I think this is somewhat linked to the decline of the amateur game, the messing around with summer / winter leagues has meant there are less teams and less players playing, meaning theres a smaller player pool going from juniors to open age. Thus there is no defined player path to pro level.

I myself have left playing league (i do play some summer games) and now play union, the set up in union is much more professional, leagues are defined way in advance, support form the RFU is clear. The RFL need to really sit down and consider the game as a whole, get the junior, amateur game in order either in winter or summer, set this in stone and increase player participation, then the player pool will be larger, better players can be picked up by pro clubs and eventually this will work up to pro level.

It should be a mix of both.
Tag/Tough massively improve passing and evasion skills and improve speed in all aspects of the game.
Regarding contact, it's a difficult one.
All RL players need to be able to tackle and players need to enjoy the contact side of the game.
However, when junior teams have a "beast" (early developer), the can become the focus of all the attacking play and these guys are difficult for the smaller players to deal with.
Although it would weaken the year that the should be playing in, maybe these players should be "moved up" a year and tested against players that are better equipped to deal with them. Maybe put a size limit on age group games (this will never happen but, you know where I'm coming from).
In cricket, which is a totally different sport with different physical needs, young players are advanced based on ability and it has little to do with age group.
Junior players, regularly play senior cricket, when they are ready nad apart from embarrassing a few adults and probably introducing them to the "social" side of things a little early, it works very well.

You need to keep up.

Since the introduction of Trinity TV (around 7 months ago) you have to subscribe to see the Trinity games and other media stuff so, the you tube channel is redundant and the Trinity fans have far more to keep themselves entertained on cold winter nights.



Perhaps they should do both but, clearly, they are wanting to steer people towards their subscription service.

In which case, fair play to them. But to answer your question, yes, I'd say they do need to do both. If this is where we think a key audience is, there needs to be content in that audience. A subscription model is great for monetising and capturing an audience that you already have, but what about the audience you don't have?

And if it is the case that video content has moved elsewhere, perhaps there should be something on the world's biggest video platform explaining that. It'd be better than the first search result for "Wakefield Trinity" being a press conference with Chris Chester.

Have you considered that Trinity may have better marketing people than you and maybe, just maybe, they have this one about right.
Having launched a subscription TV channel, it may not be in their interests to put all of their content on a zero revenue you tube site.

Once they have a decent number of subscriptions, then it may be wise to do both but, right now, they need to channel everyone towards TRinity TV, maybe you should try it, instead of yet more cheap shots at Trinity.

This thread is not about Wakefield anyway but, YOU chose to take a pot shot.
Back on topic though, Trinity will have plenty of sparkle this season and at least in some parts of the RL world the game is on the up



Increased crowds (albeit from a very low starting point, improved stability on and off the field, some of the most exciting youngsters coming through and improved league standing.
Plenty still to do but, definitely going in the right direction.

I've got no idea who is running the marketing at Wakefield. I've made some observations, and that's that. If Wakefield are making a success of their subscription service, then all power to them. My suggestion is about reaching and engaging new audiences - something which you said was difficult in the YouTube / tablet era, and I've highlighted one way in which this could be tackled. If the intention of Wakefiled at this present time isn't about new audiences but instead, monetising the ones they have, then that's their decision.


I'm not taking a cheap pot-shot at Wakefield in the slightest. My argument is that the clubs carry the biggest burden for marketing the sport, and I highlighted the activity of your club as I figured this would be the most relatable. There are examples of bad or lazy marketing at all clubs - including the one I support.



What Trinity have achieved in the last couple of years is impressive. Michael Carter has done a very good job from the state the club was in when he took over, and the team is doing well on the pitch. I only hope that the people of Wakefield support that work in greater numbers (as I'm sure you do). I don't think we'll ever agree on the issue of whether this progress has been aided by the lack of growth in the sport or not, but the world would be pretty boring if we all thought the same, eh?