*** Official Rugby League SLXIX Thread ***

Yeah, mine ran out a couple of weeks ago. Its a pretty good deal. ~£35 for the year including full replays of every single match plus other weekly features. I've always enjoyed it. Will renew soon but it was a total pain renewing last year.
 
Wigan have their own version. Subscribed to it for a while last year but haven't got round to it yet this year.

I'm on Virgin Media and it looks like they want £7.99 per month for Premier Sports.

Read somewhere that Premier Sports paid the grand total of £750 per club for the entire rights to Championship RL.
 
I believe it is a dreadful commercial decision to be agreeing in 2014, with 3 years still to go on the super leagues current deal, a new deal for super league tv rights for the 5 future years 2017-2021 at only 30% increase and without going out to tender and allowing BT sport to compete.

There are other very welcome elements for championship and championship 1 tv rights and for the community foundations, but the deal for Super League tv rights is only increased by 30% for the future 5 years 2017-2021 compared with the current remaining 3 years deal 2014-2016.

Publically available figures show the football league achieved a 37% increase for an extention from their 3 years to 5 years (not 8 years!). They made available extra TV games where super league has offered a complete restructure of the competition.

Super league should have achieved considerably more than that from committing the next 8 years, or should have extended for 2 years only, leaving us then able to renegotiate leading upto 2016 for 2017-2021 in what appears to be an increasingly competitive market in favour of sellers.

To make it absolutely clear, Sky is a great broadcaster for rugby league and I would hope they would have won any tender because of what they do for Rugby League. They have been wonderful partners for the game over many years and none of my comments are aimed at them. As another club owner hinted they have achieved a great tv deal for their shareholders.

However for the RFL to recommend the selling forward of super league for 8 years with the clubs only given 24 hours notice of the meeting, a limited amount of time to discuss the details and to be forced into an immediate take it or lose it vote, is a complete failure of corporate governance by the RFL and a condemnation of the way Super League is managed by them.

Such a key decision should have been discussed in detail over a reasonable period of time with support from an independent tv expert as all other negotiating rights holders do.

Whilst I understand fully the financially desperate position of some clubs and well understand them voting for any deal which on the short term helps their difficult circumstances, it is the responsibility of the governing body of the super league to make sure the right decisions are taken in the interest of super league and the game as a whole.

Unfortunately these two entities are largely the same people (the dreaded duality seen only in rugby league with the chairman and chief executive of both bodies being the same individuals). Also in my opinion, the chief executive in particular is too closely involved in driving his own personal view of the restructuring of the super league competition rather than the inclusive and open-minded approach which a CEO should lead with.

Decisions taken in haste have a habit of being repented over a long period. I, for one regret immensely that, under the pressure of time and a stated desire for some unanimity, I voted Wigan in favour of accepting the deal because it was clear financially challenged clubs would support it.

I awakened the next day and regretted immensely my voting which - given time to consider properly - would have been strongly against this particular deal since I believe super league could have achieved a different and more structurally sensible deal with sky preferably.

I also resent being coerced into taking an immediate position on something so vital for the future of our game. We are now shut out of any increases in the value of broadcasting rights over an 8 year period. BT sport are very serious competitors and they are in it for the long term yet Super League did not even go out to tender to give them an opportunity to bid for rights. To go with another 5 year contract, 3 years hence from now, without giving others the chance to bid is surely crazy commercially.

I am not suggesting that this tv rights decision should be challenged or reversed since the clubs (including Wigan) voted democratically for it.

However I hope that clubs, fans and players will recognise that the process followed by the governing body throughout this whole process - whilst resulting in welcome and much needed money for SL and championship clubs- has been seriously flawed and should result in a major review of the management structure of Super League and the dual involvement of the RFL

Ian Lenagan
Chairman, Wigan Warriors
Click to expand...

Hear hear.

Neil Hudgells response to the deal:

@NeilHudgell: Cautious optimism over tv deal. 8 years is a long time. Could have done with more than 2 hours to consider the detail #indecenthaste?
 
Last edited:
Anyone else seen this story emerging? Its being pedalled by various British newspapers claiming that an approach has been made by the RFU to bring Sam Burgess back over to England to play for a Union club, potentially Bath.

I find the whole thing utterly astounding.

Others are saying that it is probably just a ploy by the RFU to take the wind out of the sails of SL's opening games of the season. Even more amazing is that the RFU have agreed to pay for the release clause, instead of the club itself.

I for one can't believe that he would move, especially given his location and superstar status over in Australia. He has his brothers and family over there, a beautiful beach, playing in front of tens of thousands for each game. To then swap all that for a dank field in Bath playing in front of a few thousand? Money talks n'all, but it does sound strange.
 
physichull said:
Anyone else seen this story emerging? Its being pedalled by various British newspapers claiming that an approach has been made by the RFU to bring Sam Burgess back over to England to play for a Union club, potentially Bath.

I find the whole thing utterly astounding.

Others are saying that it is probably just a ploy by the RFU to take the wind out of the sails of SL's opening games of the season. Even more amazing is that the RFU have agreed to pay for the release clause, instead of the club itself.

I for one can't believe that he would move, especially given his location and superstar status over in Australia. He has his brothers and family over there, a beautiful beach, playing in front of tens of thousands for each game. To then swap all that for a dank field in Bath playing in front of a few thousand? Money talks n'all, but it does sound strange.
Click to expand...

i hope he stays put
 
I've been reading this too, also can't believe he would leave and do hope he stays in RL! Interestingly though, I read on Twitter that he had added 'for now' to the end of his bio which previously read 'living in Sydney.'

Can't believe he'd come back here to play for Bath. Him and Tuilagi in the centres would be fun to watch, though. Silver lining and all that.

Also, what's going on with Carvell? Chat of him going to Hull FC? Has he even put on a Bulls shirt yet?
 
If Burgess does go to Bath from the beaches of Sydney, where all his family live, I'm sure it will be for the 'challenge' rather than the £.

Interesting that hardly any mention was made of Chris Ashton's RL background until he was dropped by England - he then became ex-Wigan RL player.

It's looking pretty bleak at Bradford. I hope they manage to sort themselves out
 
On the topic of Bradford, they do seem to have a relatively decent squad still. I would be surprised if Carvell did get moved out to FC without playing a game. I think London are nailed on for wooden spoon this year which could be interesting as relegation looms. Not sure who would join them though.
 
A relatively decent opening game tonight but a deserved win for Huddersfield.

I think Wigan were pretty weak in the forwards tonight, I'm not sure what they lacked but they were outmuscled in the middle which left Brough to do his thing. Maybe half a mind on the WCC, but Wigan didn't seem up for it tonight.

Bowen certainly looked decent tonight though perhaps should have been shown a card of some kind. It was a ridiculously late "challenge", I'm not quite sure what he was thinking, the ball was gone a long time before he struck Grix.

Glad SL's back though!
 
Last edited:
physichull said:
A relatively decent opening game tonight but a deserved win for Huddersfield.

I think Wigan were pretty weak in the forwards tonight, I'm not sure what they lacked but they were outmuscled in the middle which left Brough to do his thing. Maybe half a mind on the WCC, but Wigan didn't seem up for it tonight.

Bowen certainly looked decent tonight though perhaps should have been shown a card of some kind. It was a ridiculously late "challenge", I'm not quite sure what he was thinking, the ball was gone a long time before he struck Grix.

Glad SL's back though!
Click to expand...

Agree with everything you've said here.

Some points from last night:

Huddersfield have won 5 times out of the last 6 visits to the DW.
Bowen to miss the NZW warm up with a ban. I agree that he should have walked.
Wigan scored 200 tries last season, 99 by Richards, Tomkins and Charnley
Its Round 1, come back in October ;)

Having said that, if the forwards don't pick it up, I'll be watching the Roosters game through my fingers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom