Re: NL1& NL2 instead o...
Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:18 pm
Which games are they the NRL or the NL1.wigan1977 posted:
eurosports hav got the games not sky sports
WiganWarriorsFans.com
A site for fans of Wigan Warriors RLFC. News, views, statistics, profiles and more all contributed by supporters of Wigan RL.
https://www.wiganwarriorsfans.com/
NL1& NL2 instead of NRL!
Page 2 of 3
Re: NL1& NL2 instead o...
Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:33 pm
nl1 on thursday nights not sure about aussie games
Re: NL1& NL2 instead o...
Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:44 pm
cheers 1977.
Re: NL1& NL2 instead o...
Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2007 10:33 pm
Eurosport do NOT have the NL1 matches, they were going to show them but decided not to, I think Sky Sports have decided to show them instead.wigan1977 posted:
eurosports hav got the games not sky sports
Source: SportingLifeNational League matches are still expected to be televised this season, despite Eurosport apparently pulling out of talks to provide live coverage.
Plans for Eurosport to show matches on a Thursday night have fallen through but the Rugby League are thought to be discussing expanded coverage with main broadcast partner Sky.
Sky show two Super League matches a week but have so far restricted their coverage of the National League to the two major finals.
"We are still endeavouring to secure regular broadcast exposure for the National Leagues and we're very hopeful of doing that," said a League spokesman.
Re: NL1& NL2 instead o...
Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 1:18 am
i think its a good idea that sky have got nl 1 and 2. the games are being shown on thursday night which is the only day of the week that there isnt any football on so it get more viewers watching them.
will sky still show state of origin matches like they have done nearly every year?
will sky still show state of origin matches like they have done nearly every year?
Re: NL1& NL2 instead o...
Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:07 pm
Although I will miss the NRL coverage surely it's a good thing that british rugby league is getting better exposure on TV especially lower leagues.
I do think its out of order if Sky aren't paying NL1 teams for this extra coverage as this would help lower league teams expand, invest and start to compete with the super league.
I do think its out of order if Sky aren't paying NL1 teams for this extra coverage as this would help lower league teams expand, invest and start to compete with the super league.
Re: NL1& NL2 instead o...
Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:27 pm
surley the NRL final would be shown though
It'll be great if they are both shown, the more rugby league the better
It'll be great if they are both shown, the more rugby league the better
Re: NL1& NL2 instead o...
Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 11:08 am
Oh ok, I was under some misguided notion that Sky might actually have to pay for the rights to show these games as they do in other sports... Typical Murdoch if he's found a way to avoid paying though.ian.birchall posted:No Fraggle, you are missing the basic point, SKY are not paying any money at all for National League RL.Fraggle posted:
You might well be right about this. The NRL is already getting money from News Corporation, but little/none of their money was going into the British game apart from Superleague. NL1 is now presumably getting a bit of dosh, which should help the clubs in that league in their efforts to get promoted or develop ahead of the franchise system coming in.
It's another of those cases where they've gone for an either/or option - either you have NRL or NL1 but you can't have both - just as they did with Les Catalans vs a British team. I'd be surprised if money was so tight that they couldn't accommodate both NRL and NL1 (and I think Les Catalans should have been an extra club, not a replacement), but maybe Sky didn't think they could spare another couple of hours in their football-obsessed schedule.
Re: NL1& NL2 instead o...
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 8:03 am
Sky decided to drop NRL matches because of the low numbers watching matches compared to the cost of acquiring them.
The RFL had almost agreed a deal with Eurosport, however, they wanted the National League Finals which Sky own the rights to and wouldn't let go of. I think it will have come down to accepting a free deal from Sky in order to secure a sponsor or get nothing at all which would have been disasterous.
The RFL had almost agreed a deal with Eurosport, however, they wanted the National League Finals which Sky own the rights to and wouldn't let go of. I think it will have come down to accepting a free deal from Sky in order to secure a sponsor or get nothing at all which would have been disasterous.
Re: NL1& NL2 instead o...
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2007 10:01 am
Very true. I was reading about the deal in League Express last night, there is some concern from the clubs about fans being unhappy with games being moved at short notice to suit TV schedules but no compensation for reduced attendances likely - sounds familiar...?!robjoenz posted:
Sky decided to drop NRL matches because of the low numbers watching matches compared to the cost of acquiring them.
The RFL had almost agreed a deal with Eurosport, however, they wanted the National League Finals which Sky own the rights to and wouldn't let go of. I think it will have come down to accepting a free deal from Sky in order to secure a sponsor or get nothing at all which would have been disasterous.