Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Man of Kent

‘Sky Sports Rugby’

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, Chamey said:

Did you miss the Beeb’s comment that ‘all live RL underperforms slot average’? Not everything is a conspiracy. 

So the next question is why RL underperforms, and that is the billion quid question. 

It isn't really a complex question, we know the answer we just don't want to admit it because admitting the answer means change and investment and change is scary and not all can afford the investment and they will be left behind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Bleep1673 said:

I will bet my TV License there will be the usual amount of Championship Rugby League that was shown in 2018, ie, NONE, but there will be loads of sh**e level RU being shown 24 hours a day.

 

WHEN ARE THE CHAMPIONSHIPS GOING TO BE SHOWN ON TV??

When they put together a product a broadcaster wants to buy 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chamey said:

Did you miss the Beeb’s comment that ‘all live RL underperforms slot average’? Not everything is a conspiracy. 

So the next question is why RL underperforms, and that is the billion quid question.

Again, you’ve twisted it. It said domestic RL, ie the Cup 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Again, you’ve twisted it. It said domestic RL, ie the Cup 

Well we clearly weren’t talking about internationals, given that they’re already televised. ‘Domestic rugby league on the channel is declining with all audiences for live games below the timeslot average’ was the full quote. If the CC (traditionally one of the biggest competitions in the U.K.) is performing below average then it’s not surprising that they’re not jumping for Batley vs Dewsbury. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Chamey said:

Did you miss the Beeb’s comment that ‘all live RL underperforms slot average’? Not everything is a conspiracy. 

So the next question is why RL underperforms, and that is the billion quid question. 

I didn't miss it

 

What I did miss was the parity of advertising of events, news reporting of results and studio appearances of players that the BBC affords to pretty much any other sport it still covers. 

The BBC for example has 2 regular weekly shows covering the NFL, a sort not covered by the BBC and not even played professionally in the UK. compared to the one, wandering timeslot comparitor it gives the RL.

Are we surprised then that it underperformed? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a feeling that this would happen when sky went down the dedicated sports channel route, it could be a positive thing ,League being the summer sport and Union in the winter, obviously their will be a period when both codes play at the same time , but it might just get some more union fans watching our great game, the more national exposure the better,

 

 

 

 

Edited by owls
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Ant said:

I didn't miss it

 

What I did miss was the parity of advertising of events, news reporting of results and studio appearances of players that the BBC affords to pretty much any other sport it still covers. 

The BBC for example has 2 regular weekly shows covering the NFL, a sort not covered by the BBC and not even played professionally in the UK. compared to the one, wandering timeslot comparitor it gives the RL.

Are we surprised then that it underperformed? 

I think this is right. I think the been give us good coverage. They don't give us much promotion of that coverage. And then try and blame us when they don't grow the audience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ant said:

I didn't miss it

 

What I did miss was the parity of advertising of events, news reporting of results and studio appearances of players that the BBC affords to pretty much any other sport it still covers. 

The BBC for example has 2 regular weekly shows covering the NFL, a sort not covered by the BBC and not even played professionally in the UK. compared to the one, wandering timeslot comparitor it gives the RL.

Are we surprised then that it underperformed? 

Unfortunately this is so true. The BBC completely fails to promote its own RL coverage and certainly doesn't promote it to the same extent that it does it's other sports. If people don't know it's on then they can't watch it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Chamey said:

Did you miss the Beeb’s comment that ‘all live RL underperforms slot average’? Not everything is a conspiracy. 

So the next question is why RL underperforms, and that is the billion quid question. 

By how much and against what, other sport, strictly come dancing, repeats of Antique bargain hunt in the attic, a film?

Timing in the year, what it clashes with against other specific prigrammes on TV and lack of advertising for the live games influences matters considerably. If we want to build RL to a wider TV audience there's little point having a couple of games every other month or three with a frankly joke of a highlights weekly programme hidden away from the nation at around midnight on BBC2 on a Tuesday!

Week in week out, two games minimum plus championship say on BBC Four and actul proper advertising of the sport, not the reliance of someone in the Beeb on a programme coincidentally throwing it out to their limited audience 'the RL is on tomorrow/later today' which is pretty much what happens all too often. Even when you have the weather forecast, it's at the six nations in Scotland/England/Wales it's xx weather, at the women's soccer it's yyy and for the biscuit sponsored British athletics (which gets a turnout of a few thousand and steve cram getting all jizzed up over it like it's a big occasion) it's zzz. RL NEVER gets that, not ever, and that's just one small aspect of the problems/battle..

RL viewership would increase IF it was given the same that RU was in terms of advertising/brand awareness and programme quality/time both before and after match. It certainly isn't going to expand the way things are done currently.

Edited by Denton Rovers RLFC
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

When they put together a product a broadcaster wants to buy 

Rugby League is more than Super League. Sky have bought the rights to Championship RL< so why aren't they showing it? Premier Sports were. Sky bought the rights just to stop other broadcasters showing TGG, and no-one at RFLHQ has complained, they just sit on their ass and bucket the fees to SL clubs


RESURGAM

Non solum autem Leones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Bleep1673 said:

Rugby League is more than Super League. Sky have bought the rights to Championship RL< so why aren't they showing it? Premier Sports were. Sky bought the rights just to stop other broadcasters showing TGG, and no-one at RFLHQ has complained, they just sit on their ass and bucket the fees to SL clubs

What fees do you really think SL clubs are getting that should be for Championship clubs? I think it's fairly obvious that lower league clubs benefit more financially from the TV funding split at the moment than they would if they got no SL TV money and instead sold their Championship rights completely separately but then retained the income from these TV rights. You should be careful about what you wish for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we are just being paid as feeder clubs for SL Teams? We deserve screen time as much as any of the other smaller watched sports that Sky show. They have paid the RFL for rights that another broadcaster had, but refuse to show any championship games at all in 2018.


RESURGAM

Non solum autem Leones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Denton Rovers RLFC said:

Week in week out, two games minimum plus championship say on BBC Four

There's not one sport that gets that level of coverage from the BBC, not even soccer.


Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bleep1673 said:

Rugby League is more than Super League. Sky have bought the rights to Championship RL< so why aren't they showing it? Premier Sports were. Sky bought the rights just to stop other broadcasters showing TGG, and no-one at RFLHQ has complained, they just sit on their ass and bucket the fees to SL clubs

Because people don't watch it's it doesnt add value to sky's offering to advertisers or drive subscriptions.

This is the best deal the championships have ever had and more funding than ever before have been given to the championships yet more than half the clubs in the lower leagues have gone bust  disappeared or had severe financial difficulties. 

The championship has been valued by the market not failed by the RFL 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Because people don't watch it's it doesnt add value to sky's offering to advertisers or drive subscriptions.

This is the best deal the championships have ever had and more funding than ever before have been given to the championships yet more than half the clubs in the lower leagues have gone bust  disappeared or had severe financial difficulties. 

The championship has been valued by the market not failed by the RFL 

Then sell the rights to whoever wants to show the sport rather than take the money & sit on it. We need publicity, we need screen time, we need to show we are more than SL IF you don't agree, stop watching SL & watch championship (/1) instead of sitting on your cahoonies on a Sunday.


RESURGAM

Non solum autem Leones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Bleep1673 said:

Then sell the rights to whoever wants to show the sport rather than take the money & sit on it. We need publicity, we need screen time, we need to show we are more than SL IF you don't agree, stop watching SL & watch championship (/1) instead of sitting on your cahoonies on a Sunday.

Nobody wants to pay anything to show it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Nobody wants to pay anything to show it. 

I'm not so sure of being so dismissive to be honest. The championship has been massively strengthened in recent years in terms of both quality and size of clubs it contains. And Sky specifically do pay for it as part of their deal with the RFL.

It might not be worth masses (isn't their cut currently less than 3 million a season?) But that they can still operate on that level is a bonus as they wouldn't be driving for much. With Toronto, Toulouse, Widnes, Bradford, Leigh, York, Fev, Rochdale and other former giants in there there's the makings of what would be a relatively cheap TV deal for Sky.

If sky are going for this Sky Sports Rugby thing, then Championship certainly can be a part of that. If SL is 3 games a week, there's no reason champ can't be aiming for at least 1 or even 2 slots on a dedicated rugby channel. The championship playoffs (in any sport) are often the most exciting games in a season and it shouldn't be beyond possibility that these are on TV. Nouse and Self-belief are required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

............

If sky are going for this Sky Sports Rugby thing, then Championship certainly can be a part of that. If SL is 3 games a week, there's no reason champ can't be aiming for at least 1 or even 2 slots on a dedicated rugby channel. The championship playoffs (in any sport) are often the most exciting games in a season and it shouldn't be beyond possibility that these are on TV. Nouse and Self-belief are required.

mmmm if a rugby channel thingy I would not be surprised to see more than x3 SL games per week... plus changing playing times and days to suit to get as many days of SL games as possible to fill the channel thingy... then were've be moaning more about the disruption to fans and rightly so

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

I'm not so sure of being so dismissive to be honest. The championship has been massively strengthened in recent years in terms of both quality and size of clubs it contains. And Sky specifically do pay for it as part of their deal with the RFL.

It might not be worth masses (isn't their cut currently less than 3 million a season?) But that they can still operate on that level is a bonus as they wouldn't be driving for much. With Toronto, Toulouse, Widnes, Bradford, Leigh, York, Fev, Rochdale and other former giants in there there's the makings of what would be a relatively cheap TV deal for Sky.

If sky are going for this Sky Sports Rugby thing, then Championship certainly can be a part of that. If SL is 3 games a week, there's no reason champ can't be aiming for at least 1 or even 2 slots on a dedicated rugby channel. The championship playoffs (in any sport) are often the most exciting games in a season and it shouldn't be beyond possibility that these are on TV. Nouse and Self-belief are required.

It's not me being dismissive if the championship or even my opinion. It is what it is. I'd watch it. I hope they get someone wanting to pay £10m  a year to screen it.

But there isn't anyone really out there who will pay for it, are offering to pay for it or ever have. And it's not even me saying they won't get any money for it, the championship chairmen themselves have argued against going out and selling their own rights because they don't think they will get anywhere close to what they are gifted by SL.

As for the championship being part of an Rugby channel I would hope they can leverage more out of that, but I would question how much business it would drive for sky in addition to SL and when they would play their games. I can't imagine the championships would be happy to take what would like be something like the 10th live slot, probably Monday/Tuesday/Wednesday

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, redjonn said:

mmmm if a rugby channel thingy I would not be surprised to see more than x3 SL games per week... plus changing playing times and days to suit to get as many days of SL games as possible to fill the channel thingy... then were've be moaning more about the disruption to fans and rightly so

If there is a rugby channel, and SL has Les Catalans and possibly Toulouse/Toronto I would be shocked if we didn't go to 14 and have every game live. 1 Thursday, 1 Friday 3 or 4 Saturday and 1 or 2 Sunday.

Where the chanpionship/l1 would fit in there I don't know, I'm not sure they will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

If there is a rugby channel, and SL has Les Catalans and possibly Toulouse/Toronto I would be shocked if we didn't go to 14 and have every game live. 1 Thursday, 1 Friday 3 or 4 Saturday and 1 or 2 Sunday.

Now you’re talking.

I wonder if there is a Sky producer out there who is setting up his own production company who would be interested in such a thing...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What i find interesting, as an outsider, is that the current broadcast landscape is very different to the one when the current Sky contract in 2014 (?) was signed (let’s ignore the recent contract extension). 

Cable and FTA are having to look at ways to maintain subscribers. We’re seeing the likes of Optus, Telstra, Amazon, Facebook pay top dollar to lure sports away from traditional cable/FTA. 

And what do all RFL, SL clubs and fans keep saying? 

Poor us. Sky is going to offer us less money. How will we survive? We need to be ready for less money and what the pyramid will look like with less money. 

Fark me dead! If you’re running a sport with hundreds of thousands of die hard players and fans AND you can pull a casual viewership of 2 Million on FTA, that’s a desirable product. Make the product and your offer to market irresistible and comand an increase. Sky need RL far more than RL needs Sky. Why is Ralph Rimmer and Elstone not at the table with Amazon? Facebook? Because they are perceived as Dinosaurs by the market and they don’t have a clue about what the sport should look like in 5, 10 or 20 years time. If you’re funding to clubs is based on Social Media followers than you really don’t get the landscape. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's worth remembering is that some of the sages of RL spent years telling us what a terrible deal the current one was and how we should never have signed it. You don't hear that from too many of them now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, M j M said:

What's worth remembering is that some of the sages of RL spent years telling us what a terrible deal the current one was and how we should never have signed it. You don't hear that from too many of them now.

It was a bad deal, the repercussions of it are the risk we face in the next one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

It was a bad deal, the repercussions of it are the risk we face in the next one 

It was a deal which caught the top of the market and locked Sky in at a high rate for an extended period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...