ITV and the Rugby World Cup - Why?

There has been much criticism of ITV's coverage of the Rugby World Cup. Much scorn has been heaped upon some of the commentators and pundits.

I am not really in a position to comment fully on the accusations being levelled against the broadcaster. As is customary these days, I have watched the matches with the TV sound turned down, and the radio commentary on, or else in blissful silence. From this "mute" vantage point, the coverage has seemed technically good at least.

My main question is why ITV continually goes out of its way to secure the rights to the tournament. After all, rugby union itself hardly seems to fit the supposed ITV "demographic".  When ITV happily relinquished its hold on the Formula 1 rights, there was much muttering that concentrating resources on football would enable the channel to more efficiently reach its target audience.

It could be argued that F1 and rugby union are generally followed by people falling into the same socio-economic categories, so why rugby and not F1?  Well, I would guess that the rights for the Webb Ellis trophy, which happens every four years, involve a considerably lower financial outlay.

Perhaps equally importantly, ITV are not investing in rugby union as such, but rather in what the Rugby World Cup represents, in emotional and patriotic terms. This is an "event", and ITV know that advertisers love all the jingoism and hoopla that goes with it. It is more difficult to generate and sell such hype with individual sports, or those which are less "tribal".

By the way, New Zealand are still my pick to win the thing!