WiganWarriorsFans.com

maybe we should get scully and mulder on the case ?

Channel 9 here in Oz are much worse than sky.. The telecast of the Grand Final shown in Melbourne, Sth Australia are cut off as soon as the final siren has sounded. We don`t get any of the celebrations or presentations. This has happened for the last 6 or 7 yrs. Before that the only states that got a direct coverage of the GF was Sydney and Brisbane. Melbourne got a delayed replay of the game about midnight.

NRL and channel 9 are amateurs

Stormfan wrote:Channel 9 here in Oz are much worse than sky.. The telecast of the Grand Final shown in Melbourne, Sth Australia are cut off as soon as the final siren has sounded. We don`t get any of the celebrations or presentations. This has happened for the last 6 or 7 yrs. Before that the only states that got a direct coverage of the GF was Sydney and Brisbane. Melbourne got a delayed replay of the game about midnight.

NRL and channel 9 are amateurs

Not Amateurs, just more interested in other sports of which there are plenty in Australia including now, the rise of Football which will rise even further after seeing them winning the Asian Cup held in their country.

cherry.pie wrote:

shaunedwardsfan​club​ wrote:What was the penalty for? Joel doesn't even know and he was supposedly guilty of an offence and captain!

It wasn't Joel, it was Sutton who ripped the ball out. It was subtle, but he definitely ripped it out, so the penalty was the right call.

Spot on.

The game i love of Rugby League is dying a death and i do not see anyway back for it

RIP

mickw wrote:

Whelley Warrior wrote:

Bilko wrote:I don't know about the claim made at the top BUT clearly Sky were under pressure to get off air with the way the game ended.

The Football First: Match Choice had already been delayed by 15 minutes and I think it's a contractual obligation that Sky start showing those highlights before Match of the Day starts, 10:15 being the latest they can do so.

So rather than the satellite link running out, I think more the football being delayed was the issue, certainly explains the quick exit.

If so, it only proves that that with games moved to Thursdays, Sky regard our game as a fill in at the weekend with football the be all and end all of their sports coverage.

Perhaps, the RFL should now be looking towards coverage by Premier or BT Sport.

Begs the question, Are Sky giving our game a minimum contract just above what they know rival companies can offer?

of course they are the sheer scale of the latest football deal means sky are pushed to the limit and our game will suffer because of it, what rugby league needs is a viable competitor to sky for the rights and that doesn't look likely. We are just a fill in sport for sky and treated as such.

Sky paid some more money for the continued rights without having to bid against anybody due to the ineptitude of the RFL. If you remember IL was not a happy bunny about that. There was no competitive tender.

BT Sport is the obvious competitor but when the RFL just go to Sky cap in hand saying "Please sire can I have some more" we are not going to see a great increase in money coming into the game.

It needs someone with a vision to sell the sport to someone else along the lines of "You give me a shed load of cash and I will deliver an NRL-like competition".

Instead with the "RFL's Whole Game approach" we are too concerned about the likes of Batley and Doncaster getting a share of a smaller pie.

cherry.pie wrote:

shaunedwardsfan​club​ wrote:What was the penalty for? Joel doesn't even know and he was supposedly guilty of an offence and captain!

It wasn't Joel, it was Sutton who ripped the ball out. It was subtle, but he definitely ripped it out, so the penalty was the right call.

Ok thanks. I'll have another look at it.

DaveO wrote:

mickw wrote:

Whelley Warrior wrote: If so, it only proves that that with games moved to Thursdays, Sky regard our game as a fill in at the weekend with football the be all and end all of their sports coverage.

Perhaps, the RFL should now be looking towards coverage by Premier or BT Sport.

Begs the question, Are Sky giving our game a minimum contract just above what they know rival companies can offer?

of course they are the sheer scale of the latest football deal means sky are pushed to the limit and our game will suffer because of it, what rugby league needs is a viable competitor to sky for the rights and that doesn't look likely. We are just a fill in sport for sky and treated as such.

Sky paid some more money for the continued rights without having to bid against anybody due to the ineptitude of the RFL. If you remember IL was not a happy bunny about that. There was no competitive tender.

BT Sport is the obvious competitor but when the RFL just go to Sky cap in hand saying "Please sire can I have some more" we are not going to see a great increase in money coming into the game.

It needs someone with a vision to sell the sport to someone else along the lines of "You give me a shed load of cash and I will deliver an NRL-like competition".

Instead with the "RFL's Whole Game approach" we are too concerned about the likes of Batley and Doncaster getting a share of a smaller pie.

Exactly, keeping them semi-pro for the pleasure of 1000 fans, ridiculous.