Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

The Parksider

The SKY contract for RL - good or bad?

300 posts in this topic

RFL/SLE have always reserved the right to withdraw a license Castleford and Wakefield were under threat by letter over their grounds, Bradford were under threat of losing theirs Salford are under threat of losing theirs now.

You can't just promise a business plan to the licensing people and then decide to run on a shoestring and fail to compete, you risk your license being taken away.

You in particular can't assume a club on a downward spiral can just "re-group" these words are meaningless.

So what part of face the facts don't you understand?

Which SL clubs have had their licence withdrawn to date?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to back up my opinion. My contention is that without an elite pro competition, there would not be the virtuous spiral of increasing fans, increasing viewers, Sky subscribers, advertisers paying for slots when SL is broadcast all enabling Sky to buy the rights to broadcast SL, which funds the clubs to develop themselves, which as we have seen increases fans, and so on and so on. The free to air model public broadcasting proposed by some would just not be able to generate this amount of value.

The presence of the elite competition acts as an incentive to players and potential players of ambition and generates an interest al all levels of the game.

Thus in my view, if Sky had not come along, the game at the top level would have continued it downward spiral, the incentive or pull on the smaller clubs would have ceased, players and potential players of ambition would then have looked to union as their way forward as has notably happened with Andy Farrell, Chris Ashton, etc etc). So, 17 years on, our game would have been much smaller than it is now, there would be much less money in it, fewer clubs, and the vicious spiral of decline would be continuing.

That's pretty much my view also. However the time has come to make the SL clubs self sustaining entities. They have overspent and to hell with the consequences and it has indeed led to the success in TV rating, attendances etc that you have quoted. Now the piper has to be paid and the consequences of the previous spending policies are here for all to see, Crusaders, Wakefield, Salford, Bradford, maybe Hull KR and Castleford are or have recently been in deep financial troube. In order to sustain the sucess of SL you have laid out, the clubs now need to balance the books so that no more go to the wall. Once that is done in a couple of years then maybe more risky spending patter ns will once again contribute to even more success for SL but that time is not now. Now is the time to consolidate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which SL clubs have had their licence withdrawn to date?

Crusaders had to stand down for Wakefield as the money had run out, anyway that's not the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crusaders had to stand down for Wakefield as the money had run out, anyway that's not the point.

Crusaders withdrew. SL were about to boot Wakefield and admit them before their owners realised they couldn't hack it. Not that it didn't turn out really well for the game becauseiobviously we have found a gem in Glover. Does he have a brother in Manchester?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well played for being flushed out as someone who reckons Superleague is evil and no good for the sport but daredn't debate this. Up to now........

The 10 club SL is from a poster. Equally you can propose a 5 club SL playing each other six times a season and the use that as justification that superleague is not a success at all.

The reality is SL can return to being a 12 club competition to balance the books. It was 12 clubs for many years and on several occasions there was no P & R.

You stand as a prime example of those who contrive an extreme argument from a personal bias.

The only bias I have is that I think the absence of P&R is fundamentally bad for our game. General sports fans already describe our system as "bizarre" what the movers and shakers in sport will think if we have a ten team (not twelve) comp with two of the teams being from abroad god alone knows. That leaves 8 English clubs, how much notice are the Engllsh media going to take of such a comp? Very little is my guess. Our media profile has declined dramatically since we got into bed with Murdoch. They don't exactly ignore us but they come pretty close. Contrast this with the superb treatment the Beeb gave to RL's 1995 World Cup and Centenary. What did they get for their pains? Murdoch and Super League. Is it any wonder their treatment of our game is now a little less than overwhelming ? In those days the likes of Hanley, Schoey, Offiah were household names, how many of our top stars could be so descibed today? None! Kevin Sinfield is IMO the equal certainly of Schofield and possibly even Hanley, I'd like to bet no one not involved in RL south of Doncaster has heard of him.

I do think Super League has been bad for the game but there's no going back. But given that we are in a hole the least we could do is to stop digging! At least make the game recogniseable to fans of other sports as being based in the British tradition. We aren't Americans and we aren't Ausses. Our players have no SOO to motivate them to better things, we need the stimulous that P&R gives. ATM many of them are in a comfort zone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hanley et al became famous in a different media age. (they weren't actually *that* famous anyway in reality)

There's not a lot we can do about that except try to live in the world as it is, not as we'd like it to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crusaders withdrew. SL were about to boot Wakefield and admit them before their owners realised they couldn't hack it.

Is that real fact, I know its your opinion and I know its my perception, is it the reality though,

These things are complex, and facts are not always what they seem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only bias I have is that I think the absence of P&R is fundamentally bad for our game. General sports fans already describe our system as "bizarre" what the movers and shakers in sport will think if we have a ten team (not twelve) comp with two of the teams being from abroad god alone knows. That leaves 8 English clubs, how much notice are the Engllsh media going to take of such a comp? Very little is my guess. Our media profile has declined dramatically since we got into bed with Murdoch. They don't exactly ignore us but they come pretty close. Contrast this with the superb treatment the Beeb gave to RL's 1995 World Cup and Centenary. What did they get for their pains? Murdoch and Super League. Is it any wonder their treatment of our game is now a little less than overwhelming ? In those days the likes of Hanley, Schoey, Offiah were household names, how many of our top stars could be so descibed today? None! Kevin Sinfield is IMO the equal certainly of Schofield and possibly even Hanley, I'd like to bet no one not involved in RL south of Doncaster has heard of him.

I do think Super League has been bad for the game but there's no going back. But given that we are in a hole the least we could do is to stop digging! At least make the game recogniseable to fans of other sports as being based in the British tradition. We aren't Americans and we aren't Ausses. Our players have no SOO to motivate them to better things, we need the stimulous that P&R gives. ATM many of them are in a comfort zone.

Show me examples of our media profile being high pre-murdoch, show me post Wapping how our profile was raised, rugby's profile nosedived following the loss of regional offices, the fact is we then got treated the same as the Southern issues had aays treated us, ignored.

When Northern papers printed loads of rugby reports, those reports were not published elsewhere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crusaders withdrew. SL were about to boot Wakefield out and admit them.......

Oh give up. The RFL desperately wanted Glover and Newmarket full stop. Cru lost their licence without them or the RFL losing face.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only bias I have is that I think the absence of P&R is fundamentally bad for our game. I do think Super League has been bad for the game.

On both counts the weight of opinion and evidence is against you but you are entitled to your opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only bias I have is that I think the absence of P&R is fundamentally bad for our game. General sports fans already describe our system as "bizarre" what the movers and shakers in sport will think if we have a ten team (not twelve) comp with two of the teams being from abroad god alone knows. That leaves 8 English clubs, how much notice are the Engllsh media going to take of such a comp? Very little is my guess. Our media profile has declined dramatically since we got into bed with Murdoch. They don't exactly ignore us but they come pretty close. Contrast this with the superb treatment the Beeb gave to RL's 1995 World Cup and Centenary. What did they get for their pains? Murdoch and Super League. Is it any wonder their treatment of our game is now a little less than overwhelming ? In those days the likes of Hanley, Schoey, Offiah were household names, how many of our top stars could be so descibed today? None! Kevin Sinfield is IMO the equal certainly of Schofield and possibly even Hanley, I'd like to bet no one not involved in RL south of Doncaster has heard of him.

I do think Super League has been bad for the game but there's no going back. But given that we are in a hole the least we could do is to stop digging! At least make the game recogniseable to fans of other sports as being based in the British tradition. We aren't Americans and we aren't Ausses. Our players have no SOO to motivate them to better things, we need the stimulous that P&R gives. ATM many of them are in a comfort zone.

What superb coverage of the 1995 World Cup? Do you mean the live coverage being restricted to the final, semis and the England v Australia group game? The rest of the competition was ignored, other than brief highlights late at night. There was a pre-final review programme, but that was a last-minute thing after the tournament had captured the public's imagination. The BBC's coverage was dreadful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh give up. The RFL desperately wanted Glover and Newmarket full stop. Cru lost their licence without them or the RFL losing face.

Prove it.The RFL wanted their Welsh experiment to suceed and weren t too bothered about a failed club in the Calder area.They didn t know how good an owner Glover was going to turn out to be and the Newmarket situation was still very far from resolved and the RFL were into the Wrexham stadium for 700,000..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prove it.The RFL wanted their Welsh experiment to suceed and weren t too bothered about a failed club in the Calder area.They didn t know how good an owner Glover was going to turn out to be and the Newmarket situation was still very far from resolved and the RFL were into the Wrexham stadium for 700,000..

I agree,I remember seeing pictures of the Wakefield staff and fans rejoicing after the Crusaders withdrew and they realised they still had a spot in Superleague.

It worked out well forTrinity when they realised just how good an owner Glover turned out to be.Sad for the Crusaders fans though.One would hope the people in charge of

the licencing process have learnt from their mistakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prove it.

You prove otherwise, it was not the point, you say a 3 year license is guaranteed no matter how badly a club performs. It's NOT guaranteed and that is the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What superb coverage of the 1995 World Cup? Do you mean the live coverage being restricted to the final, semis and the England v Australia group game? The rest of the competition was ignored, other than brief highlights late at night. There was a pre-final review programme, but that was a last-minute thing after the tournament had captured the public's imagination. The BBC's coverage was dreadful.

absolutely spot on. This is a perfect example of making things up to suit!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wakefield's licence would have been called in but the withdrawal prevented that happening and so, to date, there has never been SL licence recalled, cancelled, revoked, call it what you will. Not even the Bulls debacle resulted in a loss of licence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You prove otherwise,

So instead of proving it you just throw the same question back. Whats up Parkie someone called your bluff?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So instead of proving it you just throw the same question back. Whats up Parkie someone called your bluff?

You haven't followed the debate, just found a chance to have a personal go at me adding to the other numpties lacking manners and an ability to debate reasonably.

For your information Keighley said that Hailifax in 2003, would have stayed in Superleague under the licensing system if it had been in force. I said there would have been no guarantee of this because you can lose your licence mid term if you do not perform. That's a fact as Cas and Wakey were warned they could lose their licenses mid term, Bulls could have lost their license if there had been no rescue.

The fact it didn't happen does not negate the fact it could happen and so Keighley's point was lost, but he changed it, thus simply creating a silly argument. Then along you come with personal remarks holding his coat.

Now how about it Guess who? has the SKY contract been good for the game or bad?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What superb coverage of the 1995 World Cup? Do you mean the live coverage being restricted to the final, semis and the England v Australia group game? The rest of the competition was ignored, other than brief highlights late at night. There was a pre-final review programme, but that was a last-minute thing after the tournament had captured the public's imagination. The BBC's coverage was dreadful.

I mean the documentary about the game in which the noted Union star Cliff Morgan contrasted the two codes and said (without a cone of silence descending) the he doubted (at that time) if any of the current 5 nations internationals would be good enough to get into a RL 1st division side. The games centenary was even important enough to justify a set of stamps from the Post Office. I doubt very much that this would be the case today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Show me examples of our media profile being high pre-murdoch, show me post Wapping how our profile was raised, rugby's profile nosedived following the loss of regional offices, the fact is we then got treated the same as the Southern issues had aays treated us, ignored.

When Northern papers printed loads of rugby reports, those reports were not published elsewhere

When was the last time the post office issued a set of stamps commemorating a RL occasion? You can't really get higher national recognition than that - I still have mine!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On both counts the weight of opinion and evidence is against you but you are entitled to your opinion.

By weight of opinion do you mean the number of posts pro licensing that you make on here? Because the columns and letters page of LE tell a very different story. As for evidence, what evidence? Crusaders going bust twice? Wakey going bust twice? Bradford gong bust? Salford struggling? Cas cancelling their new ground? London changing their name again? And playing in front of two men and a dog? Come on Parky the game's going to hell in a hand cart!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean these? http://www.amazon.co.uk/CENTENARY-PRESENTATION-British-Collector-Presentation/dp/B007VQQNM0

Certainly raised the profile of the game. I wonder how many new people were attracted to our game or have kept their stamps?

Contrast and compare the BBCs general presentation of the game then with today's SuperLeague Show, the coverage on Radio Five Live and not just because of George Riley but the live match commentaries on R5L, R5L Sports Extra and local radio. The frequency with which RL players are on Question of Sport...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By weight of opinion do you mean the number of posts pro licensing that you make on here? Because the columns and letters page of LE tell a very different story. As for evidence, what evidence? Crusaders going bust twice? Wakey going bust twice? Bradford gong bust? Salford struggling? Cas cancelling their new ground? London changing their name again? And playing in front of two men and a dog? Come on Parky the game's going to hell in a hand cart!

How representative is that though of the 70,000 or so a week who attend SL games and the hundreds and thousands who watch on TV?

Run a poll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When was the last time the post office issued a set of stamps commemorating a RL occasion? You can't really get higher national recognition than that - I still have mine!

Well since a centenary only happens every 100 years I don't think any of us will be around to find out the answer to that one. That has got to be the silliest example ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crusaders withdrew. SL were about to boot Wakefield and admit them before their owners realised they couldn't hack it. Not that it didn't turn out really well for the game becauseiobviously we have found a gem in Glover. Does he have a brother in Manchester?

Wakefield could not possibly have been about to be booted out, you have posted time and again that this doesn't happen. So were Wakey about to be booted out or not. If they were, as you kindly pointed out to us, then your argument that nobody will ever have a licence revoked, and Halifax would never have been relegated, is null and void.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 24th July 2017

Rugby League World - August 2017