Who is “The BBC”?

They are a large organisation, elements of which probably want to see RL fail – but has many people who love RL and want it to do well.



The BBC News will report items that it thinks people are interested in. Look at the respective attendances - and you will see a clear indication as to why the RL barely merited a mention.



RL did very well at the BBC Awards in 2006.



Why? If we cant find a better sponsor than Leeds Polytechnic, we are in a bad way anyway.

For the sport of RL to truly be considered a “national treasure” or whatever nonsense name they give this list – it needs the hardcore fans to get behind it and support it first of all.

We cant complain about lack of media attention and television coverage when we are getting less than 20k at some international games and probably wont sell out the biggest game for years this weekend.

Shakespeare of our time

What really gets on my nerves is the coverage league gets compared to Union. Union get a lot better coverage, red button option, several dedicated shows, friday night games and at least 3 live games on a saturday not to mention nearly every international game broadcasted, also all cup games and super 14 games as well.
All League gets is tired broadcasting on the BBC, one poor weekly show and 2 games a week on sky plus the odd old game on ESPN classic. League seriously needs a face lift and if that means the CC final on ITV then great, but the CC must stay on terrestrial television. I for one wouldn't mind seeing ITV or BBC showing one league game a week.
I really think Red Hall should pull their finger out and start to tout this great sport of ours about.

Tbh I was just a bit bard...

Leyther Nº1: Have you ever read Shakespeare?
Leyther Nº2: No, who wrote it?

Think yourself lucky that it's on rather than some football international.

If it goes it will be the end of the CC

didn't the rfl offer the BBC free coverage for the international games and they said they weren't interested but eventually managed to convince they to take the Australia one? I might be wrong but i'm sure i was told this somewhere.

The BBC aren't interested in our game, its ran by rah rah lovers and they expect everyone else to love it too. They have lost the FA cup and england football games because of their lackluster efforts and I'm glad, i'm no fan of steve rider but at least you know whats on when ITV have a sport.

I can't stand most of the BBC sport coverage even the football, just look at match of the day. If blackburn v bolton is a 5-4 thriller it will still be last on at midnight if chelsea have played a 0-0 draw with spurs, which will always be first, with awful comentry like Motson.

They are london bias in everyway, even the news, floods in leeds, brief mension at the end, floods in london then the whole country must come to a stand still.

When MediaCityUK opens, the BBC will fall in love with the North and forget about London.

Rugby League will become the number one sport and Gordon Burns will be a mega celebrity.

Nah, they will still ignore it and everyone will be even more up in arms.

Until the game promotes itself beyond 20 mail shots a year to people who already attend games and ditches farcial things like clubcall, oh and can sell out test matches in Wigan & Huddersfield it will not get and doesnt deserve more.

Well do something, don't just stanza round

I disagree. The RFL had a great relationship with the BBC but went for the cash. Super League is always going to be a pay tv sport but they didn't and shouldn't have sold test match rights to Sky. I keep arguing and I do believe it that selling home tests to Sky has harmed our sport.

You say they are not interested but yet for the 2006 tri nations and 2008 world cup they sent a whole crew out to broadcast from Australia despite only having rights to do a highlights show. If they wern't interested they wouldn't have done that and produced it all from London.

Likewise if the BBC wern't interested they wouldn't have bothered to cover France v Australia from Paris with a full studio crew at the venue. They've also took the Challenge Cup out to France twice.

Why is Rugby Union so well supported? I agree about press bias but they do themselves every favour by having tests Live on Free Air, in particular the six nations. They are just getting out to more viewers.

You only have to compare the viewing figures

England v France (Sky): 155,000
Australia v NZ (Sky): 206,000
England v Australia (BBC): 1,400,000
France v New Zealand (Sky): 56,000
France v Australia (BBC): 1,000,000
England v NZ (Sky): No figure available yet.

The figures say it all. 9 times more viewers saw England v Australia than England v France and that's going to be similar when we play in Saturday's final. Thus union tests are being seen by at least 9 times (maybe even double or triple that!) more viewers than league tests. That's been happening for the past 15 years.

One test a year on the BBC is fine but a waste of time if the final is on sky.

We need tests back on the BBC Live and maybe then we will get more press coverage. We as a sport only have ourselves to blame I feel. The RFL gave too much to Sky Sports.

I agree that the CC needs to stay on terrestrial TV but I would prefer it to be on ITV. The BBC coverage is beyond terrible. Awful commentary, shambolic replays missing live action, with an obessesion to showing some Yorkshire woman's bloomers in the front yard drying on the line...At least Sky "sex" up our game.

itv missed the only goal of a football match not that long ago.

yer but the most important region in the UK saw it.

ITV loves the north west,they made the goal exculsive to us.

That was the most unlucky error in the history of man. 115 minutes of awful dull football (even for football standards) and they missed 20 seconds, bang goal, uproar!

[urlhttp://timesonline.typepad.com/rugby_league/2009/11/my-entry-3.html[/url

Good article.

Interesting to read that the Beeb played a bit dirty in getting the final moved to August from April/May.

Shadey gits.

Good artilce and certainly puts the BBC in a new light.
Can't see the sense in having the Cup fianl back in May now though.

It'd be good to have the fixtures closer together and not have 6 weeks between games!

Their are 9 Super League Rounds between Quarter Finals and Semi Finals next season.

For me this is why the challenge cup suffers, people get excited about it and then all of a sudden it's forgotten about because of the large periods between rounds.

Three weeks is about right for gaps between rounds.

Until the RFL shorten the gaps it'll always spoil it for me, it's my number one gripe.

Stupid IMO, nothing wrong with big gaps early on but surely between quarter finals and semis there should be 4 weeks max! 9 is way too many.

I preffered it when it ran from February to May, it meant it mattered how we were playing early on in the season, nowadays we only need to start picking up form in April.

Good point I hadn't thought of. Would be a way of getting teams/coaches to stop, in my best Sky jargon, '[ibuilding up to the business end of the season[/i'

Aye, plus I'm sure having the CC final, the SL final and the Internationals all close together must adversely affect attendances.