The future of RL's TV rights

[Lobbygobbler]

As with BREXIT, RL must be prepared to walk away with a no deal scenario. 

If this happened would it be so bad afterall? It would be no different to 1995 and Most players would be part time. However people would still go and watch their clubs in numbers - probably very similar crowds to now. RL is tribal at club level

[Woodyhkr]

15 minutes ago, Lobbygobbler said:

As with BREXIT, RL must be prepared to walk away with a no deal scenario. 

If this happened would it be so bad afterall? It would be no different to 1995 and Most players would be part time. However people would still go and watch their clubs in numbers - probably very similar crowds to now. RL is tribal at club level

Brexit - There's absolutely no chance of a hard brexit with a 'no deal'- It would be a disaster for the economy. It's an empty threat. 

RL - See above

[Spidey]

28 minutes ago, Lobbygobbler said:

As with BREXIT, RL must be prepared to walk away with a no deal scenario. 

If this happened would it be so bad afterall? It would be no different to 1995 and Most players would be part time. However people would still go and watch their clubs in numbers - probably very similar crowds to now. RL is tribal at club level

The game was dying in 1995, the crowds are currently declining. A return to PT rugby would accelerate this and all the decent players would try and get jobs in Union or Down Under

[Lobbygobbler]

10 minutes ago, Woodyhkr said:

Brexit - There's absolutely no chance of a hard brexit with a 'no deal'- It would be a disaster for the economy. It's an empty threat. 

RL - See above

I’d rather stand up and fight for a good deal and if that means walking away with no deal (with new opportunities) that is better than a really bad deal (with no opportunities) which makesus look weak.

there is no way sky want to lose RL and their is no way the EU wants a no deal (what would all their students do who cant get places in the tres ecoles)?

[Lobbygobbler]

2 minutes ago, Spidey said:

The game was dying in 1995, the crowds are currently declining. A return to PT rugby would accelerate this and all the decent players would try and get jobs in Union or Down Under

So what?

Most wouldnt get jobs in union or the NRL. I dont think it would affect crowds. It might even make games closer and more equitable bring in more fans.

i couldnt care if Leigh were full time or part time. I’d still support them

[Spidey]

17 minutes ago, Lobbygobbler said:

So what?

Most wouldnt get jobs in union or the NRL. I dont think it would affect crowds. It might even make games closer and more equitable bring in more fans.

i couldnt care if Leigh were full time or part time. I’d still support them

I’d suggest you are the minority. Some current fans of the big clubs have never know PT rugby. You’ve only seen Leigh play in SL for two seasons, that’s not the case for a lot of fans

Ive watched my club for long enough to see them play winter rugby and below SL, but I’m under no illusion that everybody thinks the same as myself. 

Going to PT would kill off our game, I don’t want that. 

[Toby Chopra]

49 minutes ago, Lobbygobbler said:

As with BREXIT, RL must be prepared to walk away with a no deal scenario. 

If this happened would it be so bad afterall? It would be no different to 1995 and Most players would be part time. However people would still go and watch their clubs in numbers - probably very similar crowds to now. RL is tribal at club level

I won't engage with the Brexit angle as this isn't the time or place other than to say I see no comparisons whatsoever. 

That said... 

It's actually an interesting question as to what would happen if the game reduced its TV income, and largely went back to semi pro. Not in a 'no deal' scenario, but perhaps a conscious decision to sell the games to terrestrial and freeview broadcasters, Facebook etc. 

The received wisdom is that if the players weren't full time pros, the standard would be so bad no one would watch t it, even for free. But I always wonder about the comparison with the GAA in Ireland. These players are largely amateur, yet the sport is seeped into Irish society, and they have huge crowds and TV audiences. It's a cultural expression as well as just a sport, even though not pro. 

Would a more egalitarian rugby league reinvigorate the sport across the North? We'd have to accept that it is firmly and proudly a northern institution as the GAA is Irish, rather than a national game. But would that be so bad? The direction of travel with politics and devolution etc is to empower the North. Why not embrace that?

All sporting competitions need an identity. That's why comps like super rugby and pro 14 are so dismal as they've sacrificed great rugby cultures like Wales and SAfrica on the altar of internationalism. It doesn't work. 

That doesn't mean going back to flat caps and whippets, but rugby league as the emblem of a modern, self governing North that is on the up, and people are proud to be involved in the game, even just as amateurs or semi pro, to be part of that. 

I wonder, could it work? 

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

GAA don't really have abother league to go to or a comparable competitor like union. 

Once you go you that level you aren't even talking about just the best going. It's everyone with any talent whatsoever.

And quality going players get snapped up before they even become semi-pro RL players.

Added to that no imports and the standard falls drastically.

The game dies pretty quickly as anything other than a regional novelty. 

Sky aren't our only option. There are others. But the idea that we could become a semi pro sport again  and that would be anything other than hugely damaging, a death knell for the sport, is massively wishful thinking. 

Possibly the game would evolve. Imports are not the answer. Puts bums on seats but does nothing to improve the structure.

[Wakefield Ram]

37 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

GAA don't really have abother league to go to or a comparable competitor like union. 

Once you go you that level you aren't even talking about just the best going. It's everyone with any talent whatsoever.

And quality going players get snapped up before they even become semi-pro RL players.

Added to that no imports and the standard falls drastically.

The game dies pretty quickly as anything other than a regional novelty. 

Sky aren't our only option. There are others. But the idea that we could become a semi pro sport again  and that would be anything other than hugely damaging, a death knell for the sport, is massively wishful thinking. 

Not having a go at anyone, but BT aside who else would pay a similar sum for SL than Sky? And BT has not made a success of paying for football.

[Futtocks]

2 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

There is no reason to think that evolution would be in any way positive except to a tiny few who would be happy to see the game take huge steps backwards so their club could compete.

Not just them; it would also please those who are uncomfortable with the game being enjoyed and played by folk who ain't from around these parts.

If we took that step, our best hope is that Twickenham's champagne bill to celebrate the permanent marginalisation of Rugby League bankrupts them..

[Markos]

Contrary to some of those posting on here I think SL leaving Sky would be a disaster. I can't see any other broadcaster making as lucrative a package offer as Sky, as much as it pains me to say. Other broadcasters would neither have the same reach, be willing to put the same amount (or more) cash on the table, or give games the time slots Sky affords. They may do one or two but not as good a combination as a probable Sky offer.

Ultimately I think a deal will be reached with Sky whereby they get more games for the same price and that might be the best deal all round

[Damien]

11 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Rugby League fans.

No where near enough of them to pay a similar sum

[Damien]

Just now, scotchy1 said:

Of course there is, Who do you think is paying for it now?

 

Sky obviously 

[Damien]

1 minute ago, scotchy1 said:

And who pays Sky to watch RL?

Countless numbers of sports fans pay to watch sport on Sky. Some may specifically get Sky for RL, the majority do not. Others may watch RL as a consequence of primarily buying other Sky packages and getting sports as an extra or even because they simply got a good deal with phone, broadband etc. Obviously some people specifically get Sky for RL, the majority do not, and RL viewing figures are certainly not made up of only RL fans. 

[Man of Kent]

1 hour ago, Toby Chopra said:

That doesn't mean going back to flat caps and whippets, but rugby league as the emblem of a modern, self governing North that is on the up, and people are proud to be involved in the game, even just as amateurs or semi pro, to be part of that. 

I wonder, could it work? 

No.

I too believe the North is on the up - Manchester and Leeds are the two fastest growing cities in the UK - but that’s no reason to go part-time or amateur (!) at the elite level.

The trick is how rugby league benefits from the North’s growth through sponsorship and other investment, not only to benefit pro clubs but also youth rugby, women’s rugby etc. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

No.

I too believe the North is on the up - Manchester and Leeds are the two fastest growing cities in the UK - but that’s no reason to go part-time or amateur (!) at the elite level.

The trick is how rugby league benefits from the North’s growth through sponsorship and other investment, not only to benefit pro clubs but also youth rugby, women’s rugby etc. 

That won't prevail under Sky. 

Next..

[Man of Kent]

Just now, SL17 said:

That won't prevail under Sky. 

Next..

Why not? 

[Futtocks]

26 minutes ago, Damien said:

Countless numbers of sports fans pay to watch sport on Sky. Some may specifically get Sky for RL, the majority do not. Others may watch RL as a consequence of primarily buying other Sky packages and getting sports as an extra or even because they simply got a good deal with phone, broadband etc. Obviously some people specifically get Sky for RL, the majority do not, and RL viewing figures are certainly not made up of only RL fans. 

Plus the money coming from advertisers, of course.

[Futtocks]

21 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

I too believe the North is on the up - Manchester and Leeds are the two fastest growing cities in the UK - but that’s no reason to go part-time or amateur (!) at the elite level.

Yes, whether the re-growth of the North is real, aspirational or just so much hot air, the last thing the region wants is for one of its most characteristic sports to suddenly and deliberately aim for the small time. A growing, confident region wants growing, confident, distinctive cultural assets.

[nadera78]

Of all the crazy ideas I've heard mooted in RL over the past 25 years, choosing to revert to semi-pro status in a bid to even the competition and revive near-defunct clubs is just about the most insane.

[Man of Kent]

2 minutes ago, nadera78 said:

Of all the crazy ideas I've heard mooted in RL over the past 25 years, choosing to revert to semi-pro status in a bid to even the competition and revive near-defunct clubs is just about the most insane.

I was too polite to say the same 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Markos said:

Contrary to some of those posting on here I think SL leaving Sky would be a disaster. I can't see any other broadcaster making as lucrative a package offer as Sky, as much as it pains me to say. Other broadcasters would neither have the same reach, be willing to put the same amount (or more) cash on the table, or give games the time slots Sky affords. They may do one or two but not as good a combination as a probable Sky offer.

Ultimately I think a deal will be reached with Sky whereby they get more games for the same price and that might be the best deal all round

Well SL isn't the heading of the topic. TV rights are. Sky want SL but don't want the luggage that goes with it. Other broadcasters have an opportunity here to step in and push Sky out. They can do that by actually broadcasting Championship/L1 matches .

Sky don't have the man power to show the 8's,so why take it on?

[themainbrace]

Got too agree with Nadera78.  It would be one thing to walk away from Sky and look for other broadcasting partners, although I would be surprised if we find one that would pay the same or more than Sky do at the moment.  However, the idea of opting for no deal would have huge implications for the sport.

We would hemorrhage talent  from the sport, but it wouldn't stop there, clubs up and down the land would have to cut back  on coaching staff for juniors, marketing staff would go, administrator would go.  I  wonder if the BBC would bother giving so much prominence to the Challenge Cup, there would be no point having Australia vs England or New Zealand vs England as it would be a mis match.  The game also relies on season ticket income, are many people going to pay out large amounts of money to watch amateurs?  It would be siezed on by Sport England to take millions of pounds of funding out  of the sport.

It would be the sort of setback that I doubt the sport would ever recover from.  We are not in the same position as the GAA because the Irish government and media live and breath those sports as they are the spirit of the nation.

[Damien]

Sorry scotchy1 that is complete fantasy to the extent it seems like a wind up. 150k RL fans paying £480 a year just for RL (about £40 a month) ?? Really? I pay £55 a month at the moment for Sky for all the Sky packages, broadband and phone. There are really so many holes in your logic that there is little point in continuing this. We'll have to agree to disagree. 

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, themainbrace said:

Got too agree with Nadera78.  It would be one thing to walk away from Sky and look for other broadcasting partners, although I would be surprised if we find one that would pay the same or more than Sky do at the moment.  However, the idea of opting for no deal would have huge implications for the sport.

We would hemorrhage talent  from the sport, but it wouldn't stop there, clubs up and down the land would have to cut back  on coaching staff for juniors, marketing staff would go, administrator would go.  I  wonder if the BBC would bother giving so much prominence to the Challenge Cup, there would be no point having Australia vs England or New Zealand vs England as it would be a mis match.  The game also relies on season ticket income, are many people going to pay out large amounts of money to watch amateurs?  It would be siezed on by Sport England to take millions of pounds of funding out  of the sport.

It would be the sort of setback that I doubt the sport would ever recover from.  We are not in the same position as the GAA because the Irish government and media live and breath those sports as they are the spirit of the nation.

The game needs coverage. Sky don't supply that,they support funding for SL. Why have a pop at the BBC?