Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
ShotgunGold

Internet Television & The Championship

9 posts in this topic

A debate which generally gets discussed on here is what to do with the Championship. What really is its purpose? And as it is no longer a league with promotion, what role can it play under the overwhelming domination of Super League?

I genuinely think that rugby league should aim for two league systems, and that Super League and the RFL should attempt to pull the Championship closer to the standard of Super League both on and off the field. This would create a larger gap between the Championship and Championship One, but I think it would be better for the game as a whole. The Championship should rightfully be its own distinctive competition, with competitive matches, fully professional players, modern stadia and goals that are worth achieving. The transition from National League One to Championship was much needed, however it is not enough as I feel that a complete overhaul, a 1995 Super League style revolution is what is needed.

Clubs like Leigh, Batley, Barrow, Whitehaven, Keighley and Featherstone Rovers are responsible for getting rugby league to where it is today

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent post but far too radical for the RFL. I'm not sure but I think it might be tricky for the clubs not in SL to break away without penalties. Really have felt for some time that there is a market elsewhere which is not exploited (Eurosport instead of Tractor Racing), Bravo (as well as Darts), the new Channel showing NRL etc - suggest you speak to Marketing at RFL - come on get cracking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow - that's a lot to take in.

However, my reply will be a lot shorter I think. Basically the amount you take in from subscription would not even cover the costs of starting up something like this off. Websites like Big Pond/Justin (which where RL is concerned isn't always legal!) only work because they are using footage that is broadcast for tv anyway - that footage would still be filmed even if those websites didn't exist. Setting up something like this for internet only - number of cameras, people to work those cameras, travel costs etc cost a lot of money - you can of course cut corners on stuff like this but then people aren't willing to pay as much if you do that. Catch 22 before you even start! The amount it would cost to set something like this up you'd need to get a broadcast partner on board to finance/sponsor it and then you might as well go for a TV deal.

You are right that the video internet market is strong for the viewer, but not so for the people who run it. Even really big companies make barely nothing from internet banner ads etc - certainly not enough to top up subs revenue. The stats are impressive for the clips thing, but they aren't entirely relevant as you are comparing clips on youtube (stuff like Usain Bolt's world record, worlds best goal) to streaming an live match in it's entirety. You are confusing two different things, as I bet the stats for people watching streaming sport are way down compared to the clips because it's available in better quality on tv. If you heard Rooney scored a belter at the weekend though and missed it on Sky go onto YouTube etc.

The idea is nice, I'm not saying it isn't, but in reality it would never work due to the sheer cost involved. Plus I think you underestimate the way the internet actually works at the moment - people go to justin because they don't want to pay for live streaming sports!

Edited by Amber Avenger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I go to Justin for a number of reasons. Firstly, Sky is supposedly illegal here. It isn't, you can get it, but you can't get all of it - one of the Astra satellites is aimed very tightly at the UK and it's the one that shows BBC and other Free-To-Air stuff - though you can get all the Sky Sports channels (I think I may be out of date, though). Secondly, I actually don't like what Sky has done to our game. I'm in a minority, I know, but I enjoyed TGG more as it was twenty years ago. Thirdly, I won't pay for Justin because the quality is not good enough. Either my PC is too slow or my bandwidth is too small or both. Either way, I have to pay money with no guarantee of a cure. (Yes, I am a tightarse and proud of it!) Fourthly, I am an anarchist! I don't go round throwing bombs, I am a philosophical anarchist. I believe we should be free of all control except our own sense of morality. And that includes the internet and satellite TV. Power to the People! (Dear God! No!) Power to nobody, freedom for all!

I'll re-think this when I'm sober. Hic! :O:D :D :D

edit: Re the OP. I hope the RFL have got an eye on this because I think this is the way TV will go. On demand via the internet. How you pay for it is the biggest problem the broadcasters face at the moment.

Edited by tonyXIII

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, I go to Justin for a number of reasons. Firstly, Sky is supposedly illegal here. It isn't, you can get it, but you can't get all of it - one of the Astra satellites is aimed very tightly at the UK and it's the one that shows BBC and other Free-To-Air stuff - though you can get all the Sky Sports channels (I think I may be out of date, though). Secondly, I actually don't like what Sky has done to our game. I'm in a minority, I know, but I enjoyed TGG more as it was twenty years ago. Thirdly, I won't pay for Justin because the quality is not good enough. Either my PC is too slow or my bandwidth is too small or both. Either way, I have to pay money with no guarantee of a cure. (Yes, I am a tightarse and proud of it!) Fourthly, I am an anarchist! I don't go round throwing bombs, I am a philosophical anarchist. I believe we should be free of all control except our own sense of morality. And that includes the internet and satellite TV. Power to the People! (Dear God! No!) Power to nobody, freedom for all!

I'll re-think this when I'm sober. Hic! :O:D :D :D

edit: Re the OP. I hope the RFL have got an eye on this because I think this is the way TV will go. On demand via the internet. How you pay for it is the biggest problem the broadcasters face at the moment.

It has already happend Tony in the case of hit tv shows like Dr Who where the overnights were as low as 6 million but then when the on demand and I player viewing figures were added this was adding a further 2 million viewers to each episode and in the case of the first and last two episodes three/four million.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It has already happend Tony in the case of hit tv shows like Dr Who where the overnights were as low as 6 million but then when the on demand and I player viewing figures were added this was adding a further 2 million viewers to each episode and in the case of the first and last two episodes three/four million.

The only problem I have with watching TV on'tinternet is the poor quality of the picture and the fact I have to watch it on my monitor as opposed to big HD Tv in my front room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It has already happend Tony in the case of hit tv shows like Dr Who where the overnights were as low as 6 million but then when the on demand and I player viewing figures were added this was adding a further 2 million viewers to each episode and in the case of the first and last two episodes three/four million.

Which is fine for drama which essentially doesn't go out of date - iplayer is a catch-up service. Sport has it's greatest impact when live. Although the BBC does have live streaming of all of its channels available, they said recently uptake of people watching live online wasn't as great as they expected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is an interesting concept but do the figures stack up? Have you tried doing even the most basic feasibility study based upon the likely levels of people willing to watch, how much they would be willing to pay, what the costs would be?

The problem is that the RFL is a governing body, not an internet entrepreneur, so it would have to go into partnership with someone that had the necessary skills. Why would that partner want to work with the lower reaches of the RFL - wouldn't soccer or union be much more of an attractive prospect to them? If the concept is workable why aren't those sports out there doing it now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your replies. I'd like to clear up a few things...

The stats are impressive for the clips thing, but they aren't entirely relevant as you are comparing clips on youtube (stuff like Usain Bolt's world record, worlds best goal) to streaming an live match in it's entirety. You are confusing two different things, as I bet the stats for people watching streaming sport are way down compared to the clips because it's available in better quality on tv. If you heard Rooney scored a belter at the weekend though and missed it on Sky go onto YouTube etc.

Your right stats 1 and 3 are for sports clips and not just full videos. Obviously it is very hard to find stats on just full matches, it was hard enough me tracking down these figures let alone others! However I do believe that the viewer figures for both live streaming and payed viewing of sports matches are rapidly growing, this is particularly true in the United States, Japan and the rest of Europe. Which leads me onto this...

If the concept is workable why aren't those sports out there doing it now?

Many sports are allowing viewers to buy online subscriptions. The difference is obviously that if this were to go ahead, the Championship would be the first sporting league in the world to be solely online. The NFL are as expected leading the way on this technology, I understand individual clubs sell the matches to customers on an individual and "Season Ticket" basis. I read in a basketball magazine in Canada called "Dime Magazine" that one NBA club had begun seperately filming their matches and selling on the internet, cutting out the middle man and making a profit. My friend in Germany recently told me that he spends 27 euros a month (around

Edited by ShotgunGold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - June 2017

League Express - Mon 17th July 2017