Wilkin makes a correct and fundamental point at the end of the BBC article. Another I'd add, is that our media profile would be helped if we stopped being thin-skinned. At least nowadays we're actually honest about the 2000 WC, but it took a long time for many. A self-confident sport is always full of arguments about, money, rules, structure, etc. but we seem absolutely paranoid about 'conflict'. Witness the uproar from those who would accuse Lenegan of almost treachery as if his comments somehow damage the RLWC. Or, conversely, listen to the way Eddie feels the need to constantly tell us how great the thing is that we're watching. Even the message boards here, whilst irrelevant in the scheme of things, betray the lack of confidence even we fans have - anyone saying 'negative' things is berated for 'talking the game down'. How paranoid must one be to give a d@@m about a post on a mesaage board?!? We need to not only give up some control, but also, as a sport, 'chill out' when it comes to the apparent need to defend or promote the quailty of the sport in our media profile. By which, somewhat paradoxically I suppose, I mean, yes, be very aggresive in chasing coverage, but stop being defensive ( to be fair to Nigel Wood - words I never thought I'd say - he handled the question about 2000 exactly right ) and stop feeling the need to bang on about how great the sport is. It doesn't work, it sounds desperate rather than confident. How often do you hear commentators (including in the press) from other major sports going on about how great the sport itself is? Market the players, the competitions, the clubs, the intrigue, the feuds, the controversies, but relax about marketing the sport for its own sake.

Bugger



WEST....I had already referred to the East with Leicester and Northampton.


^^^^this^^^^^^

Another thread I was enjoying derailed. Cheers Fax & those who waste their time responding to him.

....the question was asked

I've touched on this in the past, but the prevalence of RU amateur clubs (especially in the north) should be something the RL embraces.

I am a member of a rugby union club. Because Union is slower paced and has a number of static set pieces t excel at, guys continue to play on well into their forties, meaning that my club, like man others, musters 4 teams each week and has over 100 registered players. That's not including the womens team and minis/juniors.
Rugby league, with its high pace and extra physicality, can't compete with this level of social rugby in terms of numbers playing. Indeed, many of our member used to play rugby league when they were younger men.
But what we can do is break down the barriers between the professional RL and the amateur rugby union clubs. When there's a union internatonal on the telly, the club bar will be full, but for the majority of the game, people will watch it with one eye, chatting with their pals rather than watching a scrum be reset over and over again. They'll look up when something exciting happens, but that about it.
Rugby league is a treat to watch in comparison, so if we were to become more accepted by the social rugby unions players, we would have a massive boost to our spectator pool.

I'm not criticising the ticket sales, as they've obviously been selling well, but the World cup is obvisouly a good starting point to get these union clubs interested, perhaps ticket deals for groups of 10 etc? There are a LOT of these clubs spread across the areas that world cup games are being held in. There's 3 rugby union clubs in the town St Helens, for instance.

He has a point, undermined by his "no cameras in the dressing room" nonsense.

But you didn’t really answer that question, you went on about the south and midlands. Facts are that realtively few people watch RU in the north, I would be surprised if either the Elland Road or St James’ park games sell out. People in the north don’t really care about RU at all. In the major settlements of the North and most of the Midlands they don’t couldn’t give a fig about RU. The south and parts of the Midlands yes. The north and most of the midlands, no.

I've had (non RL) people in the office asking me about the RLWC, based on seeing the BBC trailers, and they seem keen on watching the games on the BBC, whereas I don't think this exposure would have occured if the RLWC was on Sky.

Just heard a long advert on Radio1, shocked by how much the BBC is plugging it!

Me too.Its a bit of a shame all the games are not being telivised live by the BBC, even if they used BBC2 or 3 for the non England games.I think it would have got good numbers watching throughout the competition.Still, some is better than none.

BBC news at 6pm lastnight ran a story on the world cup. That will of gone out to millions

As much as a love RL, some of the games are best 'hidden' at this point in time. Would you really want a national TV audience to see Cook Islands-USA in front of a few thousand at Bristol? and having the games live on free TV may have reduced the ticket sales. I'd rather the BBC audience just saw large crowds at Cardiff, Huddersfield, Hull, Wigan & Wembley roaring England on.

The challenge for RL is to get some of the smaller nations up to speed, and next time we host the BBC may want to show more.

have

But you might get to see me and the 5 (non RL) people I'm taking from work to the Cook Islands v USA match in Bristol !!

Just heard the ad on 6 music .

Looking to the future. As the BBC has little sport in its portfolio would it be worth leaving Sky, taking a hit on income from them and looking to gain more sponsorship due to FTA exposure to cover the monetary shortfall? I've no idea if the BBC would take it on but the question needs to be asked. More exposure and promotion from the BBC could be fantastic for the promotion of the sport over the whole nation. Just a thought.

Can we now give Brian Barwick (and his little black book of media contacts) due credit for the increased exposure on the BBC, or should assume instead that the BBC has suddenly decided to embrace the RLWC for its own purposes ?

I'd say it depends on the size of the hit and the increased exposure.

No idea of our current deal but at the moment we need the ££££'s. I'd be hoping for a better deal next time with BT and premier now both in the mix for sports.

Sky need to see the loss of this international competition as a wake up call. But I would not assume it's as simple as more exposure = better sponsors.

RU and Footy have the balance just right. Their local games on pay TV. The internations on FTA to gain exposure.

I agree with all that.

It is going to be vital at some point to get SL on FTA but at the moment the clubs and RFL can not generate enough income to not have the Sky millions.

The problem is we don't have a clear international calendar like those two sports. That's what the sport needs more than anything IMO. Hopefully this WC is the start of a more consistent calendar, bring the WC into a 4-year cycle.

Football for example; we know that once the WC is over in 2014, it'll be on to the Euro Qualifiers for 18months, Euros in 2016, then WC qualifiers for 18months, WC in 2018 then onto Euro qualifiers for 18 months etc etc etc. Throw in some long scheduled friendly weekends where most if not all nations play a match.

Union (sorry); We know that every year they'll have the six nations in Spring against European Nations, Autumn internations vs Southern Hemisphere (alternating between the two hemispheres), WC every 4 years and Lions tour every 8.

League; I'm not too sure what'll be played even next year.

Ideally I'd have for England/GB:

2013 - WC

2014 - Spring Fortnight - Two 'Friendly' tests vs European Nations.
2014 - Mid-Season - Annual test vs France. (like the Anzac test).
2014 - Autumn - Southern Hemisphere games/tournaments (NH to travel).

2015 - Spring Fortnight - Two 'Friendly' tests vs European Nations.
2015 - Mid-Season - Annual test vs France.
2015 - Autumn - Northern Hemisphere games/tournaments (SH to travel).

2016 - Spring Fortnight - Two 'Friendly' tests vs European Nations.
2016 - Mid-Season - Annual test vs France.
2016 - Autumn - GB Lions Tour to SH (other nations playing eachother too).

2017 - Spring Fortnight - Two 'Friendly' tests vs European Nations.
2017 - Mid-Season - Annual test vs France.
2017 - Autumn - WC.

I think that is partly the reason, but I also think Channel4's success of showing the Paralympics has woken the BBC up. They were outbid by C4, who completely re-vamped the coverage of a set of minority sports and turned it in to a success. The BBC have publically stated they wished they'd made a better bid, and I feel they are trying to replicate the success with the RL world cup

Our beloved leader is now promting the RLWC: www.express.co.uk/sport/otherspo ... -prospects Haven't got sound on this computer so I've not yet listened to his utterances.

Our beloved leader is now promting the RLWC: www.express.co.uk/sport/otherspo ... -prospects Haven't got sound on this computer so I've not yet listened to his utterances.

Great article in the Radio Times about Tomkins



Very positive article about Tomkins and RL in general. A few snippets

[iAs we sit in the cafe, every now and again Tomkins raises his hand to acknowledge fans who wave as they go by. It's difficult to envisage Gareth Bale having a snack in a Madrid bar without flashmob hysteria ensuing. Tomkins' world record transfer fee remains undisclosed, but best estimates put it in the neighbourhood of £700,000 - less than 1 per cent of Bale's record-breaking move from Spurs to Real Madrid.
"It's crazy," shrugs Tomkins. "The money football generates is ridiculous, probably 150 times what rugby league gets. It's just the way it goes."
He doesn't appear to mind that large swathes of his own country have no idea who he is. "It's quite nice," he says. "It means I can go on nights out and not get done." Besides, he's far too aware of his good fortune to indulge in feeling hard done by. " I get far more acclaim than I deserve. I get so many nice things on the back of playing rugby. What do I do with my money? I've got a couple of nice watches, nice cars. I've got a few houses."
Wait... "a few houses"? Monaco, New York, Bermuda - that sort of thing?
"Wigan," he says. "I bought my mum a house, I've got a house, I bought a couple to rent out."[/i

A nice ending paragraph

[iSomething about Tomkins, so unimpressed by his own star status, feels like a throwback to the way we hope sport might have been before the world became a global village, before football particularly became engorged by its own greed. He is not a "brand". He is a personable bloke eating a sandwich in a cafe. Rugby League may have a fraction of football's money, but as long as it's leading lights are men of Tomkins's calibre, the sport is rich indeed.[/i

But my favourite part:

[iAh. But it's true, though, isn't it, that he would almost certainly be richer and more famous if he followed Joel and switched codes? "Yes," he smiles again, "but then I'd have to play Union."
[/i


Well done Tomkins lad! All is forgiven!

What's Hock, Graham, Hardaker and McIlorum been up to?