Jump to content
Devon Ram

Coronavirus: Impact on Rugby League (Merged Threads)

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, Blind side johnny said:

Wait until people start to demand refunds from Sky Sports for failing to deliver proised (contracted?) services. Sports clubs in general who are dependent upon broadcasters' money for survival would likely cease to pay their players. This problem has a very long way to run and it will snowball.

Agreed. It would then be up to the players if they wanted to either acept lower wages or leave the sport.

However, even if every player in Super League decided to leave and the clubs then signed on many of the current Championship / League 1 players at lower wages then I think Sky or any tv company would still cover the games as they would still be showing the best players available in the sport at that present time.

ie: Wigan's current team are not as strong as they were in 1990s yet just because they are not then Sky haven't stopped showing them ... and the same would apply to the sport in general.

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

If the tv companies arent willing to pay for it then to save a couple of million (or most likely a couple of hundred thousand) in outgoings on wages they would lose tens of millions in income in tv rights 

True but the clubs therefore might have to not pay out so much in wages.

Edited by RL does what Sky says

Share this post


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

Doesnt seem particular good business 

But if clubs can't afford to pay the wages then they might either have to go bust or at least carry on with less-quality players. If that was the choice then I would certainly vote for the latter and still support my club.

Share this post


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

If the tv companies arent willing to pay for it then to save a couple of million (or most likely a couple of hundred thousand) in outgoings on wages they would lose tens of millions in income in tv rights 

So be it, what happens, happens, as RL intimates if wages can't be paid then something has to give, also I will be contacting Sky to cancel the sports package I buy it for a purpose to watch my sport, if that ceases I don't see the point of paying for to echo what you say is a SL product and they alone should benefit from it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just heard on the news that Virgin Atlantic has asked most of its staff to take 8 weeks unpaid leave, I expect that will be repeated in many industries and 'payed' sports clubs, Rugby League in this country because of it's near week to week financial requirements is probably in the front line, our governing body can not replicate what the NRL are doing in recompensing their clubs for lost revenue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some reports say the situation could last until next Spring. If so then maybe the season might have to be suspended until then and just restart by playing all the outstanding matches of this season so as to finish off at the same time it would have been in 2021.

Share this post


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

Wrong - the racecourses absolutely need crowds in the longer term.  As I said, however, due to the gambling connection we do have a little more wriggle room than sports like Rugby League. 

Yes they do , but not like they used to before television and the various other gambling systems , the UK gambling companies do need the racecourses , and are potentially able to sustain them until the current crisis is over 

Again , horse racing exists because of gambling , no gambling , no horseracing 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

So be it, what happens, happens, as RL intimates if wages can't be paid then something has to give, also I will be contacting Sky to cancel the sports package I buy it for a purpose to watch my sport, if that ceases I don't see the point of paying for to echo what you say is a SL product and they alone should benefit from it.

Sky charge a cancellation fee if you have a contract with them, think its around 70-75% of what you pay per month for however many months remain. Normal Sky Sports deals are for 18 months.

Anyone with a rolling 1 month contract (which will be where the standard 18 month term has expired) just has to give 30 days notice.

Sky will therefore continue to get money from SL subscribers so there is probably a case for them continuing to make (possibly reduced) payments to SL, even if the season is scrapped/suspended. That's without insight into the specific Sky/SL contract details of course. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is that minor problem that subscribers are paying Sky to broadcast live sports. Sky is not doing that and are therefore not holding up their end of the bargain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The deaths from coronavirus can, and will be measured, but what we won't be able to quantify will be the deaths and deterioration in health from the isolation measures. Depression will be a major factor, you will get the odd suicide, and older folk will be prevented from keeping up their health regimes. It will also impact with people losing their jobs and their businesses.

Sport, and other forms of entertainment, is important to people, and if it brightens up their lives, that factor should also be considered in deciding how long matches will be suspended for. If it's to be behind closed doors, then a live streaming option should be looked at for all games not screened by Sky. I know that Sky own the TV rights and currently block live video screening but they should be gracious enough to relax their rules while the emergency is on. The video recordings made by the Championship clubs cost a fraction of SL costs to make, but many of their fans would gladly pay a "pay per view fee" to watch them live. If they wanted to be pernickety, maybe Sky could charge a percentage of this "Pay per View" fee? The trouble may be that sponsors can't be found during the inevitable recession?

Of course, we all want to get back to normal ASAP, and the best I'm hoping for is postponement until August leading in a resumption up to early January similar to the mini season we had in the autumn of 1995 before Super League started? If that happened maybe the 2021 season could start a little later after a two month break in January & February, maybe March, with the extra loop fixtures and such omitted?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hoping we can just postpone for 4 weeks, get rid of the playoffs, move the postponed games there and have a 1st v 2nd Grand Final - minimal disruption and nobody goes bust. This all depends upon the Government strategy which seems to be leaning towards isolating the vulnerable and letting the rest of us get on with it. Toronto and Catalans may throw a spanner in the works.

We'll have players out with illness but that will be balanced out by the mid-season break allowing recovery from injuries hopefully. The main issue is full team outbreaks but I'm sure games can be rearranged ad hoc. It's nowhere near as simple as that but you've got to start somewhere.

Playing behind closed doors or reducing the season length puts the viability of a number of clubs at risk unfortunately.

Share this post


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

There is that minor problem that subscribers are paying Sky to broadcast live sports. Sky is not doing that and are therefore not holding up their end of the bargain.

Indeed. There is also the point that Sky are not stupid. They will not risk peeing customers off for 6 months by rigidly enforcing subscribers to pay for no sports. I expect they will start to charge a reduced rate, or throw in additional things for free until Sky Sports is back up and running. 

Similarly, they will not risk relationships with sports - hopefully their 30+ year partnership with RL will survive this 6-12m challenge, and hopefully Sky will do what they can to help the likes of RL survive this. It is in their interests as well as ours. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe we could just extend the season and play into the winter.  Now there's a new thought - winter rugby - it might even catch on.

It'll mean abandoning the international tests but the Aussies won't want to come anyway. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eamonn McManus is saying that RL "may go out of existence" .

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/51905897

No it won't ... Rugby League will always be played !

OK maybe not at fully professional level (which is all McManus is really bothered about) but the game will always be played and supported by those who want to do so.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he should stop bleating and get his hand in his pocket as should all the money men in league.

  • Like 2

Through the fish-eyed lens of tear stained eyes
I can barely define the shape of this moment in time

Share this post


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

Maybe we could just extend the season and play into the winter.  Now there's a new thought - winter rugby - it might even catch on.

It'll mean abandoning the international tests but the Aussies won't want to come anyway. 

As I've said, wrap the loop fixtures... including next season as well.  The issue may be with sharing with football clubs, but surely the important thing is to get SOME games for the next 2 seasons.  Just get them played somewhere and just get enough played to get enough to fit a sensible competition. It does not even have to be all home and away... I mean that's why we have a play off system!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

As I've said, wrap the loop fixtures... including next season as well.  The issue may be with sharing with football clubs, but surely the important thing is to get SOME games for the next 2 seasons.  Just get them played somewhere and just get enough played to get enough to fit a sensible competition. It does not even have to be all home and away... I mean that's why we have a play off system!!!

I think the clubs need the money from the additional home fixtures though - if we cut a load of fixtures (even the loop fixtures) will those without wealthy benefactors be able to cope?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote," It is important to get some games played anwhere". No,it is important to look after the Health and Safety of players and the public.Some people have strange ideas on what is important and what is not. I am 78 years old and have been involved with R.L. in one way or another since 1950, I love R.L. but in the current scheme of things it is way down my list of being important

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, fairfolly said:

Quote," It is important to get some games played anwhere". No,it is important to look after the Health and Safety of players and the public.Some people have strange ideas on what is important and what is not. I am 78 years old and have been involved with R.L. in one way or another since 1950, I love R.L. but in the current scheme of things it is way down my list of being important

Someone talking some sense at last. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Ive seen on the Twitter that there will be no games until beginning of April - I seriously think it will be a lot longer than that

June if we are lucky

Share this post


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

Maybe we could just extend the season and play into the winter.  Now there's a new thought - winter rugby - it might even catch on.

It'll mean abandoning the international tests but the Aussies won't want to come anyway. 

And it would get rid of Toronto and any other North American teams. Great idea.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the point of saying shutdown till April  when the Government is talking about 3 to 4 months at the least, just who do they think they are kidding, closedown till advised otherwise should be the statement.

Share this post


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

Ive seen on the Twitter that there will be no games until beginning of April - I seriously think it will be a lot longer than that

South Korea has shut it down in similar fashion, announcing they have decreasing numbers with the virus.  Talk of clinical trials on 45 young Americans and an anti virus medication between 1 year and 15 months.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TIWIT said:

And it would get rid of Toronto and any other North American teams. Great idea.

They might be the only ones left standing after this all spins out..

  • Haha 1

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.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...