspects of the Channel 4 production, it’s worth remembering that they’re only two ‘episodes’ in compared to Sky who’ve got many years of experience under their belt.

I also think they’re pitching at a slightly different audience than Sky and Jon Wells type analysis might not be appropriate for that demographic.

All in all I think people should see this as an opportunity to share best practice and ideas on the way rugby league on TV can be done.

I believe Jon Wells’ touchscreen is the best bit of any current RL coverage worldwide but I’m not sure Channel 4 is ready yet to bring in a player post-match to talk about how they isolated the four man defender etc. Maybe tactical analysis will come later.

[Gerrumonside ref]

3 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

I believe Jon Wells’ touchscreen is the best bit of any current RL coverage worldwide but I’m not sure Channel 4 is ready yet to bring in a player post-match to talk about how they isolated the four man defender etc. Maybe tactical analysis will come later.

Yes I agree, we need to allow the coverage to evolve over time as Channel 4 understands its audience.

[Just Browny]

I think the decision to go for two games in February without a covered studio was wild. Hills probably has a strong H&S claim against Channel 4.

[The Rocket]

Thought this was interesting :

RugbyLeagueonTV.com

 

@rugbyleagueontv

·

17h

 

Channel 4's all round audience share is 10.2% (2020 figure). So 6% share is de facto 60% of Channel 4's audience which for 12.30 on a Saturday.... Etc.

 Also worth noting Pre and post match viewing is usually considerably less than the number that only watch the game, that 468 000 average viewing figure would be considerably higher for the match itself and would have been dragged down by the lower pre and post match number.

[Damien]

29 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

I think the decision to go for two games in February without a covered studio was wild. Hills probably has a strong H&S claim against Channel 4.

I asked on here before the second game the question of would C4 move to the studio for the second game considering the weather in the first and the projected weather all last weekend. They obviously chose not to but I did find it very surprising.