Derek Beaumont reveals Super League proposal for 13-team Super League next year

[Angelic Cynic]

Are things starting to move - or not move,in Super League?

https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/rugby-league-news/super-league-relegation-scrapped-elstone-4111199

[jannerboyuk]

14 teams?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/52560445

[LeytherRob]

12 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

But Sky didnt

What this narrative has us believe is that Sky paid the RFL roughly £5m for premier to show the games. 

Which is obviously crazy 

The narrative is purely about whether sky pay money for championship tv rights which you have been shown they do. You can't argue with facts.

[LeytherRob]

26 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

It hasnt been shown to be true at all.

What we know, is that even though they can show the championship, sky show minimal games. We know they allowed another broadcaster to televise championship games.

It is incredibly unlikely that sky paid circa £5m so that premier could screen championship games.

All this is to avoid what we all actually know although seemingly it pains championship fans to say it, the super league broadcast deal supports the entire sport and if it went away the game would be screwed. 

I've not seen anyone arguing that SL clubs don't contribute more, only the argument from you that Sky don't pay for championship rights(which is wrong) and that sky don't show any championship games(also wrong). Sky may only show minimal coverage of the championship but they still own the rights and any other broadcasters only do so with Sky's permission, which entitles the championship to a share of the money. The larger upfront money championship clubs get is offset by not receiving money per broadcast that the SL clubs also get. In the old days of the Thursday night Championship games on Sky the clubs had much lower central funding but was offset by money paid for each TV game, which i believe contributed to a certain amount of free tickets.

Sky own championship, league 1 and 2 tv rights in football, they may only show playoffs and the odd match below championship level, and even reduced coverage in the championship but they still own them and clubs are compensated for this.

All this to avoid what we actually know although seemingly it pains you to say it, Championship rugby does add some form of value to the broadcast deal for sky(however small) and deserves a share accordingly. 

On 04/05/2020 at 23:01, scotchy1 said:

Championship games they don't televise.

The reticence to call this the SL tv deal seems odd

 

edit - https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/new-sky-tv-deal-for-super-league/

[LeytherRob]

2 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

I mean read that article you quoted mate

Its headlined new sky tv deal for super league. It starts off with the sentence 

Super League has agreed a new deal with Sky Sports to keep the sport on the channel until at least the end of the 2021 season.

Barney Francis says “This new deal will take Sky’s partnership with the RFL to 30 years, 26 of those between Sky Sports and Super League. Now, at the dawn of an exciting new era for rugby league, we’re thrilled that the premier competition in the UK will continue to be available only on Sky Sports until at least 2021.

It doesnt follow that there is any value in the championship, and this is backed up by the statements and actions of championship owners who have publicly stated that their funding is dependant on Super Leagues tv deal.

Sky own the championship rights by virtue of the stupid 8s structure we had in place. Since they were given these rights Sky have chosen to show minimal championship games and allowed TWO other broadcasters to broadcast the championship. 

The payment is a solidarity payment, that's why it was renegotiated as part of the SL/RFL bunfight. If it werent then The Championship and lower league clubs wouldnt have any expectation or need for that funding, as in your narrative SL hadnt previously made such a payment the payment was from Sky to the championship for championship rights. 

Yep, and the second sentence is:

The five-year contract is an extension to the existing deal that ends in 2017, and is also set to encompass the Championship from 2015.

 

[LeytherRob]

10 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Yes, Sky extended super leagues tv deal encompassed the championship due to the stupid 8s.

It doesnt follow that Sky paid anything for them. Simply that they were bundled in. 

The evidence for this is as mentioned before.

As per your narrative then SL has no duty to give the championships anything. They are free to sell their rights and apparently the value of them is circa £5m. 

I'm sure we all look forward to the championship bringing that amount in.

Doesn't matter what is stupid and what isn't, Sky extended the TV deal to include championship games, of which they show 10+ of summer bash and playoff games each year plus the odd other game. There is no narrative except the one you're creating to avoid accepting you got the facts wrong. 

We can all debate the merits of superleague paying for championship TV writes but nothing will change the fact that they currently do, trying to argue they don't is just dumb.

[LeytherRob]

39 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Super.League pay for championship tv rights? I don't think they do but I've said before I dont think its a bad idea to so.

The question was does SL pay money to the championship from the SL.tv deal. The answer is obviously yes. 

 

Wasn't the question though was it? Question was does Sky pay money for championship tv rights, which i'm glad you already accepted they do.

Here's just a selection...

 

"Sky bought the rights to SL, they and they alone show SL.

We have been told Sky also own the rights for the championship, they choose not to show the championship, they have allowed others to show the championship. This has not affected the amount Sky pay"

"Sky own the championship rights by virtue of the stupid 8s structure we had in place"

"Yes, Sky extended super leagues tv deal encompassed the championship due to the stupid 8s"

[Smudger06]

the RFL agreed a five-year contract with BSkyB, and then persuaded the Super League clubs to give their backing to it!

most of the SL Clubs didn’t need much persuading, particularly when told they would each receive £300,000 into their bank accounts within a couple of weeks.!!!!!!!!!!

Only one club voted against, that was Salford Red Devils, whose Chairman Marwan Koukash subsequently congratulated BSkyB on his Twitter account for acquiring rights to the Greatest Game for eight years.

The deal includes SL, Championship and Challenge Cup. Next year is the last season of the deal. 

Those are the facts. 

[gittinsfan]

It's pointless trying to argue with Scotcy.I am sure he argues for the sake of argument.

If you asked him what 2 plus 2 equals,Idread to think what his answer would be.

I am sure as hell it wouldn't be 4.

[LeytherRob]

1 hour ago, scotchy1 said:

Yes, the question was: does SL pay money to the championship from the SL TV deal. Not, do Sky pay anything for the championship rights. 

....in your misguided opinion.

[John Drake]

Drawing a line under this before it ends up on page 800...