Sky Sports halves offer for TV rights

[Tommygilf]

2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

As I intimated to previously any good company knows what it's opposition is doing, Sky will know where they are comfortable at placing their contract offer.

Possibly, but maybe like any negotiation you'd expect the two sides to start apart and eventually meet in the middle somewhere. And to be fair Sky have lost a lot of very big rights recently 

I think its about negotiation strategy, you can explore other options, including non exclusive coverage for Sky, without being all "stuff sky" as the poster I replied to put.

[Oxford]

10 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

No you didn't , I said it , and it IS as relevant as what you said 

Yes you did;  I said the circumstances not the clubs were different as the most telling point!

eg Bradford were forced into relegation whereas some over-extended, and yet others seemed to collapse involuntarirly and others did a Lemming  and there were others.

And yet P&R is never really a discussion we have, a bit like Brexit or the Labour Party two armed sides with the least amount of compromise but a fair total in ill will. Where only idiots believe that whatever number the dice falls on or whichever decision is made will benefit everyone.

[Scotchy1]

19 minutes ago, Damien said:

How is it possible? It would stand up to absolutely no scrutiny the moment it was challenged, which it inevitably will be.

The legal side aside, the sport is in competition with other sports for the most talented youngsters. Tell a Wigan junior that they can't sign for Wigan and have to sign for Wakefield instead, for example, then just watch them go sign for Sale instead. Why would someone like Umyla Hanley, who Wigan have desperately fought off the RU vultures, put up with that?

Drafts are great in some sort of utopian fantasy. In RL, in the real world, they are not possible and unworkable.

legally it could easily be set up through central contracts etc. 

Secondly you dont need to tell a wigan junior anything, Wigan juniors would no longer exist. It wouldnt be a case that Hanley couldnt sign for Wigan. He could, but Wigan would need to pay the requisite price for that pick. If they don't they dont make an offer. 

[Rupert Prince]

52 minutes ago, Scotchy1 said:

 

A draft system is possible, but it would be a massive departure from what we have. Id actually argue that the split between SL and the RFL makes that easier but it would be a huge and complex system to implement. 

The salary cap is a bit of a red herring. There being a massive disparity between clubs financially just means that we dont apply the restrictions financially and instead look to another way such as the NRL suggestion of a points system.

Both of these however are secondary issues, they are tools to get us towards our ultimate goal, and our problem is that the game doesnt have an ultimate goal and the differences between clubs are so great that what is the ultimate goal for some is completely opposed to the goals of others. 

Who creates the draftees in this system?  Why should Wigan, Saints, Leeds et al create players (as they do now) only to have them drafted to the bottom rungs of the league ladder?

Of course, as I understannd the US system (with its self financing college game), a leading draft pick can refuse to sign if be wants to.  So I dont see what the point of our putative system would be.

[Damien]

1 minute ago, Scotchy1 said:

legally it could easily be set up through central contracts etc. 

Secondly you dont need to tell a wigan junior anything, Wigan juniors would no longer exist. It wouldnt be a case that Hanley couldnt sign for Wigan. He could, but Wigan would need to pay the requisite price for that pick. If they don't they dont make an offer. 

Central contracts and what if people don't sign them? Are they just turned away from the game?

Why would any of our most promising players sign up to such a contract when they are paid peanuts and not know where they will end up. At 16 many don't want to go 60 miles away to Leeds or 100 miles to Hull. Do you expect them to travel several times a week like this? Are they forced to move? What about their studies and further education? I cannot think of any system that would drive kids away from the game quicker than this.  

So under this system clubs aren't going to do anything to develop players before they are signed to a club? All those players currently in systems are just not developed anymore and all the work with schools and amateur clubs just lost. Its pretty pointless for a club to do it for no benefit. Again let's just leave all of that open for RU.

 

[Sports Prophet]

I think SL is suffering from lacking a narrative. What is the storyline for SL.

2020 started with some great stories that had been evidently missing in many a year now. Toronto’s first season on the big stage coupled with dual code superstar SBW back in RL. Outspoken and amazingly talented Israel Falou joining Catalan from RU.

What is 2021’s story? 

I feel as if SL doesn’t have any drama to help elevate it in the interest of the general public, and as such, television contracts get squeezed.

[Rupert Prince]

19 minutes ago, Scotchy1 said:

legally it could easily be set up through central contracts etc. 

Secondly you dont need to tell a wigan junior anything, Wigan juniors would no longer exist. It wouldnt be a case that Hanley couldnt sign for Wigan. He could, but Wigan would need to pay the requisite price for that pick. If they don't they dont make an offer. 

In the NFL the bottom team has best pick.  And so on.    But in RL who creates the players? Who pays these "central contracts"?  I am afraid the notion is risible

[Scotchy1]

12 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

Who creates the draftees in this system?  Why should Wigan, Saints, Leeds et al create players (as they do now) only to have them drafted to the bottom rungs of the league ladder?

Of course, as I understannd the US system (with its self financing college game), a leading draft pick can refuse to sign if be wants to.  So I dont see what the point of our putative system would be.

A draft pick can refuse to sign for a team, but there would be a cost for the signing team. 

4 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

In the NFL the bottom team has best pick.  And so on.    But in RL who creates the players? Who pays these "central contracts"?  I am afraid the notion is risible

The RFL. 

 

[Scotchy1]

11 minutes ago, Damien said:

Central contracts and what if people don't sign them? Are they just turned away from the game?

Why would any of our most promising players sign up to such a contract when they are paid peanuts and not know where they will end up. At 16 many don't want to go 60 miles away to Leeds or 100 miles to Hull. Do you expect them to travel several times a week like this? Are they forced to move? What about their studies and further education? I cannot think of any system that would drive kids away from the game quicker than this.  

So under this system clubs aren't going to do anything to develop players before they are signed to a club? All those players currently in systems are just not developed anymore and all the work with schools and amateur clubs just lost. Its pretty pointless for a club to do it for no benefit. Again let's just leave all of that open for RU.

 

The same thing that happens if they don't sign a contract offered by a team. 

And nobody would need a 16 year old to travel 100 miles. 

These strawmen you are inventing are just entirely unnecessary 

[Damien]

20 minutes ago, Scotchy1 said:

The same thing that happens if they don't sign a contract offered by a team. 

And nobody would need a 16 year old to travel 100 miles. 

These strawmen you are inventing are just entirely unnecessary 

Its not the same though at all. At the moment they can sign for whatever team they choose. If they don't like an offer they sign for a different team. Under your system they are frozen out of the game and lost.

There is no strawman about what I am asking. A true draft would see such a scenario. If you can't answer that is fine. As I said its a great idea if we had some sort of RL utopian fantasy but in the real world its completely unworkable and unenforceable.

[Scotchy1]

28 minutes ago, Damien said:

Its not the same though at all. At the moment they can sign for whatever team they choose. If they don't like an offer they sign for a different team. Under your system they are frozen out of the game and lost.

There is no strawman about what I am asking. A true draft would see such a scenario. If you can't answer that is fine. As I said its a great idea if we had some sort of RL utopian fantasy but in the real world its completely unworkable and unenforceable.

They arent frozen out at all. Its an entirely invented problem. You're thinking is under a paradigm that would no longer exist. 

If Hanley only wants to sign for Wigan. If Wigan don't make an offer then what does he do?

 

[Big Picture]

1 hour ago, Damien said:

Central contracts and what if people don't sign them? Are they just turned away from the game?

Why would any of our most promising players sign up to such a contract when they are paid peanuts and not know where they will end up. At 16 many don't want to go 60 miles away to Leeds or 100 miles to Hull. Do you expect them to travel several times a week like this? Are they forced to move? What about their studies and further education? I cannot think of any system that would drive kids away from the game quicker than this.  

So under this system clubs aren't going to do anything to develop players before they are signed to a club? All those players currently in systems are just not developed anymore and all the work with schools and amateur clubs just lost. Its pretty pointless for a club to do it for no benefit. Again let's just leave all of that open for RU.

There are ways to accommodate those players' needs, as the Ontario Hockey League does in its drafts, but whether anyone in the RFL or SL has the nous to implement them is another question altogether.

Drafts could work, but only if there was a lot more money in the game so that going to play pro RU wasn't a lot more financially rewarding for young players.

[Scotchy1]

Just now, Big Picture said:

There are ways to accommodate those players' needs, as the Ontario Hockey League does in its drafts, but whether anyone in the RFL or SL has the nous to implement them is another question altogether.

Drafts could work, but only if there was a lot more money in the game so that going to play pro RU wasn't a lot more financially rewarding for young players.

The amounts paid to players the age they would be pre-draft, are negligable in both sports up here

[Damien]

38 minutes ago, Scotchy1 said:

They arent frozen out at all. Its an entirely invented problem. You're thinking is under a paradigm that would no longer exist. 

If Hanley only wants to sign for Wigan. If Wigan don't make an offer then what does he do?

 

You are just contradicting yourself rather than accepting the flaws. Is your draft to equalise talent or not? If it is not then what is the point of it?

If it is to equalise talent then many other clubs would be in line before Wigan. You are trying to make out Wigan can offer him a contract under a draft when in reality Wigan wouldn't even get to offer someone like Hanley a contact. You surely realise that don't you? If there is anyone making strawman arguments here it is you.

[Scotchy1]

6 minutes ago, Damien said:

You are just contradicting yourself rather than accepting the flaws. Is your draft to equalise talent or not? If it is not then what is the point of it?

If it is to equalise talent then many other clubs would be in line before Wigan. You are trying to make out Wigan can offer him a contract under a draft when in reality Wigan wouldn't even get to offer someone like Hanley a contact. You surely realise that don't you? If there is anyone making strawman arguments here it is you.

I havent contradicted myself at all. I see you did fail to answer the very simple question. 

If Wigan dont offer Hanley a contract what does he do?

Where your argument falls down quite dramatically is that if Hanley will ONLY sign for Wigan then the fact all other clubs would be in line before Wigan is irrelevant isnt it. Hanley will only sign for Wigan, We could make every other club in the entire world offer him a contract first. Doesnt matter, the outcome would be the same Hanley will sign for Wigan 

[Damien]

Just now, Scotchy1 said:

I havent contradicted myself at all. I see you did fail to answer the very simple question. 

If Wigan dont offer Hanley a contract what does he do?

Wigan did offer him a contract as they currently can to anyone. That is a fact and he signed for Wigan as a result. Therefore the only one dealing with invented problems is you.

Under your draft they cannot so he would very likely be lost to the game as he instead would be forced to go to someone like Hull KR or Wakefield instead. That really shouldn't be too difficult to understand.

[Scotchy1]

Just now, Damien said:

Wigan did offer him a contract as they currently can to anyone. That is a fact and he signed for Wigan as a result. Therefore the only one dealing with invented problems is you.

Under your draft they cannot so he would very likely be lost to the game as he instead would be forced to go to someone like Hull KR or Wakefield instead. That really shouldn't be too difficult to understand.

There is a reason you cannot answer such a simple question. You know it and I know it. 

Your entire argument here is predicated on the frankly silly idea that Umyla Hanley would only play RL for Wigan, and if WIgan hadnt have offered him a contract he wouldnt have signed for a different side but instead been lost to the game. 

Not only is this idea clearly insane, even if it were true, it would be a failing of the current system not the new one. If Hanley will only play for Wigan then we have created a system where not only are we reliant on Wigan being constantly right about the players they choose (because the players they choose not to offer contracts to will be lost to the game, so we risk losing better players than Hanley because Wigan decide against it) but it also requires that the best young players always come through at Wigan and only Wigan.

Your defence of the status quo manages to not only be untrue, but if it were true it is an argument for destroying the status quo. Not keeping it. 

[Harry Stottle]

3 hours ago, Scotchy1 said:

Thats their choice. The game can't be held to ransom by them. 

We have lost substantial numbers of fans since P+R was brought back. 

The game isn't being held to ransom by anyone, if SL didn't want P&R they wouldn't have reinstated it would they, please explain how a couple of Championship clubs could influence the might of Leeds, Wigan, Saints, Wire and Hull.

The amount of times I have read that some Championship clubs were kicking up a fuss about there being no P&R by some poster's is numerous, why didn't SL just tell them to swivel if they didn't want it to happen.

Could it be that the RFL are more influential than they are given credit for? Regarding funding if SKY half the offer and SL want to keep it all to themselves, I expect there is going to be some fun eminating from such a decision, and SL won't win all the battles.

[Dave T]

8 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

If only there were six matches to televise a week in order to increase the value of SL.

 

8 hours ago, gingerjon said:

The value of RU's Premiership has gone down since all matches per week were broadcast.

So, it's not a guarantee.

Just to nip back to this for a second, but the new BT deal the RU Prem signed is for 69 league games (plus 11 Cup games), so similar to the 80 games we give Sky. 

I don't think they have ever broadcast every game, despite now having broadcast quality coverage of every game. 

[Damien]

29 minutes ago, Scotchy1 said:

There is a reason you cannot answer such a simple question. You know it and I know it. 

Your entire argument here is predicated on the frankly silly idea that Umyla Hanley would only play RL for Wigan, and if WIgan hadnt have offered him a contract he wouldnt have signed for a different side but instead been lost to the game. 

Not only is this idea clearly insane, even if it were true, it would be a failing of the current system not the new one. If Hanley will only play for Wigan then we have created a system where not only are we reliant on Wigan being constantly right about the players they choose (because the players they choose not to offer contracts to will be lost to the game, so we risk losing better players than Hanley because Wigan decide against it) but it also requires that the best young players always come through at Wigan and only Wigan.

Your defence of the status quo manages to not only be untrue, but if it were true it is an argument for destroying the status quo. Not keeping it. 

I answered your questions, he has signed for Wigan so you are talking nonsense about if Wigan don't offer him a contract what would he do. As for the rest of your post it is complete nonsense and its laughable that you try to accuse others of strawman arguments when you post like that. Your 2nd paragraph makes absolutely no sense.

However lets play your game and lets presume he cant sign for Wigan and isn't allowed to sign for Leeds, Saints or any of the top 6. He is instead told to sign for a small club with a poor backroom setup, pretty poor support systems, rubbish training facilities and a rubbish stadium. He is basically being told to jeopardise his career and receive an inferior Rugby education and playing experience and travel or move away from home. On the other hand Sale Sharks, amongst other RU clubs, are waiting in the wings offering the world. Its pretty obvious what will happen. With Hanley it was one example, I'm sure you know that, there are stacks of others.

The trouble is, as is always the way when you argue like this, you are that blinded that you see only see one side and don't accept the other. I am not defending the status quo but you are that blinded when people disagree that you cant even see that. As I have said previously in an ideal world a draft is great, I would love nothing more than an equalisation of talent across the league. However I know it is impossible and that it would do nothing but drive players away from the game and destroy work done by clubs. Anyone with an ounce of common sense and knowledge of what happens with young players can see that.

I refuse to go round in circles so will leave it at that.

[gingerjon]

Just now, Dave T said:

 

Just to nip back to this for a second, but the new BT deal the RU Prem signed is for 69 league games (plus 11 Cup games), so similar to the 80 games we give Sky. 

I don't think they have ever broadcast every game, despite now having broadcast quality coverage of every game. 

I thought they did but that could be the European games I'm thinking of. They do show a lot of Premiership RU currently. Maybe that's covid related though.

[Scotchy1]

17 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

The game isn't being held to ransom by anyone, if SL didn't want P&R they wouldn't have reinstated it would they, please explain how a couple of Championship clubs could influence the might of Leeds, Wigan, Saints, Wire and Hull.

The amount of times I have read that some Championship clubs were kicking up a fuss about there being no P&R by some poster's is numerous, why didn't SL just tell them to swivel if they didn't want it to happen.

Could it be that the RFL are more influential than they are given credit for? Regarding funding if SKY half the offer and SL want to keep it all to themselves, I expect there is going to be some fun eminating from such a decision, and SL won't win all the battles.

The RFL control the mechanism for adding and removing clubs from SL. Its one of their rights under the special preference share. 

[Rugbyleaguesupporter]

27 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

I thought they did but that could be the European games I'm thinking of. They do show a lot of Premiership RU currently. Maybe that's covid related though.

Every game is broadcast around the world but 69 are broadcast in UK (average of 3 a round plus SF and Final) 

Currently all the games which are not part of 69 are available via red button or their app. 

The european rugby is a separate deal which BT pay around £15m per year for 

[Scotchy1]

13 minutes ago, Damien said:

I answered your questions, he has signed for Wigan so you are talking nonsense about if Wigan don't offer him a contract what would he do. As for the rest of your post it is complete nonsense and its laughable that you try to accuse others of strawman arguments when you post like that. Your 2nd paragraph makes absolutely no sense.

However lets play your game and lets presume he cant sign for Wigan and isn't allowed to sign for Leeds, Saints or any of the top 6. He is instead told to sign for a small club with a poor backroom setup, pretty poor support systems, rubbish training facilities and a rubbish stadium. He is basically being told to jeopardise his career and receive an inferior Rugby education and playing experience and travel or move away from home. On the other hand Sale Sharks, amongst other RU clubs, are waiting in the wings offering the world. Its pretty obvious what will happen. With Hanley it was one example, I'm sure you know that, there are stacks of others.

The trouble is, as is always the way when you argue like this, you are that blinded that you see only see one side and don't accept the other. I am not defending the status quo but you are that blinded when people disagree that you cant even see that. As I have said previously in an ideal world a draft is great, I would love nothing more than an equalisation of talent across the league. However I know it is impossible and that it would do nothing but drive players away from the game and destroy work done by clubs. Anyone with an ounce of common sense and knowledge of what happens with young players can see that.

I refuse to go round in circles so will leave it at that.

Here is the very basic premise of YOUR argument you are seemingly missing. 

It was YOUR assertion that unless Hanley signs for Wigan he is lost to the game. Im asking you the very obvious question that comes from YOUR assertion. What happens if Wigan dont offer him a contract?

A draft isnt impossible, it wouldnt drive players away from the game and would largely replicate the work clubs do. Anyone with an ounce of common sense of what happens with young players, even right now can see that. 

The reason you refuse to answer that very simple question is that it destroys the very clear straw man you have built. That being, it isnt a necessity that Wigan and the top clubs MUST sign all the best youngsters and very young ages lest they all simply refuse to play RL anymore. 

This strawman is especially strawy and irrelevant when you are comparing it to a world where no clubs would sign any youngsters at the very young ages. A world where the choice would never be 'wigan or union' because the idea of 'wigan' in that context simply didnt exist. 

Hanley is 18. In a draft system this is the year he would be drafted. He has played a total of 1 SL game that he wouldnt have played in a normal year. Everything that has been done at academy and scholarship level could be repeated cheaper, better and for more players if done centrally. 

 

[Tommygilf]

29 minutes ago, Scotchy1 said:

Here is the very basic premise of YOUR argument you are seemingly missing. 

It was YOUR assertion that unless Hanley signs for Wigan he is lost to the game. Im asking you the very obvious question that comes from YOUR assertion. What happens if Wigan dont offer him a contract?

A draft isnt impossible, it wouldnt drive players away from the game and would largely replicate the work clubs do. Anyone with an ounce of common sense of what happens with young players, even right now can see that. 

The reason you refuse to answer that very simple question is that it destroys the very clear straw man you have built. That being, it isnt a necessity that Wigan and the top clubs MUST sign all the best youngsters and very young ages lest they all simply refuse to play RL anymore. 

This strawman is especially strawy and irrelevant when you are comparing it to a world where no clubs would sign any youngsters at the very young ages. A world where the choice would never be 'wigan or union' because the idea of 'wigan' in that context simply didnt exist. 

Hanley is 18. In a draft system this is the year he would be drafted. He has played a total of 1 SL game that he wouldnt have played in a normal year. Everything that has been done at academy and scholarship level could be repeated cheaper, better and for more players if done centrally. 

 

I'm being 100% honest with you. If I'm a good young Rugby player, good enough to play for England at Youth level and even get a run out with one of the top 1st teams in Super League, I am not being told I have to drive an hour plus each way to Hull KR or Cas for peanuts because of a draft pick system. 

Your system "might" work if promotion and relegation wasn't a factor and all academy players were paid the same. It would forcibly make all clubs, and their academies, equal. Even then, it would require a hell of a lot of "sweetening" for the RFL and the big Super League academies to give up their decades invested in advantage. I'm sure those who have latterly invested in their academies like Warrington and Huddersfield would see it as a kick in the teeth too as they were declared equal to clubs who have invested virtually nothing. And even then, it doesn't remove the outside competition from Union too.