Re: Rugby League in the world news. : Sat Aug 22, 2015 7:19 pm  

Historically the 'establishment' practised a sporting apartheid in respect of RL, not only in England but more widely as a sport in Europe and the former colonies. Corruption, snobbery and self interest condemned RL to the North of England it is only through sheer opportunistic entrepreneurial chance did RL gain such prominence in Australia.
Undoubtedly the 'establishment' which would include the BBC a London centric mediia ably assisted by the RU were instrumental in the marginalisation of RL nationally.

All history now! RU has adapted to professionalism and have marketed their game, it seems irrespective of its attraction as a spectacle! at an international level, adopting a strategy of taking all the positive aspects of RL in terms of training techniques,core skills and technology
RL ,it seems, wallows in club self interest,comedic TV presentation, poor leadership at a national level and a disconnected management in the guise of the RFL.
To use club attendance as a measure of success proves very little, just take a look at club/county cricket attendances and the prominence of cricket at an international level in the media.
It's difficult to see past football (premiership at least) as an national obsession perpetuated by the 'new' media establishment ? Which TV/Radio presenter does not support a premiership team (no doubt adopted when attending uni) whist this imbalanced myopic perspective of sport persists I'm afraid the only column inches RL will attract will be largely negative.

Re: Rugby League in the world news. : Sat Aug 22, 2015 11:41 pm  

Andy Gilder wrote:

Two professional sides averaging over 6k in the North, but it's a southern based sport. Hundreds of other junior clubs in the north (probably more than RL when you include ones in East/North Yorkshire, Durham, Tyneside, Northumberland etc) but it's a southern based sport.

A southern based sport that only gets reported on by southern based journalists, despite the BBC Sport department being based in Salford.

Aye, alright then. Whatever you say. No point attempting to argue with that logic.

I'm not quite sure why you keep repeating the 2 sides in the North with average 6k crowds as if it's somehow a sign of "success". 6k crowds are poor for professional sides. Especially for a sport with the financial and media clout of Rugby Union. It's also not unreasonable to describe Rugby Union as a southern based sport since its a southern based sport.

I'm also not sure what you're on about with your second paragraph. I've never said that. It seems as if you want to jump straight to a position ie anti-Union that I've never stated. I don't have a problem with the amount of coverage Rugby Union gets. I have a problem with the lack of coverage Rugby League gets. I also have a problem with the undue prominence given to certain events/sports/issues. Things like netball, dressage etc or the huge, monumental push Women's Football has and continues to receive.
I also have a problem with other events/sports/issues that don't get the prominence they deserve.

Do you honestly think the media in this country isn't London-centric? Because the current editor of BBC Breakfast thinks it is.

Do you think the policy-makers in this country aren't London-centric?
The decision makers in this country, be it in policy, media, business etc generally come from a similar background, often from public & private schools, and as I said, they come from areas where RL isn't relevant. But that doesn't mean they should ignore RL just because it wasn't relevant to them. As I said this isn't an RL specific issue. It affects all areas of life that aren't relevant to these people. Hence economic policies that benefit the "relevant" people and areas. Hence the transport policy I mentioned earlier that is inexcusable. Hence "non-relevant" issues and events going unreported in the media and "relevant" issues and events going regularly reported.

As I said, it's a vicious circle. The more something is reported/covered the more people take interest and so the more justification for reporting it. And of course the more something goes unreported the more it is ignored by the public. That's why it's imperative our media and policy makers are fair in their decisions. Sadly they aren't, they push the agendas that are important to them.

I don't see that as an unreasonable point to make about Britain in 2015, especially with the ever increasing power and centralisation of the media.