Jump to content

RL is in the best shape it's ever been


Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Big Picture said:

As long as "our talented players" play what is perceived (by the minority out there who even know that two versions of rugby exist) as a small time down-market sport of limited interest, just how do you expect the World Cup organizers to generate plenty of positive PR for the sport?  I suggest that the perception which we both know exists has to be changed first, and for that the reality of who plays the sport and where they play it will have to be changed.

Just by being a World Cup helps, the average general sports viewer would not be bothered by Wigan v Warrington ( probably not even Leeds v London), but England v Fiji  or New Zealand is much more eye catching and likely to attract interest. The problem is, especially for NH RL, is that the guys that end up in the shop window are almost certainly going to be lured either to the NRL, or RU, since SL will be unable to afford to pay them. What needs to be changed, is the amount of money in SL, so that players can have a lucrative career without having to move to the other side of the world or switch code, how that happens, with the current leadership, is the challenge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 217
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Rugby League is the 5th most popular sport in the country.  https://www.statista.com/statistics/686971/highest-attended-types-of-sport-in-the-uk/ Of course we can all just use whatever stats

I wouldn’t put a penny on the validly of RFL participation figures being correct Ive worked within multiple youth set ups, schools and the amateur game for decades and will trust the veracity of

I mentioned it elsewhere, but I feel it deserves its own thread.  Seeing as we always hear people saying the game is declining in the UK or some even go as far as to say things like "dying a slow deat

Posted Images

On 24/01/2021 at 16:47, langpark said:

I mentioned it elsewhere, but I feel it deserves its own thread.  Seeing as we always hear people saying the game is declining in the UK or some even go as far as to say things like "dying a slow death", I dug up some figures that prove otherwise:

2015:  Increase of 9,900 reported on previous year:  https://www.rugby-league.com/article/33357/participation-increases-are-testament-to

2017:  Year-on-year increases since 2012 confirmed as well as a 40% increase over the last 10 years:  https://www.totalrl.com/exclusive-rfl-issue-response-participation-figures-sport-england/

2020:  RFL reports increase in participation in 2019, from 102,304 to 109,501:  https://www.rugby-league.com/article/56906/rfl-confirms-return-to-profit-and-increased-participation-in-

This is not even factoring the (undeniable) growth of the international game either.  I don't have any figures of other countries, but I know there has been significant growth across Europe in the last decade as well.

 

This being positive will never catch on. However, I agree with his post - which doesnt even mention how brilliant our sport is. If RU sport had produced a game like that (as if) a DVD of the game would have been invited to the palace and a monthly slot on QoS. PLUS how good are our players on and off the pitch, they really are true role models.

RL deserves better. Our sport deserves more funding. What we do in communities where the streets are not paved with gold is amazing.

Great thread. All sports have challenges, ours repeatedly rises above them because it truly is the greatest

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Oldbear said:

Just by being a World Cup helps, the average general sports viewer would not be bothered by Wigan v Warrington ( probably not even Leeds v London), but England v Fiji  or New Zealand is much more eye catching and likely to attract interest. The problem is, especially for NH RL, is that the guys that end up in the shop window are almost certainly going to be lured either to the NRL, or RU, since SL will be unable to afford to pay them. What needs to be changed, is the amount of money in SL, so that players can have a lucrative career without having to move to the other side of the world or switch code, how that happens, with the current leadership, is the challenge.

The leadership isn't the obstacle, the location of the teams in what Sean McGuire has called smallish economically deprived towns is the issue.  No broadcaster is ever going to pay the sort of money needed to enable British RL to compete with RU or the NRL for a league full of teams from places like that because as you said the average general sports viewer would not be bothered by Wigan v Warrington and probably not even Leeds v London so matches like those won't get the ratings the broadcaster would need to justify paying that much for the rights.

The reason Sky cut back the rights payments in 1999 was precisely that SL wasn't getting the kind of ratings needed to justify the original amount negotiated by Maurice Lindsay four years earlier.

Edited by Big Picture
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

The leadership isn't the obstacle, the location of the teams in what Sean McGuire has called smallish economically deprived towns is the issue.  No broadcaster is ever going to pay the sort of money needed to enable British RL to compete with RU or the NRL for a league full of teams from places like that.

The Super League TV deal is arguably better than the RU equivalent and reaches a wider audience on Sky than BT.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Damien said:

The Super League TV deal is arguably better than the RU equivalent and reaches a wider audience on Sky than BT.

Not quite, the Gallagher Premiership's three year extension covering the period from 2021 to 2024 is worth 110 million £, or almost 37 million £ a year, plus they're getting 10 million £ a year from Gallagher for the naming rights sponsorship.  Their salary cap is still three times the SL salary cap even after they reduced it, and only a handful of SL clubs can even afford the current SL cap.  Even after accounting for their bigger rosters that enables them to pay players double what the few SL clubs able to afford the current SL cap can pay.

Edited by Big Picture
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

The leadership isn't the obstacle, the location of the teams in what Sean McGuire has called smallish economically deprived towns is the issue.  No broadcaster is ever going to pay the sort of money needed to enable British RL to compete with RU or the NRL for a league full of teams from places like that because as you said the average general sports viewer would not be bothered by Wigan v Warrington and probably not even Leeds v London so matches like those won't get the ratings the broadcaster would need to justify paying that much for the rights.

The reason Sky cut back the rights payments in 1999 was precisely that SL wasn't getting the kind of ratings needed to justify the original amount negotiated by Maurice Lindsay four years earlier.

The leadership is a major obstacle, the game is run by club chairmen, who obviously have self interest at heart. Expecting major changes from them is like expecting turkeys to vote for Christmas. Fair play to their efforts in keeping the game alive for so long, however to move forward in the modern era is going to require more than that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

Not quite, the Gallagher Premiership's three year extension covering the period from 2021 to 2024 is worth 110 million £, or almost 37 million £ a year, plus they're getting 10 million £ a year from Gallagher for the naming rights sponsorship.  Their salary cap is still three times the SL salary cap even after they reduced it, and only a handful of SL clubs can even afford the current SL cap.  Even after accounting for their bigger rosters that enables them to pay players double what the few SL clubs able to afford the current SL cap can pay.

You talked about broadcasters. Super League rights have been broadly similar or better than the RU equivalent for years. The geographic spread of teams has had no impact on that. You were wrong and so now are moving the goalposts.

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

You talked about broadcasters. Super League rights have been broadly similar or better than the RU equivalent for years. The geographic spread of teams has had no impact on that. You were wrong and so now are moving the goalposts.

No, SL rights have not been broadly similar or better than the RU equivalent for years.  That 37 million £ a year is a reduction from their previous deal which was worth 200 million £ over four years or 50 million £ a year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

No, SL rights have not been broadly similar or better than the RU equivalent for years.  That 37 million £ a year is a reduction from their previous deal which was worth 200 million £ over four years or 50 million £ a year.

You are simply making stuff up now, the previous RU deal was £200 million over 6 years.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Damien said:

You are simply making stuff up now, the previous RU deal was £200 million over 6 years.

No I'm not making anything up, though 6 years was widely quoted it's erroneous because as you can read here the extension covered the four years from 2017 through 2021 even though it was negotiated in 2015, so it paid £200 million more than the original contract for that 4-year extension.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

No I'm not making anything up, though 6 years was widely quoted it's erroneous because as you can read here the extension covered the four years from 2017 through 2021 even though it was negotiated in 2015, so it paid £200 million more than the original contract for that 4-year extension.

£200 million over 6 years. When you are in a hole its better to just stop digging.

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

£200 million over 6 years. When you are in a hole its better to just stop digging.

Though it says that, it also says that it covers the 4 years from 2017-2021 so in fact it was 200 million £ over 4 years.  If it had been 200 million £ over 6 years that would average out 33.333333 million £ per year, making their latest extension of 110 million £ over 3 years an increase rather than a decrease, in which case they wouldn't have needed to reduce their salary cap like they've done.

So I stand by my statement that in fact the 200 million £ was over 4 years and the claim that it was over 6 years was just sloppiness on the part of the journalist(s) who reported it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Big Picture said:

Though it says that, it also says that it covers the 4 years from 2017-2021 so in fact it was 200 million £ over 4 years.  If it had been 200 million £ over 6 years that would average out to 33.333333 million £ per year, making their latest extension of 110 million £ over 3 years an increase rather than a decrease, in which case they wouldn't have needed to reduce their salary cap like they've done.

So I stand by my statement that in fact the 200 million £ was over 4 years and the claim that it was over 6 years was just sloppiness on the part of the journalist(s) who reported it.

 

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

Though it says that, it also says that it covers the 4 years from 2017-2021 so in fact it was 200 million £ over 4 years.  If it had been 200 million £ over 6 years that would average out 33.333333 million £ per year, making their latest extension of 110 million £ over 3 years an increase rather than a decrease, in which case they wouldn't have needed to reduce their salary cap like they've done.

So I stand by my statement that in fact the 200 million £ was over 4 years and the claim that it was over 6 years was just sloppiness on the part of the journalist(s) who reported it.

They've reduced the salary cap because of a little thing called covid and the fact that most clubs were losing small fortunes as is. They also have less money coming in after selling their soul to PE.

Either way none of this moving the goalposts backs up your initial claim. You can knock RL for a lot of things but Super League TV deals compare well to their RU equivalents. It certainly isn't a negative like you are trying to portray.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Damien said:

They've reduced the salary cap because of a little thing called covid and the fact that most clubs were losing small fortunes as is. They also have less money coming in after selling their soul to PE.

Either way none of this moving the goalposts backs up your initial claim. You can knock RL for a lot of things but Super League TV deals compare well to their RU equivalents. It certainly isn't a negative like you are trying to portray.

I didn't move the goalposts, I simply stated the true facts about that 200 million £ extension.  You're conveniently forgetting that the 2 years from when it was negotiated to when it kicked in were already covered by the previous TV contract.  The salary cap cut is the result of a reduction of income, they aren't getting an increase with their new contract.

I agree that the SL TV deals are pretty good for what SL gives the broadcasters, but they aren't as good as what RU gets.  The fact that only a few of the SL clubs can pay the full cap amount for their players and those players get on average only half as much as players in the RU Premiership speaks to how far behind RU the sport has fallen in Britain.

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

I didn't move the goalposts, I simply stated the true facts about that 200 million £ extension.  You're conveniently forgetting that the 2 years from when it was negotiated to when it kicked in were already covered by the previous TV contract.  The salary cap cut is the result of a reduction of income, they aren't getting an increase with their new contract.

I agree that the SL TV deals are pretty good for what SL gives the broadcasters, but they aren't as good as what RU gets.  The fact that only a few of the SL clubs can pay the full cap amount for their players and those players get on average only half as much as players in the RU Premiership speaks to how far behind RU the sport has fallen in Britain.

Maybe RU needs to set up clubs where nobody is interested in RU , that'll increase their income 🤔

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

I didn't move the goalposts, I simply stated the true facts about that 200 million £ extension.  You're conveniently forgetting that the 2 years from when it was negotiated to when it kicked in were already covered by the previous TV contract.  The salary cap cut is the result of a reduction of income, they aren't getting an increase with their new contract.

I agree that the SL TV deals are pretty good for what SL gives the broadcasters, but they aren't as good as what RU gets.  The fact that only a few of the SL clubs can pay the full cap amount for their players and those players get on average only half as much as players in the RU Premiership speaks to how far behind RU the sport has fallen in Britain.

Premier Rugby accounts show they don't receive the money you are trying to claim. Your £50 million a year is a made up fantasy.  Their accounts and every news report shows that.

The salary cap reduction is because of covid. Ignoring the effects of covid to paint a false picture is just daft.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Damien said:

Premier Rugby accounts show they don't receive the money you are trying to claim. Your £50 million a year is a made up fantasy.  Their accounts and every news report shows that.

The salary cap reduction is because of covid. Ignoring the effects of covid to paint a false picture is just daft.

Do you have link to that information then?

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

Maybe RU needs to set up clubs where nobody is interested in RU , that'll increase their income 🤔

If they had a way to promote their sport in those places and create an audience there for it, then yes it might well do that.  They don't really need to though, they have a national profile and stature already.  RL on the other hand ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

The RU Prem deal was £40m per year, the same as Sky were paying RL. This is widely reported in many articles, a quick Google search shows it. 

RU have seen that reduce to £37m per year, it looks like we have dropped further so far. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Big Picture said:

If they had a way to promote their sport in those places and create an audience there for it, then yes it might well do that.  They don't really need to though, they have a national profile and stature already.  RL on the other hand ...

So maybe RL should stop worrying about the names of the SL teams and really focus on the international game, which is where the real growth is. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Dave T said:

So maybe RL should stop worrying about the names of the SL teams and really focus on the international game, which is where the real growth is. 

Our biggest failing 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The RU Prem deal was £40m per year, the same as Sky were paying RL. This is widely reported in many articles, a quick Google search shows it. 

RU have seen that reduce to £37m per year, it looks like we have dropped further so far. 

True but, as I understand it, CVC now grabs 27% of their revenue.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Dave T said:

So maybe RL should stop worrying about the names of the SL teams and really focus on the international game, which is where the real growth is. 

That growth is a mirage though, it's built on made up teams full of players who've either never lived in the country they represent or left it when they were little gaffers and grew up in another country altogether.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...