Did anyone see League Weekly this week and Times man Christopher Irvine's column about the death of rugby league in national media ?

Times are axeing Irvine and rugby league coverage in the organ of a paper owned by Rupert Murdoch and News corporation, the very people who brought in Super League for god's sakes.

Maybe the Times dismissal of league means Sky are pulling out of league. Their contracts run out soon, doesn't it. All of it is terrible news for the sport. If the papers are pulling out of league whose next.

Irvine compares it in his column to speedway. So it must be bad!

Rugby league doesn't have one full time league reporter any more in national press just a mob of freelances. Its a disgrace. Irvine asks what the Rfl's doing about it. His answer is aint very much.

I can't find a link to the League weekly so have copied some sections. It says RL is on a fast track to media oblivion. Irvine says this,

[i[i]The galling truth is that rugby league's presence in the national papers is assured only by a mix of hard-working freelancers, at the mercy of sports desks, for whom football is all that really seems to matter.

Does it matter that rugby league no longer commands decent space ? Newspapers are dead, aren't they ? Not if you consider that 10 million national papers are still sold every day in this country.

That's 70 million a week - a heck of a lot of column inches and invaluable publicity that rugby league is missing out on.

Factor in worldwide syndication rights, overseas sales and newspapers' vast internet audiences and rugby league's lack of presence is of huge concern.

It should have the legions at the Rugby Football League beating down Fleet Street's doors. Alas, Red Hall gives the impression of fiddling while Rome burns.

The "commercial" decisions of news organisations is not seen as their concern.

Try telling that to their sponsors, who are missing out on thousands, if not millions of pounds worth of publicity and exposure.

Little wonder that blue chip companies are not beating a path to the RFL's door, when there is precious little "added value" in terms of coverage.

The beauty for these big companies of national newspapers and their big internet presence is that they reach way beyond the niche website and trade publications - which serve converted rugby league followers admirably, I should add - to valuable new audiences.

It is these new "markets" that rugby league is starting to miss out on.

Without the resourcefulness and dedication of my freelance colleagues, the likes of Richard Bott, Julie Stott, Martin Richards, Dave Hadfield, Andy Wilson, Neil Barraclough, Dave Burke and Gareth Walker, the sport's collapse in newspaper terms might have occurred some time ago.

London sports desks are consumed now by football year-round. Its locust-like influence has left a scorched earth of flattened and trampled sports, rugby league among them. Pick up any newspaper and you often struggle to find much more than soccer in the "sports" pages.

The net result is that a generation of rugby league players, who should be more high profile, are missing out on exposure and income potential, the likes of Sam Tomkins, Kyle Eastmond and Richard Myler. Either they accept that awkward truth, or move to the NRL or worse still, rugby union.

Diversity of coverage that guaranteed reasonable coverage of rugby league is no longer on newspapers' agenda. Football comes first and last, interspersed with blanket coverage of major events such as the Olympics, Wimbledon and golf Open.

It would be remiss of me to neglect the fact that rugby union has enjoyed a massive hike in its profile since turning professional in 1995 - helped in no small measure by England's 2003 World Cup victory, in reinforcing the importance of international success that league has so sorely lacked.

Whither rugby league ? Growth is the only course of action and the RFL has successfully tapped into funding to promote the sport at one level. In terms of publicity beyond its natural constituencies and dedicated outlets, the message is simply not getting out.

It's no good having kids playing rugby league in droves in the south without any role models. Jamie Peacock is one of the best I can think of, yet mention the England captain's name in Devon, Droitwich and Dover, for instance, and you'd probably draw a blank.

As far as our national newspapers are increasingly concerned, rugby league, despite the great strides taken by the sport, is no longer worth covering properly. Out of sight and out of mind, for all Sky's continuing efforts.

Remember speedway ?[/i[/i]

I cant find out the Times sports editors names but I reckon the paper should no rugby league reader's thoughts on all this. Its great we've dedicated websites like this but how can we convert non believers with no national press coverage.

Time to stand up for our game and to the media.

They survive for the same reason that RL clubs do, someone is willing to cover the losses. I think that most professional sport is in the same boat, whilst RL may not be run incredibly well, it isn't the complete basket case that some would make out.

Portsmouth? Birmingham RU?

i take it they've gone bust?

For the papers these days its just wall to wall football even the broadsheets have been laying off Cricket reporters. So they can use the cheaper option of a PA reports. Its just how papers are being run these days with a very basic staff.