Next NRL TV deal could be reduced due to de Belin case

[Yorkshire Knight]

Wake up call for the NRL especially in light of the past off season. Time to make serious efforts to stamp out bad behaviour

https://stuff.co.nz/sport/league/112168491/nrl-chief-todd-greenberg-fears-jack-de-belin-scandal-could-cost-game-hundreds-of-millions

[Whippet13]

Well, they are going to say that it'll cost millions to justify standing him down aren't they.

I'd stand accused down until they have been tried in a court of law. Pay them their wages as they have not been convicted, no problem with the NRL doing that. If found guilty I'd implement sine die bans, with a truely independent rehabilitation panel to judge if someone is ever fit to return or not - a parole board if you like.

Overall, the NRL are doing the right thing in the De Belin case and seem to be finally getting serious about setting some examples.

There is similar bad behaviour from players in all major sports all around the world, I dont think Australian RL is unique here.

[Damien]

I am confused with Yorkshire Knights stance on this. This is because on numerous Folou threads he has been saying all publicity is good publicity and how it's not a negative for RU in Australia. Yet for Rugby League its the opposite. Strange.

[Yorkshire Knight]

5 minutes ago, Damien said:

I am confused with Yorkshire Knights stance on this. This is because on numerous Folou threads he has been saying all publicity is good publicity and how it's not a negative for RU in Australia. Yet for Rugby League its the opposite. Strange.

Don’t shoot the messenger. It’s all in the article

[philipw]

2 hours ago, Whippet13 said:

Well, they are going to say that it'll cost millions to justify standing him down aren't they.

I'd stand accused down until they have been tried in a court of law. Pay them their wages as they have not been convicted, no problem with the NRL doing that. If found guilty I'd implement sine die bans, with a truely independent rehabilitation panel to judge if someone is ever fit to return or not - a parole board if you like.

Overall, the NRL are doing the right thing in the De Belin case and seem to be finally getting serious about setting some examples.

There is similar bad behaviour from players in all major sports all around the world, I dont think Australian RL is unique here.

Doing so opens up a can of worms if found not guilty though. De Belin is a good example, in that he will miss out on Origin payments, other performance-related bonuses he may be entitled to and it will affect the value of his next contract. Do the NRL really want to risk being sued for all that, plus reputational damages caused during the period, on their 'no-fault' stand down policy?

[philipw]

And of course the broadcasters will say that it affects ratings - they want to get the tv rights for as low a sum as possible. The proof will be in the pudding - does anyone know the viewing/attendance figures for the NRL so far this season and how they stack up?

[Man of Kent]

Does this make Jack de Belin a fornicator?Will he burn in hell?

[The Future is League]

10 hours ago, Damien said:

I am confused with Yorkshire Knights stance on this. This is because on numerous Folou threads he has been saying all publicity is good publicity and how it's not a negative for RU in Australia. Yet for Rugby League its the opposite. Strange.

I think you will find that Yorkshire Knight is a former poster on the BBC forums called Nottins.

He was a well known troll on there like he is here, and he comes from Wakefield and is a bitter and twisted union fan and is considered a bit of a geek due to his liking of electric cachets 

 

[Man of Kent]

15 minutes ago, The Future is League said:

I think you will find that Yorkshire Knight is a former poster on the BBC forums called Nottins.

He was a well known troll on there like he is here, and he comes from Wakefield and is a bitter and twisted union fan and is considered a bit of a geek due to his liking of electric cachets 

 

Electric what?

[Pulga]

11 hours ago, philipw said:

And of course the broadcasters will say that it affects ratings - they want to get the tv rights for as low a sum as possible. The proof will be in the pudding - does anyone know the viewing/attendance figures for the NRL so far this season and how they stack up?

 

 

 

 

It's slightly down on traditional platforms.

 

I saw a figure on another forum that the Aussie FTA channel's streaming site has NRL viewership up 101%.

 

The whole entertainment industry and the way we watch is in a massive state of flux.

TV deals may not be what we're used to in the future. They may not be of any use at all.

[philipw]

6 hours ago, Pulga said:

 

 

 

 

It's slightly down on traditional platforms.

 

I saw a figure on another forum that the Aussie FTA channel's streaming site has NRL viewership up 101%.

 

The whole entertainment industry and the way we watch is in a massive state of flux.

TV deals may not be what we're used to in the future. They may not be of any use at all.

Indeed - and this is ammunition the tv companies can spin, but as you say, other methods of watching are up massively

[Pulga]

1 hour ago, philipw said:

Indeed - and this is ammunition the tv companies can spin, but as you say, other methods of watching are up massively

On the other hand though, TV might pay an absolute premium for live sports because it doesn't really fit with the "on demand" model like Netflix. Traditional TV and subscription TV are in a tailspin. They need to hold on to what they have.

The next decade is going to be very interesting.

[Southerner80]

14 minutes ago, Pulga said:

On the other hand though, TV might pay an absolute premium for live sports because it doesn't really fit with the "on demand" model like Netflix. Traditional TV and subscription TV are in a tailspin. They need to hold on to what they have.

The next decade is going to be very interesting.

This is a good point. Live sport is the key thing sky has over streaming services here In the UK. 

I can't get rid of sky period as it has SL NRL Super Rugby and NFL. 

So I will pay the fee. 

[Yorkshire Knight]

10 hours ago, Pulga said:

 

 

 

 

It's slightly down on traditional platforms.

 

I saw a figure on another forum that the Aussie FTA channel's streaming site has NRL viewership up 101%.

 

The whole entertainment industry and the way we watch is in a massive state of flux.

TV deals may not be what we're used to in the future. They may not be of any use at all.

That’s not the point of the article though. Yes technological change will result in different viewing experiences therefore affecting tv deals but this is about Channel Nine and its stance on NRL issues

[Pulga]

40 minutes ago, Yorkshire Knight said:

That’s not the point of the article though. Yes technological change will result in different viewing experiences therefore affecting tv deals but this is about Channel Nine and its stance on NRL issues

The point of the article is that Greenberg feared that the De Belin case would cause a drop in tv viewership. It hasn't.

Sorry to end your game like that but facts are facts.

 

[Yorkshire Knight]

39 minutes ago, Pulga said:

The point of the article is that Greenberg feared that the De Belin case would cause a drop in tv viewership. It hasn't.

Sorry to end your game like that but facts are facts.

 

You should probably read it again. 

Greenberg detailed conversations in which he said executives from Australia's Nine Entertainment and News Corp, which owns Foxtel, told him the next broadcast deal could be impacted dramatically by the de Belin saga.

Ratings aside, it’s naive to think that companies which pay to have their ads on Channel Nine haven’t put pressure on the network as those same companies would be under public pressure especially in this day and age. 

Why do you think the NRL has already lost some sponsorship deals as detailed in the article? It goes way beyond tv ratings. At the end of the day, companies and sponsors don’t want to be associated with things that could tarnish their image. 

[deluded pom?]

1 hour ago, Yorkshire Knight said:

You should probably read it again. 

Greenberg detailed conversations in which he said executives from Australia's Nine Entertainment and News Corp, which owns Foxtel, told him the next broadcast deal could be impacted dramatically by the de Belin saga.

Ratings aside, it’s naive to think that companies which pay to have their ads on Channel Nine haven’t put pressure on the network as those same companies would be under public pressure especially in this day and age. 

Why do you think the NRL has already lost some sponsorship deals as detailed in the article? It goes way beyond tv ratings. At the end of the day, companies and sponsors don’t want to be associated with things that could tarnish their image. 

Seems football never suffers from bad publicity.

[DavidM]

What a shock tv companies want to pay less . Using De Belin as a means to threaten that is pretty low. The guy has right of due process like everyone else , or should have Mr Greenberg 

[Pulga]

9 hours ago, Yorkshire Knight said:

You should probably read it again. 

Greenberg detailed conversations in which he said executives from Australia's Nine Entertainment and News Corp, which owns Foxtel, told him the next broadcast deal could be impacted dramatically by the de Belin saga.

Ratings aside, it’s naive to think that companies which pay to have their ads on Channel Nine haven’t put pressure on the network as those same companies would be under public pressure especially in this day and age. 

Why do you think the NRL has already lost some sponsorship deals as detailed in the article? It goes way beyond tv ratings. At the end of the day, companies and sponsors don’t want to be associated with things that could tarnish their image. 

And viewers haven't batted an eyelid.

This is the very start of their second year of a 5 year deal. By the time the next deal is fleshed out the De Belin case will be long forgotten.

The NRL will gain new sponsors easily.

[Davo5]

On 19 April 2019 at 12:56, Yorkshire Knight said:

Don’t shoot the messenger. It’s all in the article

You really are pathetic.