Elstone talks TV deal, Private Equity and next season (ish)

[Tommygilf]

12 minutes ago, M j M said:

I don't want to question your personal experience but I think this is absolute rubbish, from a TV perspective at least.

Which of these scenes is more likely to make a TV viewer think this sport isn't worth watching?

A

or B

One looks like a sparsely populated stadium, the other looks worse than what you'd get in the early rounds of the FA cup. 

[M j M]

9 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

One looks like a sparsely populated stadium, the other looks worse than what you'd get in the early rounds of the FA cup. 

And which would make you more likely to switch off? The not massive stadium where nobody seems interested or the smaller stadium which looks like people care?

People get massively hung up on Cas's ground but, putting to one side spectator experience, a sea of empty seats, in normal times at least, is not something Sky want to show.

 

[Man of Kent]

1 hour ago, M j M said:

And which would make you more likely to switch off? The not massive stadium where nobody seems interested or the smaller stadium which looks like people care?

People get massively hung up on Cas's ground but, putting to one side spectator experience, a sea of empty seats, in normal times at least, is not something Sky want to show.

 

I’d hate for Cas to move from t’Jungle because it’s one of the most atmospheric stadia in Super League.

They’d be better off extending & upgrading the grandstand (if possible). Similar to what Wakefield are doing, with exec boxes etc.

[Big Picture]

10 hours ago, Man of Kent said:

I’d hate for Cas to move from t’Jungle because it’s one of the most atmospheric stadia in Super League.

They’d be better off extending & upgrading the grandstand (if possible). Similar to what Wakefield are doing, with exec boxes etc.

Their field of play is too short though, it would need to be lengthened too.

[tms]

12 hours ago, M j M said:

I don't want to question your personal experience but I think this is absolute rubbish, from a TV perspective at least.

Which of these scenes is more likely to make a TV viewer think this sport isn't worth watching?

A

or B

empty stand s do look bad but rfl don't help themselves  a lot of the time put cameras in stand where most people are sitting 

[M j M]

12 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

Their field of play is too short though, it would need to be lengthened too.

It's larger than Old Trafford's pitch.

[M j M]

Just now, POR said:

empty stand s do look bad but rfl don't help themselves  a lot of the time put cameras in stand where most people are sitting 

FFS what on earth does the placing of tv cameras at club stadia in Super League games have to do with the RFL???

[Big Picture]

2 minutes ago, M j M said:

It's larger than Old Trafford's pitch.

How so?  Old Trafford fits a full length field of play, though just barely.

[Tommygilf]

12 hours ago, M j M said:

And which would make you more likely to switch off? The not massive stadium where nobody seems interested or the smaller stadium which looks like people care?

People get massively hung up on Cas's ground but, putting to one side spectator experience, a sea of empty seats, in normal times at least, is not something Sky want to show.

 

The one that looks like Sky are doing some community service broadcasting for a village fete.

[M j M]

3 minutes ago, POR said:

empty stand s do look bad but rfl don't help themselves  a lot of the time put cameras in stand where most people are sitting 

And while we're at it the non-tv facing stand at Totally Langtree is little different in terms of how full it is in my experience.

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, M j M said:

FFS what on earth does the placing of tv cameras at club stadia in Super League games have to do with the RFL???

If you have to ask then you'll never understand.

[M j M]

1 minute ago, Tommygilf said:

The one that looks like Sky are doing some community service broadcasting for a village fete.

Well we can't quantify it but that's not my experience.

I actually know a couple of football/casual RL fans (their only live games have been grand finals and internationals) who have mentioned wanting to go to Wheldon Road before it is closed because it looks like such a great place to experienced live sport.

[Hela Wigmen]

It’s going to blow peoples minds that Sky want to show the successful teams and the ones who bring the most eyes on their channels and that attendance won’t rank high on their reasons for picking games to be televised. 

 

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, M j M said:

Well we can't quantify it but that's not my experience.

I actually know a couple of football/casual RL fans (their only live games have been grand finals and internationals) who have mentioned wanting to go to Wheldon Road before it is closed because it looks like such a great place to experienced live sport.

I agree its a great little ground when its packed, had a few good evenings there, but as a visual TV spectacle and as a professional sporting facility its an embarrassment.

[M j M]

1 minute ago, Tommygilf said:

I agree its a great little ground when its packed, had a few good evenings there, but as a visual TV spectacle and as a professional sporting facility its an embarrassment.

Maybe but I genuinely don't think tv viewers switch off in disgust because a team play in a small or old stadium.

The opposite in fact, I think Cas playing in front of enthusiastic crowds in a little old stadium is nice part of their identity. That sort of underdog is a useful thing for the league to have and very easy with people to identify with. 

Certainly Cas aren't a team Sky are loathe to show home games from even if it's probably a right pain in the **** for them to set up there. Compare with Huddersfield for example.

[whatmichaelsays]

13 hours ago, M j M said:

And which would make you more likely to switch off? The not massive stadium where nobody seems interested or the smaller stadium which looks like people care?

People get massively hung up on Cas's ground but, putting to one side spectator experience, a sea of empty seats, in normal times at least, is not something Sky want to show.

 

People might get massively hung up on Castleford's ground, but with good reason. The fact that it "looks full on TV" doesn't really mask its shortcomings. 

I get the point you make about the image projected on TV. I recall Brian Carney saying on a podcast a while back that his job is to go on TV and convince the viewers that this is a "must see game", only for the empty seats behind him to completely undermine his point. If the game is so "must see", why aren't the locals bothered?

But the problem with this argument is that the proposed solution is so often to "downsize" the event, rather than to grow it. This year was the first that I recall where we haven't had people arguing to move the Challenge Cup Final away from Wembley because "we can't fill it". 

The answer to the problem that we struggle to sell-out semi finals should not be to turn them all into double-headers (where the sport essentially ends up discounting the ticket price by anywhere between a third and 50%), but to instead make the semi finals something that people want to attend and something that they fear missing out on. 

The answer to improving the way the product is portrayed on TV is not to play in smaller venues, but to work with broadcasters to develop the presentation of the sport, in the way that darts, cricket and football have done.  

The Premier League transformed it's TV branding with incredibly vibrant colour schemes, enforced minimum standards on floodlighting to ensure that TV images were brighter - all to make the TV product stand out. Compare here which competition looks more appealing:

 

Look, I get it (before anyone mentions it) that the Super League is not the Premier League, but that doesn't mean that the sport can learn from what they do well. Both of those RL images you posted look like half of the stadium lights are turned off to save a few quid on the electric bill - not of a vibrant, well-produced sport - irrespective of the crowd there. 

[Tommygilf]

8 minutes ago, M j M said:

Maybe but I genuinely don't think tv viewers switch off in disgust because a team play in a small or old stadium.

The opposite in fact, I think Cas playing in front of enthusiastic crowds in a little old stadium is nice part of their identity. That sort of underdog is a useful thing for the league to have and very easy with people to identify with. 

Certainly Cas aren't a team Sky are loathe to show home games from even if it's probably a right pain in the **** for them to set up there. Compare with Huddersfield for example.

I'm not disagreeing with you, as I think we're making 2 different points.

Its possible for Wheldon Road to be a nice quaint old ground that's fantastic to be at when packed and to think that people turn on the TV and assume its Sky showing a Village league level game. Its not disgust that would make someone turn over, just self evidently not important it would seem as part of the whole visual spectacle that goes into a game.

With no crowds, that is only re-emphasised with regards to the ground.

[Scotchy1]

I think the idea that people switch off because of either crappy small stadiums full of people, or large modern stadium which are half full pretty odd. Neither are really factors for the vast vast vast majority of people. 

Cas' problem with Wheldon Road is it costs a fortune to maintain and people, generally, arent that excited to go stand in a crumbling Victorian stadium with terrible facilities in a deprived area of West Yorkshire to watch a game they arent already fans of.

 

[ATLANTISMAN]

52 minutes ago, Scotchy1 said:

I think the idea that people switch off because of either crappy small stadiums full of people, or large modern stadium which are half full pretty odd. Neither are really factors for the vast vast vast majority of people. 

Cas' problem with Wheldon Road is it costs a fortune to maintain and people, generally, arent that excited to go stand in a crumbling Victorian stadium with terrible facilities in a deprived area of West Yorkshire to watch a game they arent already fans of.

 

You are spot on the best thing for Castleford would be to knock the entire stadium down and start again its a dump as is Wakefield and not fit for purpose.

 

P 

[LeeF]

6 hours ago, POR said:

empty stand s do look bad but rfl don't help themselves  a lot of the time put cameras in stand where most people are sitting 

And here I was thinking that the home club was in charge of selling tickets with Sky placing their cameras where they could in conjunction with the home club 

[LeeF]

6 hours ago, Big Picture said:

Their field of play is too short though, it would need to be lengthened too.

It’s long enough for a professional game & whilst we can discuss and probably agree that clubs should 100 metres between goal lines with decent size in-goals there is no requirement to lengthen the pitch

[ELBOWSEYE]

On 02/12/2020 at 20:09, Dave T said:

Warrington, Wigan and Leeds to name just 3 have invested in off-field facilities in recent years. 

Either I misread your comment or you misread mine, I was understanding you were on about clubs that say they have spent new facilities at the expense of spending on their squads, the 3 clubs mentioned all do both. 

[Harry Stottle]

On 03/12/2020 at 11:43, Hela Wigmen said:

It’s going to blow peoples minds that Sky want to show the successful teams and the ones who bring the most eyes on their channels and that attendance won’t rank high on their reasons for picking games to be televised. 

 

Lots of jeapordy games on show in 2019 Hela, lots of eyes on those not very successful teams, the point being Sky will show what is interesting to the punters, that is high on their reasons for picking games to be televised.

[Dave T]

21 minutes ago, ELBOWSEYE said:

Either I misread your comment or you misread mine, I was understanding you were on about clubs that say they have spent new facilities at the expense of spending on their squads, the 3 clubs mentioned all do both. 

The point being made was that the cap keeps the spend low and it lacks ambition when one of the things the cap does is drive spend on other areas, in this case the investment can be in areas of infrastructure that is both good for the game and can help to give advantages to the individual clubs. 

The likes of these three clubs aren't lacking ambition, as claimed, they are investing in other areas to get every advantage, which is one of the things the cap was to do. As we saw in the past, clubs used to just run their stadium into the ground and invest in players, which doesn't help the strength of the club necessarily. 

[Harry Stottle]

On 03/12/2020 at 12:17, Scotchy1 said:

Cas' problem with Wheldon Road is it costs a fortune to maintain and people, generally, arent that excited to go stand in a crumbling Victorian stadium with terrible facilities in a deprived area of West Yorkshire to watch a game they arent already fans of.

Victorian? Built in 1926.