Dave T
-
Posts
43,405 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
249
Posts posted by Dave T
-
-
2 minutes ago, Futtocks said:
It's as if the camera crew have never covered RL before. Very peculiar.
They've mastered shots of the rain though!
-
1
-
-
Just now, JohnM said:
I could see that coming. 25 mins of Saints domination and pressure yielding just 4 points for 2 penalty goals, with the momentum gradually shifting towards Leeds
Yup. Shame really.
-
Interception full length try!
-
1 minute ago, north yorks trinity said:
I was enjoying the Leeds v Saints game and the coverage. Thought I'd pop on here and seems I've got it all wrong!!
You're welcome to give your own opinion.
-
6 minutes ago, Blind side johnny said:
Maybe because the interest in the Challenge Cup has been declining for ten years or more?
It still doesn't excuse only a couple of cameras and a rubbish sound setup.
BBC Sport online coverage is usually still decent.
-
Just now, sam4731 said:
This is a very amateurish production for Saints Leeds in the CC.
It's rubbish. Really not good enough tbh.
It doesn't look like anyone's interested, fans, broadcasters, clubs.
-
3
-
2
-
-
17 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:
A lot of it does feel superficial in retrospect, but perhaps that is because most of it doesn't feel like it has worked at all.
I think they've focused on the wrong things, constantly shifting the dates and trying double headers at semi final and final stage.
Putting top clubs coming in really late has generally been seen as a negative.
None of those things are going to get more bums on seats in meaningful numbers. I wouldn't say they've done anything really to make it more attractive to punters.
Wire v London this weekend is a tough sell. But tbh, Wire look like they aren't even bothering and I expect they'll get 4k or so as a reward. It's as low-key as they come. It's as much on the clubs as it is the RFL.
It's weird, because the opportunity to get a half decent crowd has probably better returns than many league games which has many as ST holders.
But in reality it'll have the feel of a pre-season friendly and isn't worth getting off your backside for.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, Eddie said:
What have the RFL been doing to arrest the decline of the Challenge Cup? Serious question btw.
I think that's a good question. Because on the surface they may appear to have done bits and bobs, but I don't think they have done anything of any substance.
-
1
-
-
59 minutes ago, Eddie said:
She was probably amazed anyone orders a Sky package over the phone in 2024.
38 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:I ring them at least once a year to see what deals are on offer. They are always very friendly, and I always end up better off (or less out of pocket as Mrs Exiled would frame it). If you have a few minutes to spare of course.
Yep, speaking to companies LIKE sky is far better than using their website. It's probably the opposite of most companies.
-
3
-
-
42 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:
Mmm, at what level (numbers please as in monetary values) would you describe as 'significant income' Tommy?
22% of the SL commercial deals is a substantial amount of money.
-
2
-
-
45 minutes ago, binosh said:
Typical pessimistic Rugby League attitude, don’t ask, don’t get.
To be fair, we have had various different TV deals for our 2nd tier over the years, right back to the BBC, ITV and Channel 5, as well as Sky Sports, Premier and Viaplay, so somebody obviously is asking.
But I'm not sure I can think of any comparable sport that gets its 2nd tier broadcast prominently, certainly not on major terrestrial TV.
In reality, we are talking really minor leagues (SL ain't exactly huge!) and TV deals with the likes of Premier are probably the level, at best maybe a Sky Sports deal, but we've even seen there that they don't commit.
-
56 minutes ago, Blind side johnny said:
I think it is. I assume that the broadcasting contracts will be with the RFL and the distribution will be of a sum nett of other costs, including RFL and RFLCom.
Some folk, when deriding the distribution formula are being very simplistic in assuming this just applies to the proposed deal. As I understand it, it applies to all broadcasting income to RFL. Notwithstanding current deals it should also apply to any future ones, ensuring that the lower level clubs don't get squeezed out of those by the SL mob. It is actually there to protect the interests of non-SL clubs, in my opinion.I suppose your first para shows that it ain't so simple. Commercial agreements can be written however you want them to be written, meaning future protection can be written in without this structure.
I can understand to an extent having a fixed % share of distributable income - in principle this means the clubs outside of SL get plenty of 'freebies' as most commercial income is driven from SL, but it does come with unintended consequences like this. Where is the incentive for non-SL clubs to try new things, take deals like this if their reward for it is less than 20% of the commercial value it brings in?
The principle of 'the more we put in, the more we get out' is sound, but it does deliver poor outcomes like this, where decisions can be made for the wrong reasons.
-
Just now, Sports Prophet said:
I would be satisfied with yellow. Red would be too much for my liking.
I've never been a fan of these tackles (James Graham used to be bad for them) and imo they can be far more dangerous than a high tackle with the arm which we'd see given red.
-
That head on head contact would be a red card in SL. And I must admit, I think it's hard to argue against. The tackler rose into the tackle and made to attempt to move his head into a safe place. It's quite a horrible injury that can absolutely be prevented.
-
1
-
-
Just now, Damien said:
It's very much a coaching team, hence Wigan tying in all three together. Each is as important as the other, Leuluai and O'Loughlin are far from your normal (junior for want of a better term) assistants.
I'd certainly imagine there are clauses where people can leave etc though. For me its another statement under the new owner, Mike Danson, as much as anything else.
Yeah, like I say, I get it as a statement for fans/media etc. A 7 year contract doesn't really do anything that a more standard 5 year contract doesn't do.
It's PR really, which isn't a bad thing.
I think the only other 7 year contract we've seen here though was Brodie Croft!
-
At risk of becoming a rout this one.
-
Some lovely slick passing there, looks easy but high quality stuff.
-
Just now, Sports Prophet said:
Come join on the Aussie RL page
Ah, it's not a place I ever venture tbh.
-
What is the longest coaching tenure in the SL era?
Always weird these 7 year deals. They are there to send a message really, but I'm not sure why you'd ever offer somebody a 7 year deal, especially not an assistant coach.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:
You not watching Panthers v Broncs now?
Yeah, working from home has benefits for these Thursday matches!
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, Blind side johnny said:
I believe that it applies to all broadcasting income, but may be wrong.
What about the share for RL comm, including the RFL and IMG?
I expect the split isn't that simple.
-
We do need to get a clear view of what are the benefits of a lower league TV deal. I know people who say it offers no benefits are dismissed as neanderthals, but we do need to be wary of fantasy stuff.
Let's be honest, there is no up front financial value in this deal, hopefully no costs at best. But we do need to have a clear strategy around how to turn it into a positive - we can all talk about things like awareness, benefits for sponsors, fan engagement etc. but I'm not convinced many of these bullet points are worth the paper they are written on for 2nd and 3rd tier comps with clubs the size of ours.
I don't think it's just as clear cut as seeing any tv deal as a positive.
-
13 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:
In that case, I am assuming it is every game televised on Channel 9. Thursday and Friday nights (later kick off for the latter) and Sunday arvo. Sound right?
I think it's a bit more random than that tbh.
We've got Thurs/Fri/Sat for the next couple of weeks, then a Sunday, they we have a Friday and a Saturday double header. There is obviously a selection person, not sure whether that's on game attractiveness for UK audience, or based on Sky schedules.
-
45 minutes ago, gingerjon said:
It is baffling because, given the amounts will always be small, it makes it essentially not worth the Championship’s time and effort in obtaining deals if 3/4 of it will be taken from them.
Yup. It's a poor structure if that is what's been agreed. And we are just going off RL journos.
Things should pass the sniff test, and this doesn't. It's not difficult to have commercial agreements that are weighted in favour of the main focus of the deal.
I'm sure international tv deals won't be weighted like that, so I'm not sure it will be true.
-
3
-
Fri 22nd Mar-Sun 24th Mar: The Betfred Challenge Cup Sixth Round Match Thread
in The General Rugby League Forum
Posted
Should never have even been a penalty, never mind a yellow imo.