Sky Sports halves offer for TV rights

[Scotchy1]

2 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

The Northernness of RL is its strength and weakness. Twas ever thus. Northern England is actually a big market and I’m not convinced RL has reached its limits of significant growth there.

We aren't northern though. Firstly I don't think 'northern' as an identity carries much weight but even if it did. We don't cover the whole of the north.

[Tommygilf]

12 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

The Northernness of RL is its strength and weakness. Twas ever thus. Northern England is actually a big market and I’m not convinced RL has reached its limits of significant growth there.

Absolutely. Of the Northern Powerhouse cities we cover Leeds and Hull in Super League (which is by far and away the best if not the only visibility most RL clubs get from the wider public).

We have 3 Super League teams in Greater Manchester none of whom want to be known as a "Manchester team".

Bradford is, well, whatever Bradford Bulls is.

We don't have a presence in Liverpool.

Our presence in Newcastle and Sheffield is small and not at Super League level.

You could argue Wakefield as a City perhaps to be kind. The rest of our teams are in towns.

The problem that has happened in the last 30 years with the boom in communication and connectivity is that the North has become much harder to culturally tie down or isolate. To put it succinctly, the easiest way to be popular in Manchester or Leeds is to be popular in London.

[Gerrumonside ref]

6 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

The Northernness of RL is its strength and weakness. Twas ever thus. Northern England is actually a big market and I’m not convinced RL has reached its limits of significant growth there.

Trouble is the north is also full of giant sports teams offering the chance to see the best players in the world play in the most entertaining league in the world (successfully too) and against other teams containing the rest of the best in Europe.

In terms of status rugby league struggles to compete and in some areas may have to limit the scope of its ambition to being the number 2 or 3 most popular sport in a city.

It’s an uphill battle.

[Man of Kent]

5 minutes ago, Johnoco said:

Yes, which is why the claim that ‘we’re a northern game’ is not only a cop out, it simply isn’t true. It would be in much better shape if it genuinely was a northern game and played all over the north- but it isn’t. Put it this way, I can drive for about half an hour from Bradford and get to places that are total deserts when it comes to RL. 

But surely there are people who live half an hour from Odsal who go to Bull games.  As surely do people who follow Leeds, Wigan, Saints, Warrington, Hull FC etc. This is where the growth is. 

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, Johnoco said:

Yes, which is why the claim that ‘we’re a northern game’ is not only a cop out, it simply isn’t true. It would be in much better shape if it genuinely was a northern game and played all over the north- but it isn’t. Put it this way, I can drive for about half an hour from Bradford and get to places that are total deserts when it comes to RL. 

Ironically for those who claim they want "grassroots first" or "organic" expansion, RL is remarkably top down in every area it exists. 

I put it above in this thread but of the 5 or 6 major "city regions" in the North of England, we nominally cover the city at the centre of those only twice in Super League (being kind with Hull) and only 4 times in professional RL as a whole.

[Oldbear]

Having a snow day today, so I had time to read the responses in this thread.

Have to say that there’s no correlation between the supposed new TV deal and the decision to admit Leigh as the 12th SL club, the TV deal figure was in the minds of the Sky execs long before SL came to its decision about the 12th club, so don’t blame Leigh!

Also feel that the loss of Toronto would have little impact either, probably less than the Broncos getting relegated last time. The reality is we get the TV deal we deserve because we don’t attract many casual viewers, we don’t attract many casual viewers because we are still relatively unknown as a sport, or at least are low profile, and we are low profile because for years we have neglected the international game. Many people become first time watchers of sports by seeing the national team play in meaningful internationals on TV, then they start to look further into the sport. The reality is that our international game is almost non existent beyond a World Cup every 4 years, and that tournament has an overwhelming favourite each time, and it’s the same nation. Neglecting the international game got us here, next years World Cup could really be make or break for the sport.

[Big Picture]

5 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

The game ? 

The game is those towns 

And as Sean McGuire identified that's the game's fundamental problem.  As long as it's locked into those towns it will continue to decline and fall further and further behind soccer and RU because it's not able to deliver the big events which today's audience wants without breaking out of that limiting sphere.

[Big Picture]

4 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

Of course there is a strong game in Wales and a game of sorts in Scotland and in Ireland

Of course.

Err...  That's because we broke away from the RFU.   I'm sure you remember the Northern Union.    That's why we are a northern game based around northern industrial towns. It's not rocket science.

Why is everybody obsessed with the fact that we are based in the North when we northern towns broke away from the rest of the country?

Listen to what Sean McGuire has to say in this interview with Tony Collins and you'll understand why.

[The Rocket]

3 hours ago, Oldbear said:

Also feel that the loss of Toronto would have little impact either, probably less than the Broncos getting relegated last time. The reality is we get the TV deal we deserve because we don’t attract many casual viewers, we don’t attract many casual viewers because we are still relatively unknown as a sport, or at least are low profile,

Oldbear I just can`t help but think that a powerhouse Toronto Wolfpack trading blows with the existing big guns in SLE in epic matches with SBW as their hook for the casual viewer, could not of but have had a positive effect on the outcome of the broadcast negotiations. At a minimum it sends a positive message about SLE ambitions.

SBW is the closest thing we are going to get in our sport to a David Beckham type profile character. Him in a successful Canadian team defeating all in front of them, that would strike me as ratings gold.

Any way all ancient history now.

[DC77]

8 hours ago, Scotchy1 said:

Im not sure that the game itself is the major problem. Sure tweaks can be made but it isnt going to change an awful lot

 

It’s not creating stars though. This debate has been brought up in podcasts (“how do we create stars”...with crazy suggestions like “get them on a reality show”, or “question of sport”..and that from the like of Phil Caplan). There’s not one player who would draw in a crowd or a viewer, and that’s not because the talent isn’t there, it is, but the talent isn’t afforded the freedom on the field to do what players in the past got. Creative players (in any sport) generate the most headlines. It’s those that go viral, and a sport that makes it harder for creative types to shine means less stars. 

This applies to both rugby codes. RU hasn’t had a star name in 15 years. Name one household English RU player that plays the game today? There isn’t one. Years ago there was Will Carling, Rory Underwood, Jerry Guscott, Jason Robinson (RL also), Jonny Wilkinson (although more so for his kicking). The 2015 RUWC game between Wales and England (the one Sam Burgess played in) there was one line break in the first half. When it happened the roof almost came off. France used to have a very creative midfield. Now it has an 18 stone limited bruiser (Bastereaud or however you sell it). It’s about bulk and attrition now. Defensive coaches from RL have been brought in, tightening up defences to make it even less appealing to watch.

The defences in both have improved dramatically, to the detriment to attacking play. The poster I responded to spoke of games generally being a grind. The last Aussie coach of England, apparently he’s a god in Australia...he made England unwatchable. The Aussie coach at Wigan who is credited with bringing in the wrestle to Super League, the English game has gone away from a more open, less restrictive style which made it a better watch. It looks much more claustrophobic with space at a premium. If you watch footage of Wigan at the old Wembley, so much freedom for off the cuff play and players to roam, and then flick on a RL game today, you feel strangled. Like chains have been put on players.

If football was littered with Jose Mourinho type managers, ie.10 men behind the ball and 90 minutes of trying to stifle play, creativity would nosedive. Mourinho himself (at the top of his game) didn’t get the Barcelona job as they wouldn’t tolerate the defensive tripe he served up. Thankfully he’s a minority in the game and his style is vilified.

[DC77]

9 hours ago, Jao 711 said:

I think it will be a while before Leeds actually own their ground again.I don’t know about Wire andSaints.but what is the big fuss about” owning”  the ground.Over half of Super League teams,play in shared or municipal stadiums and it works just fine for them The same situation applies in the NRL..In fact their are advantages to sharing.(Cas and Wakey fans take note ) .My point is this.We have developed a great product on the field but we have badly neglected it off the field We call it “The greatest game” but I’m afraid that isn’t enough in 2021.

Not owning your own ground means less income (often much less) as it has to be shared, and an inability to modernise and grow your club. As has been reported, municipal stadiums have had a very damaging effect on Italian clubs for example. The financial crash of the late 2000s meant the Italian government had to streamline spending, so stadiums that needed upgrading were neglected. Clubs were hamstrung. It’s only in the last five years that Italian clubs are seeking to own their own stadiums. Liverpool will be starting work on the Anfield road end to bring capacity up to 61k, while Italian clubs with council owned stadiums can’t do a damn thing. 

[The Rocket]

7 hours ago, DC77 said:

It looks much more claustrophobic with space at a premium. If you watch footage of Wigan at the old Wembley, so much freedom for off the cuff play and players to roam, and then flick on a RL game today, you feel strangled. Like chains have been put on players.

I think there is a realisation of this amongst the hierarchy down here. Their not openly talking about getting the big men out of the game but there is a lot of talk about encouraging more ` unpredictabililty ` and `mobility ` and ` skills `in the game. The way they seem to be approaching this is through making the game more difficult for the big men to keep up with the play. hence the emphasis on 6-again for indiscretions where teams would of once looked to give the big blokes a breather, i.e. slowing down PTB`s, not getting back 10, sloppy tired play around the PTB and of course less scrums. The bigger less mobile blokes will become a liability and their places will be taken by not so big blokes who might have a step and a bit of agility and speed.. Fittler came out and stated this in an article about next years Origin series the other day.

Interesting in theory, in practicality we may just end up with the bigger blokes being more mobile. 

[DC77]

5 hours ago, Johnoco said:

Yes, which is why the claim that ‘we’re a northern game’ is not only a cop out, it simply isn’t true. It would be in much better shape if it genuinely was a northern game and played all over the north- but it isn’t. Put it this way, I can drive for about half an hour from Bradford and get to places that are total deserts when it comes to RL. 

I experienced this too when living in Liverpool and Manchester, having also stopped off at places between the two cities. Tony Collins also references this in a podcast where you can leave a RL town and within no time at all there is no RL in sight.

I don’t know if England is unique in having these mini cultures where places are so different to one another despite their close proximity. The obvious example is accents. I’ve never seen a place have so many. Canadian accent? I can only make out one (and it’s also very close to the US accent). Australian? Can only make out one. US, can make out about three (New Yoik, Southern, and standard). England...it’s in the teens. Having these mini cultures really impacts on a regional sport like RL trying to spread. RU club game is also regional hence has no profile in non RU areas, but the international game (ie. Six Nations) does have a national profile so is able to at least have a modicum of interest. In Liverpool RL might as well be a game that’s from Tibet, never mind that it’s played in St Helens (wool territory). Manchester is the same, I just never came across it.

[DC77]

1 hour ago, The Rocket said:

Oldbear I just can`t help but think that a powerhouse Toronto Wolfpack trading blows with the existing big guns in SLE in epic matches with SBW as their hook for the casual viewer, could not of but have had a positive effect on the outcome of the broadcast negotiations. At a minimum it sends a positive message about SLE ambitions.

SBW is the closest thing we are going to get in our sport to a David Beckham type profile character. Him in a successful Canadian team defeating all in front of them, that would strike me as ratings gold.

Any way all ancient history now.

SBW is a great talent, but it’s a talent that would have been afforded a much greater platform years ago in a more open game. 

 

48 minutes ago, The Rocket said:

I think there is a realisation of this amongst the hierarchy down here. Their not openly talking about getting the big men out of the game but there is a lot of talk about encouraging more ` unpredictabililty ` and `mobility ` and ` skills `in the game. The way they seem to be approaching this is through making the game more difficult for the big men to keep up with the play. hence the emphasis on 6-again for discretions where teams would of once looked to give the big blokes a breather, i.e. slowing down PTB`s, not getting back 10, sloppy tired play around the PTB and of course less scrums. The bigger less mobile blokes will become a liability and their places will be taken by not so big blokes who might have a step and a bit of agility and speed.. Fittler came out and stated this in an article about next years Origin series the other day.

Interesting in theory, in practicality we may just end up with the bigger blokes being more mobile. 

I don’t know what the answer is, but I do believe both rugby codes are shooting themselves in the foot as they have the capacity to be much bigger games than they are if the codes were geared towards the more creative aspect of play. They are collision sports, so I’m not advocating they do away with that (the collision based stuff wouldn't be my cup of tea), but more attacking stuff to balance it out more. 

You’ll know from an Australian perspective, David Campese was a maverick. There’s no Campese in RU today because the game doesn’t allow for it. With eight interchanges allowed the players only need to last 50 minutes. This means they can be built like houses, then another eight of similar size slowly trudge on to the overcrowded field for another 30 minutes of the same. Although RL isn’t quite the grind RU is, it’s slanted in that direction. 

[Oxford]

Have a nice Christmas and a really good New Year everyone!

[langpark]

I am coming straight in, having not read any of the previous posts but have a question.

In Australia, Channel 9 has the rights to 2 (it might be 3 these days) matches per week, they choose the best ones and the remaining ones go to Fox Sports. Have the RFL explored this option? Selling the currently untelevised matches to another network? Would provide a much-needed boost in revenue and finally bring us out of the dark ages, where not all matches are televised.

[sweaty craiq]

2 hours ago, langpark said:

I am coming straight in, having not read any of the previous posts but have a question.

In Australia, Channel 9 has the rights to 2 (it might be 3 these days) matches per week, they choose the best ones and the remaining ones go to Fox Sports. Have the RFL explored this option? Selling the currently untelevised matches to another network? Would provide a much-needed boost in revenue and finally bring us out of the dark ages, where not all matches are televised.

A big challenge we have is the loyalty with sky over the years, there is no bidding war or interest from any new players- we have never quantified our value

secondly Sky pay ridiculous money for soccer, and in 20 years of having Sky sports I have never watched a full game or indeed more than 10 mins so I massively over pay. To put things into perspective the TV money for Burnley FC will be 5 times that of the entire SL if this number is correct. This deal leaves scraps for the rest and we are not high up on the waiting list

[gingerjon]

2 minutes ago, Johnoco said:

To digress a minute and go back to your point on accents....I recently worked with some Slovakian guys. Talking to one, I was surprised to hear that he had trouble understanding some of his fellow countrymen because of their accent! Obviously to my ears they all had a very similar voice. He also said it was difficult to understand (at first) the guys from the Czech Republic, even though they were once the same country and spoke pretty much the same language. 

I remember a German teacher going through regional variations. Obviously, as you say, to me they all sounded the same - with the exception of (I think) a Berlin accent which was might as well have been Dutch. A friend who is fluent in Spanish says it's very easy to do with regional and national Spanish accents. I can spot it with Welsh speakers speaking Welsh.

[Tommygilf]

4 minutes ago, Johnoco said:

But look at the example of Sheffield for instance.

They were treated pretty much like Toronto or London (albeit not as badly) and seen as too much trouble. Too far to travel, no fans, what’s the point? Etc etc

RL has always been about existing clubs maintaining the status quo, this won’t change. Only the target of blame changes 

Absolutely, spot on. Its the same thing trotted out again and again.

[redjonn]

5 hours ago, The Rocket said:

I think there is a realisation of this amongst the hierarchy down here. Their not openly talking about getting the big men out of the game but there is a lot of talk about encouraging more ` unpredictabililty ` and `mobility ` and ` skills `in the game. The way they seem to be approaching this is through making the game more difficult for the big men to keep up with the play. hence the emphasis on 6-again for discretions where teams would of once looked to give the big blokes a breather, i.e. slowing down PTB`s, not getting back 10, sloppy tired play around the PTB and of course less scrums. The bigger less mobile blokes will become a liability and their places will be taken by not so big blokes who might have a step and a bit of agility and speed.. Fittler came out and stated this in an article about next years Origin series the other day.

Interesting in theory, in practicality we may just end up with the bigger blokes being more mobile. 

don't disagree but wouldn't it be better looking at the non injury substitutions allowed and being able to put players on, then off and then on again... once substituted it should be you can't go back on, plus limit the number of substitutions... Isn't it the later parts of the game in which the play used to open up more...

Personally I hate the fact that you can bring a bloke on for 20 mins, rest him for 20, bring him on again, etc etc.. it keeps the game more about the coaching like NFL then about the players on the pitch/selected for the 80mins.

I know its slightly off topic but is a factor in the whole game approach...

[Rupert Prince]

5 hours ago, DC77 said:

It’s not creating stars though. This debate has been brought up in podcasts (“how do we create stars”...with crazy suggestions like “get them on a reality show”, or “question of sport”..and that from the like of Phil Caplan). There’s not one player who would draw in a crowd or a viewer, and that’s not because the talent isn’t there, it is, but the talent isn’t afforded the freedom on the field to do what players in the past got. Creative players (in any sport) generate the most headlines. It’s those that go viral, and a sport that makes it harder for creative types to shine means less stars. 

This applies to both rugby codes. RU hasn’t had a star name in 15 years. Name one household English RU player that plays the game today? There isn’t one. Years ago there was Will Carling, Rory Underwood, Jerry Guscott, Jason Robinson (RL also), Jonny Wilkinson (although more so for his kicking). The 2015 RUWC game between Wales and England (the one Sam Burgess played in) there was one line break in the first half. When it happened the roof almost came off. France used to have a very creative midfield. Now it has an 18 stone limited bruiser (Bastereaud or however you sell it). It’s about bulk and attrition now. Defensive coaches from RL have been brought in, tightening up defences to make it even less appealing to watch.

The defences in both have improved dramatically, to the detriment to attacking play. The poster I responded to spoke of games generally being a grind. The last Aussie coach of England, apparently he’s a god in Australia...he made England unwatchable. The Aussie coach at Wigan who is credited with bringing in the wrestle to Super League, the English game has gone away from a more open, less restrictive style which made it a better watch. It looks much more claustrophobic with space at a premium. If you watch footage of Wigan at the old Wembley, so much freedom for off the cuff play and players to roam, and then flick on a RL game today, you feel strangled. Like chains have been put on players.

If football was littered with Jose Mourinho type managers, ie.10 men behind the ball and 90 minutes of trying to stifle play, creativity would nosedive. Mourinho himself (at the top of his game) didn’t get the Barcelona job as they wouldn’t tolerate the defensive tripe he served up. Thankfully he’s a minority in the game and his style is vilified.

Fair points. May be when I get time (I'm currently in the Waitrose car park) I'll consider more.

But the 'old' game with more supposedly ofc the cuff play was slower, possibly more sensible and less frought.  I'm not sure the faster game now is better for it.

But we do need more stars.  French is one.

[Damien]

3 hours ago, langpark said:

I am coming straight in, having not read any of the previous posts but have a question.

In Australia, Channel 9 has the rights to 2 (it might be 3 these days) matches per week, they choose the best ones and the remaining ones go to Fox Sports. Have the RFL explored this option? Selling the currently untelevised matches to another network? Would provide a much-needed boost in revenue and finally bring us out of the dark ages, where not all matches are televised.

In Australia it is very much a sellers market when it comes to RL. It has ways to fight back against TV companies and has ways it can counter poor treatment. It certainly doesn't have all its eggs in one basket. RL in the UK doesn't. If no one else wants RL other than Sky,  which has evidently been the case for as long as I can remember, who also demand exclusivity then its a pretty hard position to be in.

[redjonn]

4 hours ago, DC77 said:

SBW is a great talent, but it’s a talent that would have been afforded a much greater platform years ago in a more open game. 

 

I don’t know what the answer is, but I do believe both rugby codes are shooting themselves in the foot as they have the capacity to be much bigger games than they are if the codes were geared towards the more creative aspect of play. They are collision sports, so I’m not advocating they do away with that (the collision based stuff wouldn't be my cup of tea), but more attacking stuff to balance it out more. 

You’ll know from an Australian perspective, David Campese was a maverick. There’s no Campese in RU today because the game doesn’t allow for it. With eight interchanges allowed the players only need to last 50 minutes. This means they can be built like houses, then another eight of similar size slowly trudge on to the overcrowded field for another 30 minutes of the same. Although RL isn’t quite the grind RU is, it’s slanted in that direction. 

mmmm their was a time when having blokes kicking 7 shades of whatever out of the creative players was part and parcel of soccer - every team had at least one or more of that enforcer.  Many bemoaned the changes or applying of rules/laws that  drove out of that type of player.   The game flourish's so much more because of losing those type of "limited" players and the watching culture of fans and what they want as a result changed.

The focus on collisions/a bash seems somewhat similar to me from the wider playing perspective.  We need allow creative players more scope or protection similar to how soccer moved the game on.... despite the British soccer fans addiction at the time to the rugged hackers of yesteryear,

[Scotchy1]

17 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

I remember a German teacher going through regional variations. Obviously, as you say, to me they all sounded the same - with the exception of (I think) a Berlin accent which was might as well have been Dutch. A friend who is fluent in Spanish says it's very easy to do with regional and national Spanish accents. I can spot it with Welsh speakers speaking Welsh.

My partner is Spanish and tells me South American accents sound awful (which is apparently how I sound when speaking spanish) except Argentinian which is good 

Its apparently a bit of hangover from the different languages over there but she can even tell where in Spain someone is from when they are speaking English

All sounds exactly the same to me

[Scotchy1]

10 minutes ago, redjonn said:

mmmm their was a time when having blokes kicking 7 shades of whatever out of the creative players was part and parcel of soccer - every team had at least one or more of that enforcer.  Many bemoaned the changes or applying of rules/laws that  drove out of that type of player.   The game flourish's so much more because of losing those type of "limited" players and the watching culture of fans and what they want as a result changed.

The focus on collisions/a bash seems somewhat similar to me from the wider playing perspective.  We need allow creative players more scope or protection similar to how soccer moved the game on.... despite the British soccer fans addiction at the time to the rugged hackers of yesteryear,

Thats a really interesting comparison