It shows Briscoe's "double movement"

to be fair, the BBC probably thought the try was given.

Slightly off topic from the BBC but still media

I read the free ‘Sport’ mag they hand out in London (maybe elsewhere) a few weeks ago before the 4 Nations started and they had some bit about it feeling a bit like ‘after the Lord Mayors show’ of the RU World Cup etc etc

Today the piece was all about how McNamara’s men had beaten the world champs (and in more style than the soccer lads bored the Spanish into submission at Wembley). The best bit was about the League boys putting the feel good factor into English rugby after the English debacle in the World Cup... made my day

The BBC go out of their way to promote union, because they perceive it to be a part of the mainstream national culture, whereas there is still a perception of RL as being a northern M62 sport.

It isn't - I can happily report on Gloucester Uni's impressive victory in Newcastle against Northumbria in the elite student competition, that Loughborough beat Hull and St mary's (London) beat UCLAN in the same competition, while Exeter are unbeaten at the top of the Premier South Division, and Bristol Sonics are already into their pre-season for the 2012 competition. But it's how it's preceived.

In comparison, the BBC news team has a 'North of England' correspondent. They don't, however, have a south of England correspondent, because they regard the south of England as [ibeing [/i mainstream England. That's why they also report on union as a matter of course, and on league less frequently.

It's coverage, then, is reflective of the depth and experience of the respective codes in southern England, which the BBC regards as 'real' England, and in the background and experience of the editors and journalists, who disproportionately reflect southern English graduates, many from a private educational background - even though, in numerical terms, there's not a huge amount to choose between them. But, as has been pointed out, its relative lack of coverge for league becomes self-perpetuating: the nation doesn't care so it's not reported; the nation deosn't know because it's not reported; the nation doesn't care because it doesn't know; the nation doesn't care so it's not reported; and so it goes, round and round.

Another reason why union gets coverage... it pays for it. Tens of thousands for column space in tabloids and broadsheets. Tens of thousands on all expenses paid trips to the World Cup for journalists, on condition that the game is covered. BBC doesn't take such payments, but it does follow the news agenda. If a story is in every paper, the broadcast media just can't ignore it.

For a start, the RFL hasn't got that kind of money. But, even if it did, how would Leigh Miners or Skirlaugh react if they suddenly started shelling out thousands to southern journalists, instead of supporting community the game at home. £20,000 would just about fly a single journalist around the world and support 6 weeks expenses in four star hotels, or it would pay a community coach for a year to deliver 2,000 hours of coaching. The RFU can afford both. We'd can barely afford the latter.

Complaints to the BBC, calls to national phone-ins, letters and comments to journalists and talkshow hosts, that's the way forward. Make the BBC understand what RL means to hundreds of thousands of people - albeit people they don't know, in communities which they don't know, in towns and cities they don't know, but which all pay licence fees to keep them in post.

Turing up and buying tickets and getting behind our game, getting involved with the local club or refereeing or playing touch or bringing mates along or starting a works' touch league etc etc etc... that's the other thing to do. Be proactive, make the game bigger, tell people how much it means and it matters, and do your bit.

A bit of positivity in the RL community? Maybe it could catch on. Maybe it could be what we're known for? Now, that would be a national news story!

Great coverage in there today. The Editor (Simon Caney) has mentioned RL quite a bit since the Wembley game. In his editorial he says that he gave Tompkins one of his 10 nominations for SPOTY, describing him as a "wonderboy" and "thrilling to watch". And the article you refer to as well, essentially putting tomorrow night's game forward as the highlight of the next 7 days of sport, is very encouraging.

I think this goes to show the importance of events like the Wembley double header in terms of spreading the word. Although they do carry RL in here (previously they have interviewed Roby and Peacock off the top of my head) the coverage during the 4 nations has been very positive and suggests to me that a genuine interest now lies behind it.

Because they are a public funded broadcasting company not a commercial station.

I'm a big fan of the BBC and think it's worth every penny but they do give RL the sh@tty end of the stick IMO.

I contact Mike Bushell this morning (chap from BBC morning sport prog) about the coverage or lack of. He has informed me that the preview of the game is on tomorrow (sat) morning and he also mentioned that the choosing of an Aussie ref 'needs to be looked at'. I mention that a point for neutrals has to be sam Tomkins as this would appeal to many watchers as well as the game itself. If only Sam was a tennis player or a sprinter; he'd be a world superstar.

TWEET ME: Antwigan

Great post this thankyou.

Got tried at Orrell, but for entirely different reasons...

And on another note, Radio 2 mentioned the World Trampoling Championship earlier this week in the sports news. Bizarre.

Don't agree here. There is and always has been a condescending attitude to RL from the hierarchy at BBC.

Considering how little national media coverage we get, it's amazing just how well placed within the nations sporting psyche RL is.

Now the sports desk has moved to Salford, especially if Salford themselves start to do something, hopefully, we will get more of shot. They definitely owe it to us.

Did this opinion really send you into a fit of giggles? why?

I don't think thats true.I would say the attitude towards rl only began when sky came in and financed SL and then the situation was made worse when RU went pro.

Not sure if that is the case or not but if it was it is revealing too. There was that Five Live hatchet job a decade or so back which involved some Sheffield student's university thesis but tied in with that I well remember a top BBC bod's comment "well Rugby League has sold its soul to Sky".

And that sums up to me the mentality - conscious or not - amongst some at the BBC: other sports negotiate TV deals; Rugby League "sells its soul".

It's a short reverse step to understand the original thought - that Rugby League should know its place, that Rugby League should be grateful for what it gets, that Rugby League isn't a sport which can be considered or should be treated as mainstream.

TBH in the 1970s (OK, I was a kid and my memory isn't that brilliant AND I lived in the BBC North area), but I seem to remember that RL was a staple of BBC Sport.

They used to broadcast matches from the County Cups, Player's No. 6 Trophy (which became the Regal Trophy), Challenge Cup and Premiership Trophy. These were spread throughout the season and action seemed to be on "Grandstand" a lot of the time. There was also the BBC2 Floodlit Trophy which was midweek (Tuesdays?) where you got a live second half and some highlights.

However, the sporting focus of the country seems to have changed and football (which I really don't find at all interesting) became the focus of all sports reporting about the time that Sky started up. I don't understand why, because the reasons seem a bit unclear, but it's now got to a stage where even during the off-season, sports reporters want to talk about football than Cricket, RL or anything else. And if you live away from "t'north", there's very little chance of reading (or hearing) much about RL via the mainstream press.

However, because of the internet, we can actually make a difference by positively contributing to the internet world, such as forums like this, but also the BBC's forums and e-mailing and tweeting the BBC's coverage programmes, showing that there's a good, strong following out there who are passionate about the sport. For me, it was refreshing to hear Nicky Campbell talking positively about RL on 5 Live yesterday morning at a time when I reckon the audience would have been very large (it was about 8.15). When the BBC completes its move to Salford, we may begin to look a bit more mainstream to them and get broader coverage.

Only time will tell. I reckon, though, if more of us take time to positively contribute to the BBC's programmes, it can only do the sport good.

Well Colin Murray just gave a big thumbs up for England and was bigging up our game and its players saying they're "Straight forward, honest and modest". I get a sense amongst the real sports fans i.e. not the golf/RU fairweather sects, that people want us to achieve not for the country but for the sport and the people that participate in or follow it. That's a nice feeling to have.

Dear Senior BBC executive,

I wish to register a severe and harsh complaint regarding your lack of blanket coverage of my sporting event happening in three days time. I am of course referring to the Four Nations Rugby League final although you'll need to be looking this up some time soon as apparently you don't know what it is as you haven't mentioned it on this particular day and I know some radio hosts did but that's not good enough.

I note that you spent an inordinate amount of time discussing a murder, which effected only one person directly and maybe seventeen affected by proxy, whereas my sporting event affects many more than one plus seventeen. You then had a segment called "the weather", which seems to get an inordinate amount of time given that it happens every day. It seemed to follow the exact same vein as yesterdays "weather" too. Perhaps you could cut this until a change happens? "This week will be mostly drizzle, but I'll let you know if this changes, or look out of a window instead. Here's the rugby league with Clare Balding", something like that.

There was then to my shock and anger a segment about foreign politics. Something called Greece something something Germany. Why oh why do you concentrate on things abroad rather than things happening in this country? I raised this issue regarding a famine in Africa last year and received no reply. The Four Nations is happening in this country you morans.

Now whilst it would be too much to ask to get leading story status on your programme for a week (would it?) but then we come to the sport bulletin. You only ever seem interested in Association Football. Is this really the be all and end all of current sporting status with the public in this country? It turns out it is but should it be? A bunch of hair obsessed diving cheats should not be discussed with the same reverence as men such as Sean Long and Sam Tomkins.

And then you bring in the Vichy government sponsored, old tie wearing Rugby Union, a sport only monitored by monocle wearing facists called Rupert Smythington Smythe. This is an appalling outrage. John Inverdale has all the class of Alan Partridge, and whilst I appreciate this, and his jumpers, and 1970s hair styles (why oh why we went away from this I will never know) I get the distinct impression the man doesn't like rugby league.

Why do you not give rugby league the respect it deserves you snotty nosed, snooty, disgraceful B****** C*** F******s. Until you engage with us in a respectful, meaningful way I will not only boycott the BBC for ever (except Bargain Hunt of course) but I will also protest outside your house, try to get you fired, open a petition with the united nations to have you executed and tell walkers to stop selling you smokey bacon crisps (and I know this is your favourite flavour as I happen to be stalking you so don't deny it.)

I will do the above and more unless you answer the ultimate question.

Why don't you like us?

Every bit of coverage seems begrudging, however small. Why is this, you imbecile?

Yours faithfully.

A disgruntled viewer.

P.S. Any chance of getting in the audience for Question Time? I love that show.

Well said






Negativity and moaning is never productive in any walk of life, a can do attitude will make a difference. Fans asking themselves what can I do to promote the game in a positive way...by the way posting 10 times a day on a message board doesn't count!

England do have the ladies WORLD CHAMPION in trampolining though


Seriously, we do get the rough end of the stick with regard to broadcasting to the nation much to do with historical and political reasons however the failing of the leaders within the RFL in the late 70s & 80s not wanting league games on TV as it would effect attendances (many fans of the time also did not want this for fear of the same) is as much to blame. They failed to promote the game at all within the national media so it isn't just the BBC at fault.

Boxing has fallen off the radar as well - another sport that moved across to Sky. Snooker's something else that seems to have lost the BBC's interest.

Unfortunately, RL hasn't had many new stories to interest mainstream journalists. Australia always win, and the feeling is the same teams win SL.

If England could beat the Aussies, there might be more interest. If London or Catalans end up in a final, then again there's something new to interest the casual sports journo and fan.

I think Radio 5 is fair; it's the BBC TV News sports reporters who seem to be clueless about the sport.

4 times as many people play Union than League in a month, and the match attendances are probably bigger too, so the other code is likely to receive more coverage.

ITV news announced the result on their evening broadcast, a victory for the Wallabies

There seem to be some genuine fans in the BBC now - Clare Balding, George Riley and Mark Chapman - and they are light years away from Eddie Waring.

Tompkins and Hall have scored tries that I'm sure will be shown again - two talented players whom the mainstream can talk about.

I think the BBC News is allowed to show X seconds each day from Sky Sports. I wonder if all the time is used up showing soccer highlights - or if it's x seconds per sport?

if you were bothered you could do a freedom of information requestto see what breakdown there is within sport in terms of coverage for sports and if there is a given formula for sports other than soccer and why given RL is the third highest supported sport in the UK (in terms of top echelon) why it does not receive more coverage/mentions as a whole?
It probably won't achieve anything but the RFL could well do with a kick up the arris to infiltrate BBC sport at the higher levels somehow

Or write into BBC's Points of View. I think the show still runs, on BBC News Channel. Doubtful the complaints have any effect on BBC policy, but it should glean an answer, at least.

Our dear friends at Sky are as much to blame for this.The name" Rugby" League has been usurped by Super League. Other than Stevo's occasional reference to "basic rugby league football" super league is parlance in everyday use.