Says a lot about you and your argument that after easily disproving your angle about F1 being at the same stage you've now been reduced to quips about porn sites in a debate about sports coverage......only making yourself look more and more silly.

They're staying stuff that's making it onto others sites that I've previously mentioned. The point about not high on their list of priorities would be relevant if we were talking about newspapers who have a limited snobby of space at the back of their papers and have to prioritise what makes it in and what doesn't but a Sports website doesn't have that issue, it isn't hamstrung by how much it can report in a day.

Of course it is. It's got finite resources like any organisation.

If the BBC is making a conscious decision to focus more on producing higher quality or more resource-intensive content that generates higher levels of traffic, rather that any old , then a non-story about the England coach isn't going to be a high priority. The BBC Digital teams are tending to focus much more heavily on video and social media content, which is more resource intensive, and hasn't had any notable resource increase resource to do that. Something has to give, and the thing that is most likely to give is a declining sport that fewer and fewer people seem to care about.

If RL content delivered traffic, I think it's safe to say that it would command much more of the BBC's time. The fact that it doesn't is, once again, a sad reflection on the performance of those who are responsible for generating interest in the sport.

There is no conspiracy here. All roads lead to the same problem - the clubs can't market themselves.

The argument about F1 was only partly about the stage of their off season. The FACT remains that as a televisual experience, F1 is more popular than SL with larger figures for viewing and yet the F1 community aren't up in arms with disgust that a sport where a Brit is World Champion is largely ignored during its off season on their dedicated F1 Tab on the BBC site.
As for the quips regarding porn sites, I was genuinely surprised to see them on a web-site monitoring site.......along with the Mail and the Guardian who too didn't have a single RL newsworthy story on their sports landing page at the time I wrote my post yesterday.

As for me looking silly......if you think a debate about the level of coverage any topic "deserves" will ever have a winner, then I'd suggest it is you who needs to check themselves in the mirror. You are adamant that the BBC will lose visitors to their web site because they lack RL content.....and yet their they sit, above ALL the other UK media sites in terms of traffic. Your OPINION holds little against the actual FACT, but no matter, because I'll happily debate this to death every 3 months when some over zealous sports bigot decides that their sport is the best and therefore deserving of automatic coverage regardless of its geographical limitations, declining supporter base, near non-existent international footprint and shrinking TV popularity.
As other have said....even sports journalists.....it's the job of the clubs and RFL to get attention and not whining fans
[urlhttps://inews.co.uk/essentials/open-letter-super-league-chief-nigel-wood/[/url

I've not said it's a conspiracy. I've not actually said their year round coverage is bad or not at the right level for our sport. Hell they had several stories in the first week and a half of January - so clearly we were giving them stories.

But the original point was how it's completely gone dead on their RL page with only 1 story in the last two weeks on the eve of the new season.

Now we can just always blame RL and it's clubs even though the start of January was ok on the BBC site with stories about Rochdale, Salford potentially buying their stadium (although you say a story about Bennett's potential future won't be of interest) Wood and Draper leaving roles and Paul McShane signing a new contract. Are these any more significant than some of the suggest stories of preseason friendlies round up or new captain announcements (is a story in Rochdale bigger than these?) To go from that to completely dead for almost two weeks whilst other sites aren't suggest on this occasion the finger of blame points at the BBC on this one.

That's because they're at a different stage of the offseason as I had to point out to you. They're at our equivalent of early/mid December and I think most would understand little to no RL stories at that particular time. But the key thing is that we are ONE week away from a new season. I'm sure when F1 are one week away from starting they'll have plenty of coverage building up and if they don't the fans probably will criticise.

It's their off season as it is ours. I am sure if a new driver was unveiled AND THE TEAM INVOLVED CONTACTED THEM, then they might cover it.
click the link....seriously, read it instead of repeating that in your opinion the cubs/game are being ignored rather than not being proactive
[urlhttps://inews.co.uk/essentials/open-letter-super-league-chief-nigel-wood/[/url



coverage or not, F1 fans will not complain because they are not of the opinion that a casual visitor to the BBC news site will find their sport and instantly become a fan....they will visit relevant sites, such as SKYSPORTS who happen to hold the rights.....kind of like SKY and RL.

At the risk of repeating myself, The BBC are not in danger of losing any traffic. That is in your head.....the BBC are the #1 News Media site in the UK.....and RL gets the same level of coverage from Yahoo.co.uk, MSN.com, The Mail, The Guardian etc etc.........start a thread about them, but cease with the BBC bullcrap, because it's old and it's never gonna change.

I'm not saying the club/game is being ignored but something on the BBC's end is as fault for the lack of coverage in recent weeks. As pointed out the first week and a half they did cover numerous stories, the same ones as Sky.....then the last 2 weeks nothing whilst stories on Sky have continued. Something's gone iffy and it's on the BBC's end.

On BBC
3rd Jan - Bailey drugs case
5th - Wood leaves RFL
8th - Rochdale payment reductions
8th - Ottio death
8th - Salford fan takeover
9th - Draper leaves RFL
9th - McShane contract extension
9th - Salford potentially buying the AJ Bell stadium
12th - Widnes sign Albert and Alker jailed

Next 12 days just one single story about Monaghan becoming Wakey assistant

In those 12 days Sky Sports (who had all of the above) have had articles on the future of the England coaching position, new captain announcements at three different big clubs, Rimmer announcing he wants to succeed Wood, interviews with Tomkins, Wane, Jack Walker, Liam Sutcliffe and Tim Sheens, Hock signing for Featherstone and Toronto releasing 3 players under suspicious circumstances. Given the articles the BBC had the previous week or so you think it's all on the RFL and clubs that BBC's RL page has gone dead for nearly 2 weeks?



So given Leeds have the best attendance in SL should they not try and increase their numbers because they're already number 1? Pretty lazy thought process you've got there "we're already number 1 so we don't need to keep trying"

so no conspiracy calling, but blame?

Again no conspiracy?
As for Leeds being #1. Of course they should try and attract new fans...to the cricket and Union too, because it will enhance their business as a whole. The BBC on the other hand wouldn't notice much of a drop if they removed any sport from their sports section other than Football. Rest assured, that after 2 dozen years of bitch whining from supporters of a localised sport about the SL show not being on a decent time the BBC still refuse to budge. They KNOW THEIR BUSINESS.....but again, your opinion must be right.
BBC online are by far and away the #1 online UK based media outlet and have been since day 1. The Heil and the Guardian also embraced the web at a early stage, but your assumption that people will stop going to their site because they didn't run a story about the new skipper at Hull FC is a nonsense.

Again I must ask 2 questions:
1. Do you believe that the inclusion of more RL stories on their web platform would attract more casual fans?
2. Why do you visit the site when you obviously know that SKY and other sites will have more RL related news?

Visiting a site so you can then berate said site for not carrying "your news" is very Donald Trump......maybe you should check out FoxNews

No, look up the meaning of conspiracy because it's not what you think.



Never said it would be a big drop or that it would really hurt them but NO business should have any drops if it can be helped. If there's genuine reasons why then ok, but getting sloppy and not producing the odd short article every other day isn't a good reason.



1 - No, but you'd be less likely to lose fans to other sites.....and yes whilst you'll say it won't hurt them they shouldn't be content with that.

2 - I visit because as I mentioned in another post they are usually ok, but something in the last 2 weeks is obviously not right at there end.

8 days...still nothing has happened in the world of Rugby League !

Has on Sky Sports, story about Salford turning down HKR's approach for Lui and they're live from the Super League launch right now.

Huddersfield tweeted a list of all the journalists that McGillvary and Stone will be speaking to and Dace Woods for BBC is on there as well as local BBC so no excuse not to have anything in the next day or two.