Thursday night fixtures

[whatmichaelsays]

12 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

If my club was given £100m over the next 10 years they could change whatever they wanted as they have truly paid for the right

The point, which you missed, was about impact on supporters. That's the same whether the fee paid to the club is £100 or £100m. 

[phiggins]

Ideally, the 11 English clubs would split the Thursday games as evenly as possible. But with various clubs needing longish spells without home games, and other factors that need to be fed into the fixture list, it's probably unlikely to be possible for it to be any more even than it is now.

I do wonder if we've gone a year or two too early with it though. If Sky want the games to be more spread out, then could we not ask for them to pay more for it? 

[sweaty craiq]

Just now, whatmichaelsays said:

The point, which you missed, was about impact on supporters. That's the same whether the fee paid to the club is £100 or £100m. 

No it isn’t because if supporters didn’t have a club then there is no impact

[gingerjon]

8 minutes ago, phiggins said:

 do wonder if we've gone a year or two too early with it though. If Sky want the games to be more spread out, then could we not ask for them to pay more for it? 

It's better for SL+ for the games to be spread out.

[whatmichaelsays]

18 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

No it isn’t

Over the last ten years or so, I've probably lost close to £1,000 in change fees and non-refundable train tickets that were rendered useless by Sky Sports rescheduling Leeds United games at short notice. Are you saying that the impact of that loss is lessened because Sky writes the club a bigger cheque every year? 

[sweaty craiq]

33 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

Over the last ten years or so, I've probably lost close to £1,000 in change fees and non-refundable train tickets that were rendered useless by Sky Sports rescheduling Leeds United games at short notice. Are you saying that the impact of that loss is lessened because Sky writes the club a bigger cheque every year? 

That’s £100 a season. If Leeds get £35m a season they could refund 350000 fans from the tv money and of course they get much more in the premier league. As a fan of any club you would always want the best for your club, I would exchange a few wasted train tickets to away games for such a huge funding that secures the financial viability of my club.  The issue is the Sky deal is too low to be bending over backwards but if it’s a sprat to catch a mackerel then fair enough

[M j M]

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

It's better for SL+ for the games to be spread out.

I can get spreading them over the weekend - but suspect it is foolish to undermine club's main revenue streams to achieve it - but SL+ at this stage is not something we should be switching games to Thursdays for.

[gingerjon]

6 minutes ago, M j M said:

I can get spreading them over the weekend - but suspect it is foolish to undermine club's main revenue streams to achieve it - but SL+ at this stage is not something we should be switching games to Thursdays for.

It’s not what I would have done but, combine that with what will hopefully be several distinct TV packages being sold next time around, it’s also not the end of the world.

[M j M]

16 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

It’s not what I would have done but, combine that with what will hopefully be several distinct TV packages being sold next time around, it’s also not the end of the world.

I don't feel our non core Sky TV product is financially  mature enough yet for us to risk other revenue streams over it.

As for game timings generally I'm sure everyone is different. Thursday night games don't bother me as much as Saturday ones which I loathe and typically miss both in person and on tv.

[StandOffHalf]

1 hour ago, M j M said:

I can get spreading them over the weekend - but suspect it is foolish to undermine club's main revenue streams to achieve it - but SL+ at this stage is not something we should be switching games to Thursdays for.

Yeah, a Thursday game only if it's on the main Sky channels.

One Thursday, one or two on Friday, two on Saturday, one or two on Sunday.

I favour individual time-slots and think it's eminently do-able, but I'd hold off from jumping unless Sky paid extra first. 

[Harry Stottle]

4 hours ago, JohnM said:

It seems like an argument some need, in order to promote dissatisfaction with the current regime of RFL, RFL Commercial, Sky and IMG.  

Ultimate Rugby League

You get to lots of games do you?

[Leyther_Matt]

4 hours ago, whatmichaelsays said:

There's a fair argument that we should be making it easy for people to go to games - it's not as if midweek games in the EFL are universally popular and, as a Leeds United fan, the Leigh fans on here know nothing about getting a raw deal from TV companies and fixture planners. 

This Leigh fan does after going to Portsmouth away on a Monday night last season and half 12 at Crawley this season  

[Tommygilf]

5 hours ago, sweaty craiq said:

Depends if you have one or three if you are a paying fan or sponsor 

It really isn't that big a deal. If it is, you're not even glass half empty just looking for something to moan about.

[Tommygilf]

34 minutes ago, StandOffHalf said:

Yeah, a Thursday game only if it's on the main Sky channels.

One Thursday, one or two on Friday, two on Saturday, one or two on Sunday.

I favour individual time-slots and think it's eminently do-able, but I'd hold off from jumping unless Sky paid extra first. 

I don't think Thursdays have the massive impact some say tbh. They never appear to be wildly lower attendances and are often within the range of attendances across our fixtures. No Monday nights either for RL, or regular Tuesday/Wednesday fixtures to complain about. 

What is a worry is that we have allowed our monopoly on Thursdays and to a lesser extent Friday nights on Sky Sports Main Event to be usurped by Darts and second tier football in the past 10 years or so. 

We need to have games on at different timeslots, partly to make SL+ and SS+ worth it, but also because I suspect the figures for some of the triple header Fridays were abysmal.

[StandOffHalf]

39 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I don't think Thursdays have the massive impact some say tbh. They never appear to be wildly lower attendances and are often within the range of attendances across our fixtures. No Monday nights either for RL, or regular Tuesday/Wednesday fixtures to complain about. 

What is a worry is that we have allowed our monopoly on Thursdays and to a lesser extent Friday nights on Sky Sports Main Event to be usurped by Darts and second tier football in the past 10 years or so. 

We need to have games on at different timeslots, partly to make SL+ and SS+ worth it, but also because I suspect the figures for some of the triple header Fridays were abysmal.

When I was young/in my teens and getting into RL Friday night was pretty much always always the big one that I was excited for.

I think going to Thursday has played into something of a dilution, with SKY putting RL progressively up against more and more sports. Just a feeling of mine.

I don't have a massive issue with some Thursday games, as long as they are televised on SKY. I agree that staggered scheduling could well bring more TV viewers, but the game has to be careful about getting the big games on in the right slots.

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, StandOffHalf said:

When I was young/in my teens and getting into RL Friday night was pretty much always always the big one that I was excited for.

I think going to Thursday has played into something of a dilution, with SKY putting RL progressively up against more and more sports. Just a feeling of mine.

I don't have a massive issue with some Thursday games, as long as they are televised on SKY. I agree that staggered scheduling could well bring more TV viewers, but the game has to be careful about getting the big games on in the right slots.

I think, by and large, we have got the big games in the right spots. Friday night games are always my preference - I don't think Sky have a particular agenda in minimising our coverage, it's just a fact of how popular or not we are. I think we were starting to be put on Thursdays when Sky lost the UEFA Cup, we also went onto Mondays too briefly to create another slot for broadcast. I certainly don't think Sky ignore us or anything like that.

Thursdays are potentially a difficult one. Either we take the "maximise it" approach and only put "local" matches on Thursdays. However, that comes with the criticism that we are taking what otherwise would be some of our best attended games and limiting them with the "worst" slot.

The alternative, one adopted in EFL football for example, is to ask for the least attractive/biggest travel matches to be put on midweek slots. That way you keep the biggest revenue earning matches on weekends, and take the big hit all in one go. 

I can see the argument for both, though in reality I'm not sure it makes a huge amount of difference especially when our clubs play so few Thursday games each year. Perhaps clubs go somewhere down the middle, which is why Leigh and Castleford find themselves playing more away Thursday matches.

[StandOffHalf]

2 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I think, by and large, we have got the big games in the right spots. Friday night games are always my preference - I don't think Sky have a particular agenda in minimising our coverage, it's just a fact of how popular or not we are. I think we were starting to be put on Thursdays when Sky lost the UEFA Cup, we also went onto Mondays too briefly to create another slot for broadcast. I certainly don't think Sky ignore us or anything like that.

Thursdays are potentially a difficult one. Either we take the "maximise it" approach and only put "local" matches on Thursdays. However, that comes with the criticism that we are taking what otherwise would be some of our best attended games and limiting them with the "worst" slot.

The alternative, one adopted in EFL football for example, is to ask for the least attractive/biggest travel matches to be put on midweek slots. That way you keep the biggest revenue earning matches on weekends, and take the big hit all in one go. 

I can see the argument for both, though in reality I'm not sure it makes a huge amount of difference especially when our clubs play so few Thursday games each year. Perhaps clubs go somewhere down the middle, which is why Leigh and Castleford find themselves playing more away Thursday matches.

Personally I would favour going with a local match-up for Thursdays, if possible.

But, it's a balancing act. It's not always going to work out.

[Hopie]

4 hours ago, gingerjon said:

It's better for SL+ for the games to be spread out.

At the moment all I can say to that is, so what? What is SL+ bringing in return? I can see how its good for the RL tragics that post on these boards that will watch multiple games a week, but how is it generating any serious income, we have no figures to suggest SL+ is pulling in decent viewers or attracting sponsors. It is a big gamble to mess around a core audience of paying spectators to try and do something which is not clear. Keeping the season ticket renewal date before the fixture list is released will push some people away from regular attendance. Many clubs are close to the wall already.

 

 

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, StandOffHalf said:

Personally I would favour going with a local match-up for Thursdays, if possible.

But, it's a balancing act. It's not always going to work out.

I think we are seeing that a lot with clubs going for non marquee games, and seeing them as opportunities to get their Thursday matches done. It doesn't impact their more marquee fixtures. It's also possible given some of the aggro reported in recent seasons that police concerns have been taken into account too.

Cas and Wakey are also somewhat skewed by their Easter match being on what is effectively a Friday night (but under the Thursdays column).

Generally I think the mixture is fine, as you say it's a balancing act.

Notably Catalans play no home Thursdays, a move that no doubt is designed purely with travelling English fans in mind. On the reverse they play 3 away Thursdays. 

[Tommygilf]

27 minutes ago, Hopie said:

At the moment all I can say to that is, so what? What is SL+ bringing in return? I can see how its good for the RL tragics that post on these boards that will watch multiple games a week, but how is it generating any serious income, we have no figures to suggest SL+ is pulling in decent viewers or attracting sponsors. It is a big gamble to mess around a core audience of paying spectators to try and do something which is not clear. Keeping the season ticket renewal date before the fixture list is released will push some people away from regular attendance. Many clubs are close to the wall already.

 

 

SL + and SS+ is needed so that the sport can go into the next broadcast cycle with a stronger hand to say what the value of all SL games are (and therefore broadcast packages). 

Likewise, we need to make these broadcasts now have the best chance to succeed as possible. We've spent years putting our Friday TV games up against 2 or more other fixtures directly. Even domestic Premier League football, rarely ever does this for its broadcasts.

[Dave T]

4 hours ago, M j M said:

I can get spreading them over the weekend - but suspect it is foolish to undermine club's main revenue streams to achieve it - but SL+ at this stage is not something we should be switching games to Thursdays for.

It would be good to get some proper analysis done on time slots, because obviously things like Saturday afternoons are now being used, and tbh I'm mot sure they are necessarily any better or worse than Thursday evenings - although I don't have the data to back that up, it's a perception thing.

I think in reality clubs would want Friday night games, it seems to be the premium slot, but everything outside of that can bring lower crowds. If we are trying to be attractive to TV companies and our own TV platform, then all playing at the same time is challenging.

 

[JohnM]

4 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

You get to lots of games do you?

It's kind of you to ask. I don't get to many at present as it's the off season and there aren't any.  I moved house this summer and despite touring Europe for 8 weeks, I did manage a couple of games, as well as watching a lot on Sky.

So now I've moved closer to the M62, despite declining mobility owing to heart and arthritis, I'll get to more as I'm now only 40 miles from a decent club, one where fans are not obsessed with Ultimate Rugby League.

Edited December 12, 2024 by JohnM

[Harry Stottle]

15 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

We need to have games on at different timeslots, partly to make SL+ and SS+ worth it, but also because I suspect the figures for some of the triple header Fridays were abysmal

SL+ have no idea what they are doing yet for next season Tommy as I reported in this thread on page 2, pretty poor show considering we are less than 9 weeks from the start of the season, I wouldn't mind as much if this was an independent body but it is SuperLeague themselves producing it.

[Harry Stottle]

11 hours ago, JohnM said:

one where fans are not obsessed with Ultimate Rugby League.

Aw Bless.

There is only one fan of Rugby League that is obsessed with Ultimate Rugby League and thats you, no one else brings it up but I suppose you will put that to one side when you find another 'bee to put in your bonnet'.

[Harry Stottle]

14 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

I think, by and large, we have got the big games in the right spots. Friday night games are always my preference - I don't think Sky have a particular agenda in minimising our coverage, it's just a fact of how popular or not we are. I think we were starting to be put on Thursdays when Sky lost the UEFA Cup, we also went onto Mondays too briefly to create another slot for broadcast. I certainly don't think Sky ignore us or anything like that.

Thursdays are potentially a difficult one. Either we take the "maximise it" approach and only put "local" matches on Thursdays. However, that comes with the criticism that we are taking what otherwise would be some of our best attended games and limiting them with the "worst" slot.

The alternative, one adopted in EFL football for example, is to ask for the least attractive/biggest travel matches to be put on midweek slots. That way you keep the biggest revenue earning matches on weekends, and take the big hit all in one go. 

I can see the argument for both, though in reality I'm not sure it makes a huge amount of difference especially when our clubs play so few Thursday games each year. Perhaps clubs go somewhere down the middle, which is why Leigh and Castleford find themselves playing more away Thursday matches.

Re your second paragraph, that is precisely what Sky are doing putting one of the best attended games of last season for not only the first game of the season but also the first Thursday Night game.

And your last paragraph Tommy, my club has 7 games 25% of its fixtures on Thursday's and our 2 nearest neighbours have 1 and 2 Thursday fixtures respectively.