Not sure who you're directing your question to?

First up, the BBC Sports editors need to be engaged, but instead of doing this, the RFL pander to the specialist League Publications Limited and its moonie followers. This is pointless, as those people who pay for these rags already know when and where their teams are playing and are more than capable of trawling the web for information. Mark Foster was appointed to the role at the RFL, of Marketing and Communications director, so maybe you should ask him why various RL centric websites and publications seem to be treated with more professional courtesy than the major media outlets. Preaching to the converted is lazy......
The appointment of Foster last Feb does raise the question of what happened to the heralded marketing guru, Matt Lowery appointed in March 2012? Do we have room for a Director and a Guru? Who is making the decisions?
Don't get me wrong, Foster did great work at RLWC2013, but flogging tickets for a tenner isn't a long term plan that will deliver success......the lack of anything on the BBC site about the season start and the WCC sits squarely at his door. How much daily interaction is there between the RFL and the BBC? If it were purely a case of the BBC ignoring press releases from the RFL, then the Parliamentary group would be involved, so I suspect it's just a matter of opening channels of communication and not some mythical conspiracy.

Secondly, why would the BBC give any coverage to a competition that they won't cover live for a good few rounds yet? Skirlaugh Bulls v Aberdeen Warriors this Saturday is not of interest to 99.9% of the BBC audience, so why cover it? Or are you that blinkered that you think the BBC should cover all news, including friendlies of a sport that has its entire top tier located along one road?

Media coverage you say?

The promotional video THE TIME HAS COME has been eyeballed by 65,000 or so people so far in 1 week. Compare this to say the the visit England video unofficially released a week earlier that is already on 216,000. The RL has been pushed by the RL moonie press and website corps, whilst Visit England has yet to be officially released.......yet you want media coverage? I'd be pinging an email to Mr Foster and the Guru at the RFL rather than fishing on a forum

Gutters, I got bored reading your post but when scanning over I did notice one thing. You say the Visit England ad has not been officially released. I have seen it on television a few times over the last fortnight?

I didn't get past the first line!

Still he amused himself for a while.

Ah....there was me thinking that Visit England would have little need to advertise to people already there. Happy to accept I was mistaken about the release status.

During your boredom, I take it you didn't see the bit about the benefits of asking the RFL why we get little coverage in the media rather than aimlessly having yet another media bias whine on a forum?
There's a pretty damning and accurate map knocking about which shows exactly how regional we are in terms of top flight teams.......it shows that to be noticed we would have to work harder than and be more persistent than other team sports played with a football.

Not withstanding the shocking lack of marketing from the governing body and indeed the clubs, a season preview would be nice, what with the BBC having rights to SL highlights. They don't need to be spoon fed to produce that.

I've been struggling to sleep this week as I have a lot on with work so the reply to my post is a godsend. Goodnight chaps!

Cool story bro!

Again I'll highlight this part. It's the same reason why when I have to listen to BBC radio at work they go on about the likes of Strictly Come Dancing and The Voice more so than the X Factor. Why they mention The Apprentice more than Big Brother.

Rubbish. Its a conspiracy I tell thee.

People seem happiest when they wrap themselves in a conspiracy blanket and I am beginning to include rfl management in that too.

I'm sure there will be a season's preview from the BBC. In the week that the season starts. That's how news organizations work - they cover things when they're news.

On "The Time Has Come", tbh gutterfax is right. It's one thing making a snazzy video and it's another thing getting it seen.

I can see an almost inevitable retortary moan about why are we straying away from the BBC then if they won't cover us and staying we should stick with them because a highlights package at 2:30am on a Monday morning means we might feature more on their website.

Reality is (AND EVERYONE SHOULD KNOW THIS BY NOW) that if you're looking for Super League news then check the Sky Sports website.

If you have access to the Internet to be able to check the BBC Sport site then you must have the ability to view the Sky Sports one too. It's almost like checking the St Helens website and wondering why they aren't talking about HKR on there instead.

The BBC is a news organisation. What RL news has their been that the BBC should be covering?


It is upto the clubs and the RFL to generate content and news that the media find interesting enough to publish, not the other way round.

I tend to agree - it's a known known that for various reasons, the BBC is mostly disinterested in the day to day workings of RL; for that reason, it's on the governing body and the clubs themselves to create content that engages BBC sports journalists and dials up their interest.

The disincentives to blanket cover RL are many - its regional nature, the Sky monopoly and just maybe, the old school tie/RU connection; that being the case, the sports marketeers need to work that bit harder to overcome those disincentives, rather than simply railing against them as unfair - there may be a certain Quixotic appeal to highlighting the class issue, but it doesn't advance the position one iota.

Maybe the RFL could start by employing a genuine sports marketing expert - preferably one poached from RU - and have them devise, implement and evaluate an *actual* marketing strategy, rather than the scattergun, unfocused work they seem intent on pursuing year on year. If they were really serious about it, they could also offer to work with the marketing managers of all their member clubs, so that on top of all the club-specific marketing work that happens locally, aimed at filling grounds and shifting shirts and season tickets, there was also some joined up marketing of the sport itself on a national basis, that was cohesive and had consistent themes and messages.

Entirely this.

The BBC is not our PR agency. If the BBC doesn't see a benefit in publishing a story from RL land, that is the fault of RL land for not creating a story that interests the BBC and, by extension, the wider BBC audience.

We have 12 clubs in Super League, all with full-time employees in the roles of PR and marketing. The fact that the newest story about RL on the BBC website (aside from the Gareth Raynor trial) is an interview that Daryl Powell did with Radio Leeds three days ago is, quite frankly, a sad indictment of the marketing and PR efforts of all 12 clubs.

Pretty much sums it up.

The RFL have for too long been targeting those who already know about the product. It's up to the RFL to feed the BBC worthwhile news, not the BBC to go looking for it.