By Ed Jackson
November 20th 2009 @ 1:31am
Related coverage
NRL willing to sacrifice money for schedule
The NRL says it’s willing to take a pay hit on its new television rights agreement if it means they can have a fixed calendar of matches.
The NRL’s current deal, valued at $500 million over six years, ends following the 2012 campaign.
But under the terms of that deal, the NRL has a rolling schedule which allows broadcasters – the Nine Network and Fox Sports – to pick and choose which matches they want to televise depending on a team’s form and appeal.
So if it guaranteed the year’s fixtures were locked in before the season started, NRL chief executive David Gallop says the game would accept less money for its next deal.
Gallop says the system should be changed to allow fans and clubs to know exactly where and when they are playing – even though he said it could cost the code up to $50 million on the negotiating table.
“A fixed schedule for us, the advantages for our fans and clubs will hopefully outweigh that equation,” he said.
“The whole issue of how we allocate games on that rolling schedule … is a very complicated exercise.
“We will definitely be going to them and say that’s what we want and if they were to come back hypothetically and say `okay, that’s $50 million less’ then we’ve got a commercial decision to make.
“I doubt they’ll do that. I do think they’ll come back and offer us less but I don’t think it’ll be enough to make us change our mind.
“I think that certainty has become a real imperative for the game.”
Gallop, speaking at the NRL’s second annual club members forum, also expressed his frustration with the sport’s broadcasters, saying they had been guilty of breaking their contractual obligations at times, particularly with televising matches in Melbourne.
“We do agitate about it, on a week-to-week basis because, to be frank, from time-to-time they don’t even comply with their contractual obligations,” he said.
“You can’t fine them, but I’d like to. I think we all share that frustration.”
NRL marketing and commercial director Paul Kind said the new TV deal could also include a Sunday afternoon “twilight” fixture as that concept gained popularity with fans and broadcasters.
“When this deal was negotiated Friday night was the big night … two Friday night matches looked like it was going to be a great outcome for us from an attendance point of view,” Kind said.
“And now that Sunday afternoon idea seems to have warmed right up in the past 12 months.”
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(165)
Billo said | November 20th 2009 @ 2:28am | Report comment
Gallop is a lousy chief executive.
By saying he’ll take a hit on the money under the next deal, you can be sure the NRL will take a hit.
If Gallop had any business sense at all, he would be pointing out that what he is seeking would ensure higher attendances, which would in turn lead to a more dynamic TV product. So he shouldn’t be valuing it any less than the existing deal, which is badly skewed against the NRL.
LT80 said | November 20th 2009 @ 9:51am | Report comment
He’s not suggesting the next deal would be valued less than the current deal because of fixed scheduling. He’s saying that by insisting on fixed scheduling, it will reduce the value of the deal from what it could be with a rolling schedule. That’s my take, but I think the article is a bit ambiguous.
MyGeneration said | November 20th 2009 @ 10:22am | Report comment
That’s my read too. He’s not saying $50 million off $500 million, but $50 million off whatever. He’s just saying that this is the commercial cost of going back to a fixed schedule.
Mick from Giralang said | November 20th 2009 @ 4:15pm | Report comment
MG: And what’s your opinion of his comments?
Crosscoder said | November 20th 2009 @ 5:19am | Report comment
Agree to say the game would be prepared to take a financial hit ,is undervaluing what is one of the best TV ‘products” in this country.Any marketeer in his rtight mind,never undervalues his product.
I think however what Gallop is finally admitting, the fans have previously been dudded,not having a set seasonal fixture in place.After all the game is about the fans,without them good luck.
The trouble is the game is tied down contractually to a useless ch9,which does zilch in spreading the word into other non rl states.
What he has trumpeted to the Tv stations”fellas no worries ,we will have a set fixture list,as this may not meet your programme needs , just pay us less.Now that is fair”.
There are lawyers,accountants and marketeers,and neither the twain shall meet.
Firestarter Bob said | November 20th 2009 @ 5:53am | Report comment
Stand out contender for the most ill thought out comment from a football code CEO so far in the 21st century.
Rusty said | November 20th 2009 @ 6:49am | Report comment
Gallop – A News Limited man to the end. Is he getting a bonus for saving Fox money on the next pay tv rights deal? Sorry, I just noticed the Daily Telegraph back page saying he’s doing it for the fans – what a man, he should chair the independent commission.
Col the Bear said | November 20th 2009 @ 7:31am | Report comment
… CENTRAL COAST BEARS JERSEY UNVAILED IN THE HERLAD TODAY.. thats the real news…
Redb said | November 20th 2009 @ 7:50am | Report comment
Col,
Got a link?
Redb
Col the Bear said | November 20th 2009 @ 7:59am | Report comment
it’s the push by the Bears that has bought this on probably, our bid will be top notch,CC crusaders also being announced this week with the newcastle deal.. rather hastily mind you, and now look like having to change their name .. thanks to the CC basketball..
The push is well and truly underway for the next licence the CC Bears…and now it gets serious..!!!
it’s in the sports section of the Herald.. can someone pop it up please on this site Steve???
Redb said | November 20th 2009 @ 8:02am | Report comment
no pic just this…
“BEAR CHEST
Here is the first look at the Central Coast Bears’ jersey. The new strip will be unveiled at the official launch of the Bears’ new headquarters at the Fortuity Building in Erina tonight. More than 150 guests are expected at the function, emceed by television personality Mike Munro. Attendees will include Gosford Mayor Chris Holstein, controversial Labor MP Belinda Neal and a host of former North Sydney greats. The Bears, who are pushing for readmission into the NRL for 2013, will also launch their membership drive and interactive website at the event. ”We see these as being important steps in our return,” Bears chief Greg Florimo said.”
prowling panther said | November 20th 2009 @ 9:13am | Report comment
is that in the paper or online. cant find it on google
Redb said | November 20th 2009 @ 9:16am | Report comment
I think I spotted it in the ‘Inside Word’ on SMH online.
prowling panther said | November 20th 2009 @ 9:25am | Report comment
cheers
Col the Bear said | November 20th 2009 @ 8:13am | Report comment
the jersey is in there twice today.. lets hope phil gould now takes this by the throat and runs with it on Sunday..
M1tch said | November 20th 2009 @ 8:15am | Report comment
Well, I am gobsmacked..
once again gallop has bent over to the networks and they done what they’ve done to RL for 15 years.
Seriously, expansion to the Central Coast or Qld again isnt a risk, unlike afl in WS and a-league
This just simply shows the pathetic organisation at NRL HQ..they’ll give Melbourne the blockbusters of 2 tests, but then say, we will have less money so we can apease the fans..
oikee said | November 20th 2009 @ 2:29pm | Report comment
Hey Mitch, just let Sydney worry about filling Origin, after all, it is our show Piece. One thing you have to learn my good fellow, if you create demand, you can sell ice to Eskimo’s. Now please take note,= why do you think Origin in QLD sells out in under a hour, ? demand to get a seat. Now if that was a 80 thousand stadium, demand would not be a risk, as a matter of fact, you would probably be where Sydney is at the moment, heaps of games so you can pick and choose.
And the final peice to the Puzzle, if Qld wants to pay the NRL 3 million just to hold a final, why would you sell it to Sydney for half a million? We all keep complaining about money, when someone comes up with ideas, we all Whinge. Things are looking up, lets not blow it with-out looking at what they are trying to acheive,
P.S, read my post below, i will explain what the NRL are doing in full.
M1tch said | November 20th 2009 @ 3:15pm | Report comment
I got no problem with Brisbane hosting the grand final.
prowling panther said | November 20th 2009 @ 8:23am | Report comment
i dont mind a rolling schedule although the broncos get way too many friday nights. not sure why he’d by willing to sacrifice any sort of money given the afls massive warchest.
nine is a disgrace. i wasnt aware they had conractual obligations to broadcast into melbourne. id sue them all the way but i guess it aint great for media relations
Ziggy the God said | November 20th 2009 @ 8:29am | Report comment
If the guys running the NRL do not try and get the best deal for the game at the next contract, they will be standing in front of an old guy with a wig this time.
Nothing will be surer.
Gallop, either talk up the game or phark off you clown.
Mick from Giralang said | November 20th 2009 @ 8:37am | Report comment
I have long been an admirer of Gallop and the way he held the game together after superleague, and his strident and unequivocal stance against poor behaviour off the field. But he has recently disparaged the NRL’sTV value compared to AFL and now this. I too am gobsmacked that the CEO of rugby league is talking down the next TV deal. The game is undeniably the most attractive TV sport produced in Australia, and it should be dictating the terms to the bidders, not the other way round. I’m not a conspiracy theorist but I seriously beginning to wonder at the unseen forces that appear to be at work to again deny rugby league the television deal it deserves. If there was any lingering doubts about the need for an independent commission, Gallop’s comments surely dispel them. My view is that New Limited will not allow the commission to take over until the next TV rights deal is sealed.
oikee said | November 20th 2009 @ 2:32pm | Report comment
Read my post below Mick, and yes, dont worry, the commission is coming, but Gallop is setting up the future, trust me.
Paul J said | November 20th 2009 @ 8:44am | Report comment
Yet more words…no action.
In fairness, RL still has 3 long years to go until the next TV rights deal starts. The media has stated that serious negotiations with the networks are not due to start until the end of next year.
In regards to expansion Gallop has said all year that RL won’t be looking at that until at least 2012 (after the next TV rights deal is signed) so if he’s saying they’ll have another serious look at expansion in 2011 nothing really has changed there.
The only thing i got out of Gallop’s words yesterday is that the work on getting the new independent commission up and running is going “reasonably well”. If we can get that up and running for the 2010 or even the 2011 season we’ll be better off for all future negotiations.
Mick from Giralang said | November 20th 2009 @ 9:04am | Report comment
Here’s an interesting article by Roy Masters on why Gallop should be seeking double the current deal — not rolling over in public and talking it down.
http://www.leaguehq.com.au/news/experts/roy-masters/double-or-nothing-why-the-nrl-tv-rights-are-worth-1-billion/2009/05/15/1242335881328.html
Redb said | November 20th 2009 @ 9:29am | Report comment
Pity Masters cumulative TV viewing numbers are wrong and ignore several other factors such as 3 hour game v 2 hour game.
Your first clue should have been ” following the release of a confidential report” Where is that report and why hasnt it been made public?
reason: it’s BS.
Redb
AndyRoo said | November 20th 2009 @ 9:39am | Report comment
Time for plan B…. “just give us the billion dollars….. pretty please”
oikee said | November 20th 2009 @ 2:33pm | Report comment
Redb, your 3 hour game is too long, trust me, people will eventually tire of it, and most men will be devorced by then.
John Ryan said | November 20th 2009 @ 3:29pm | Report comment
Funny how anything Masters says is wrong,or incorrect but anything said by the AFL and its (what could you call them,I have a few ideas but doubt they will get printed) people on this site and others is the gospel truth.
Masters is always running an agenda and of course the AFL whatevers are not,Bolloks
Redb said | November 21st 2009 @ 9:42pm | Report comment
The facts speak for themselves. Do some research.
Masters draws a response because he is often wrong and leaves critical factors out of this arguments. Dont really care if you beleive it or not.
John Ryan said | November 21st 2009 @ 11:25pm | Report comment
Masters is wrong because he leaves out facts I,m still waiting for you to justify the last lot of attacks on Masters please point out where he was wrong..
One must assume your facts are correct because you get then off an AFL website,some where.
Redb said | November 22nd 2009 @ 5:48am | Report comment
Masters claims equal ratings.
Let’s face it any assessment of rugby league in Australia is bolted on to comparisons with AFL
It is the one constant.
3 hour game AFL v 2 hour game NRL.
176 x 4 free to air games per week – AFL.
192 x 3 free to air games per week – NRL. (I think the 192 H & A is right)
There is no way NRL out rates AFL nationallly week to week on free to air. The AFL Friday night game is just as big as the NRL Friday night game.
The facts are the AFL on a cumulative basis each week gets more viewers.
The AFL with 4 games a week and a 3 hour game has 2,112 rateable hours.
The NRL with 3 games a week and a 2 hour game has 1,152 rateable hours.
Add SOO – 3 games.
Add Foxtel 5 games v 4 games – both regularly in the Top Ten.
Foxtel is rugby league. The saturation in Sydney is much higher than Melbourne.
The top NRL game on Fox might hit 300,000 viewers against the top AFL game at 200,000 on average.
Free to air games have between 500,000 and 1,000,000 viewers for each game nationally.
Even the recent 2009 final series showed a big gap in cumulative national TV audience.
This is why despite the cheerleading from some even David Gallop the CEO concedes the NRL’s true value and it is much less than the AFL. Who despite theories of some (over the odds $780M) has already been offered $820M and knocked it back. In much more difficult economic times.
Redb
.
Mick from Giralang said | November 20th 2009 @ 3:52pm | Report comment
Oikee: How did the crocodile hunt go?
Mick from Giralang said | November 20th 2009 @ 4:03pm | Report comment
It’s getting very predictable how strong voices for rugby league elicit outrage and bile from the AFL cheerleaders….they better get used to it.
oikee said | November 20th 2009 @ 5:17pm | Report comment
Good Mick, made meself 150 grand in that hunt, so nice trip. Yes, to be honest Mick, the AFL and A-league, you could , well not could, throw rugby into that mess with expansion plans, dont they realise what it costs to prop teams up, i know the AFL is sprouting 200 million, now thats alot of cash, and hope they allow for rainy days. Something nobody has thought about on these blogs. And trust me, their will be rainy days.
Yes the trip went well, snared me some good skins. Remember Mick, read between the lines, the crocs are the defendents, and i made a killing.
Nick the Rooster said | November 20th 2009 @ 9:21am | Report comment
The Yes Man has done it again. He has de-valued the game before contract negotiations have even begun.
Rugby League is the best TV sport in the country and should not be taking a hit on revenue for anything reason. Especially now that Seven has said that they’re going to throw their hat in the ring as I’m sure the digital channels like One HD and co. will. No longer does rugby league have to suffer at the hands of Nine and Foxtel.
As far as I’m concerned, the new TV rights negotiations should be opened up to the highest bidder. Regular season matches, the finals series, the grand final and rep football should all be sold off as individual packages. Let the game get what its really worth.
Gallop has to go!
AndyRoo said | November 20th 2009 @ 9:26am | Report comment
I wouldn’t be worried, they are going to get more money than last time. He is just showing he is serious about this particular clause, I read it more that if the TV networks want a rolling schedule then they should pony up 50M, because that is what it’s worth to the NRL. Good on him.
The comments about Melbourne TV are also a fantastic sign.
Paul J said | November 20th 2009 @ 9:44am | Report comment
Lack of info is frustrating for fans.
The first state of origin this year was the highest rating ever. The NRL grand final was only 300k behind the AFL for nation wide audiences. NRL games ratings have increased for 3 straight years.
Great!!
We still don’t know what the NRL is expecting to get or even wants for the next TV deal or when the independent commission will be up and running.
I guess as a fan i’m guilty of being impatient but surely they can give us more to go on than the usual political speak which sounds professional but basically tells us very little.
Woody Warambel said | November 21st 2009 @ 12:23pm | Report comment
Preliminary estimates had the NRL GF about 200k ahead of the AFL TV audience. Where did the AFL get an extra half-million?
BTW another thing forgotten in the TV Rights’ debate is the value of the advertising in the respective markets.
NSW & Queensland have about 60% of this figure nationwide. So this half-as-much again advertising dollar avantage the RL areas have over the AFL states should at least counter the extra hour of game time argument when discussing the value of the TV rights for the two codes.
Woody Warambel said | November 21st 2009 @ 12:30pm | Report comment
Here is the TV Add Revenue reference”
http://www.thinktv.com.au/media/Media_Releases/PR11_Revenue_%20figures_Jul_-_Dec_08.pdf
ren said | November 21st 2009 @ 12:36pm | Report comment
but an afl game will contain heaps more adds, there are ad breaks after every goal and during the qtr and half time breaks- both are longer than the half time in nrl
Col the Bear said | November 20th 2009 @ 10:23am | Report comment
I can assure you all the Bears are not walking this time..in 2004 when the NRL said they are not expanding.. the CC Bears run by Singo at the time and the Wellington orcas decided not to pursue, within a year ,hey presto.. the titans were admitted..This time we are entrenched in our new offices at Erina.. and the Bears have had 10 years of knocking down hurdles.. this time we will keep knocking them down, until the CC and North Shore are finally represented by the CCBears NRL side.We are completely and utterly committed to that.. to bring back the red and Black..and all you people are quite welcome to let the NRL know what you think about it…..so if you thought you deterred us Mr Gallop.. once again you have bonded the Bears bid team and supporters to be more resilient…And hey what a coincidence this come out today.. right when all the media and the Pollies and sponsors will be attending the CC Bears launch tonight at erina… Love it.. Go the Bears.. because we’re coming back…..and we are looking the goods..
Michael C said | November 20th 2009 @ 10:27am | Report comment
The first I heard about this, just as a headline – I thought, good on ‘em….a vote of confidence in their clubs to go and get members, increase attendances and via the members, generate more ‘core’ income and the sort of income that – for exmaple – even a ’struggling club’ like MElbourneFC has over 13,000 members already signed up for next year before the end of November……that’s gold, money in the bank that early.
But, then reading these comments about the actual tone of Gallops statement……and yep…..it looks pretty poor. Marketing (101) FAIL.
Usually people in such positions choose their words very carefully,
so, the plot thickens.
Col the Bear said | November 20th 2009 @ 10:48am | Report comment
and just another point. to let you know the CC Bears bid team are listening to the fans and their supporters.. this jersey design was in a contest on the Red and Black army site with 60 odd other designs sent in from everywhere,going back quite some time .. and after a lot of deliberation this is what the CCBid team thought a very modern strip with the historic link of 1908…
Mushi said | November 20th 2009 @ 10:57am | Report comment
TV execs will actually already be aware that this reduces the value of the programming rights, this is hardly Gallop letting them in on some state secret that only the NRL had any idea about.
If you’re marketing steak knives to mug punters yes you keep these things secret, if you’re negotiating with a well informed counter party then trying to pretend like this isn’t a reduction in value is something which just raises more questions and allows them to set the price.
What he has done here is put a cap on the value he is willing to concede for that aspect of the rights. Provided this is intentional then it is actually a valid negotiation technique – name what you want (fixed schedule) and name the price you are willing to pay (50m) for that concession.
In a game where the value of something is both different between parties and not transparent naming your price first sets the line in the sand where you want it not where the other party does.
The reason this works is illustrated in the 20 odd responses above.
Mick from Giralang said | November 20th 2009 @ 3:54pm | Report comment
Put a cap on the value he is willing to concede???
I’m glad you’re not negotiating my next EBA.
AndyRoo said | November 20th 2009 @ 3:59pm | Report comment
I dont see it as a value he will concede. More the NRL deal is now a fixed calander, but for A$50m you may be able to have a rolling calander
Mushi said | November 25th 2009 @ 8:31am | Report comment
So you would rather someone who goes in utterly naïve believing that the other side have no idea about their own business and what is valuable and just hope really really hard that they allow you to pull the wool over their eyes in a single meeting?
First mover sets the price, it is because of people like yourself that this actually works. Go in with your best case scenario price rather than wishing upon a fallen eyelash that they are incompetent and will name a better price for you.
This is a process taught by both Scotwork and workshops at Harvard Business School
Mick from Giralang said | November 25th 2009 @ 8:44am | Report comment
Ah, the Harvard Business School…the mob that produced many of the dills that helped set up the Global Financial Crisis…I’ll stick to the CFMEU for my negotiations, thanks.
Mushi said | November 25th 2009 @ 2:04pm | Report comment
Funny that one of the consultants at Scotwork was a negotiator for various Australian Unions (he wasn’t, to be fair, a CFMEU rep so maybe they use completely different techniques).
But hey your right, you’re much smarter than those “dills” that attend Harvard, but one has to ask if they are so stupid and such bad negotiators how come they managed to get obscenely paid for such a screw up? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
Mick from Giralang said | November 25th 2009 @ 6:32pm | Report comment
I’m looking forward to see how many of then negotiate their way out of the criminal charges they’re facing….
Mushi said | December 8th 2009 @ 1:51pm | Report comment
Who from Harvard actually is on criminal charges in relation to the sub prime or other leveraged vehicles? (and this simplification shows how utterly ill informed you are, but I’ll stick with you)
Do you have even the vaguest concept of what criminal charges are?
Have you noticed how utterly incapable you are of putting forward a cohesive argument that doesn’t contradict on every second post.
You say people from Harvard (for the record I not me) are both poor negotiators and incapable of performing their job. Yet the jobs you believe they are incapable of performing are exceptionally well paid.
So either you are:
- full of it because they must be good negotiators to be well paid for something they are incapable of doing or
- full of it because they are poor negotiators but are well paid because they are so good at the roles?
Of course the most likely result is you are a full of it because it’s something in between but end results – Mick = full of it.
Firestarter Bob said | November 20th 2009 @ 11:12am | Report comment
Can the AFL Commission please take on the running of rugby league as well.
Michael C said | November 20th 2009 @ 2:42pm | Report comment
Did the Crawford report recommend it??
IF not, then, it ain’t gonna happen!!
Dogs Of War said | November 25th 2009 @ 6:34pm | Report comment
Got to be honest, not too impressed with how the AFL handle things off the field. Fevola getting no penalty? Would have at least been a month off in the NRL. The guy who kicked his team mate when he was on the ground at the start of last season would have had a case to answer as well.
As for Barry Hall, repeat offender, would have got at least 12 weeks.
Col the Bear said | November 20th 2009 @ 11:24am | Report comment
the thing is we are all a bit more savvy now then what we were back in the SL days..we have learnt a lot.. I can tell you…
Mick from Giralang said | November 20th 2009 @ 3:56pm | Report comment
The trouble is Col, the game is not in the hands of people who have it’s best interests at heart. If it was, the Bears would be back on the CC pronto and the Perth Reds would be back in business…and a second team in Melbourne would be on the radar.
Midfielder said | November 20th 2009 @ 11:32am | Report comment
From DG today no expansion … and the media deal to stay the same…
http://www.smh.com.au/news/lhqnews/tv-money-puts-brakes-on-nrl-expansion/2009/11/19/1258219925063.html
Col the Bear said | November 20th 2009 @ 11:41am | Report comment
Oh yes thankyou MF I was waiting for you to turn up..I’ve talked to the bid team members today,instead of crying in their drinks as ’some’ might expect they are extremely excited and jovial and looking forward to our launch tonight.. so you can make that out to what you want..
Firestarter Bob said | November 20th 2009 @ 12:28pm | Report comment
It’s obvious what’s going on. The NRL doesn’t want to reveal its hand about expansion to the AFL and its other competitors and probably the current NRL clubs too.
Midfielder said | November 20th 2009 @ 2:44pm | Report comment
Col the Bear
Not quite sure about your post all I said or just put up the link… but somehow that is miss read so I will simply post the article where DG says no to expansion… sorry … but it’s the CEO of the NRL saying it in print to be quoted …
http://www.smh.com.au/news/lhqnews/tv-money-puts-brakes-on-nrl-expansion/2009/11/19/1258219925063.html
While rival codes are trumpeting expansion announcements, the NRL has put any plans to introduce teams in new areas on hold after being advised it was unlikely to receive an increase in television revenue.
Despite the establishment of new AFL, A-League and Super rugby teams from 2011, NRL chief executive David Gallop revealed yesterday that the issue would not even be discussed again by the league’s governing body before then.
”We’ve done some research during 2009 about expansion and whether we should be expanding to maximise television revenue,” Gallop said. ”The answer that has come back thus far is that the best thing we can do to maximise television revenue is to have an exciting competition, a competition where there are no easy games, where people are genuinely backing their team every week because they think they are a chance of winning. Adding teams won’t necessarily do that for us.”
Gallop made the comments at a forum with club members in Sydney yesterday during which he also outlined the pitfalls for the NRL’s rivals if their new teams hit financial trouble.
After expanding from 16 teams to 20 in 1995, the game was torn apart by the Super League war. Of the four new clubs introduced, the South Queensland Crushers and Western Reds folded while the Auckland Warriors and North Queensland Cowboys had to be bailed out.
”To be frank, I think some codes are getting in a race to put dots on a map without carefully considering the impact on the remaining clubs, or their current clubs,” Gallop said.
”I think rugby league has been down that road and made those mistakes, and I wouldn’t like to see it make those mistakes again.
”There is nothing worse than to add teams to your competition and have them fall over. It’s not only bad for the particular area, it has a ripple effect across the whole game and the confidence that people have in the game and the confidence that players have to play your game.”
The news leaves the Central Coast Bears with an uncertain wait in their quest to return to the NRL, while a Central Queensland consortium has been formed to lobby for a team in Rockhampton, and the Papua New Guinea government wants a side established in Port Moresby. Gallop said the issue would be reviewed in 2011 – a year before the NRL’s television deals expire.
”There are obviously target areas we have our eye on – Central Coast, Brisbane, Perth, Adelaide and perhaps another team in New Zealand,” he said. ”I think PNG is, quite frankly, a fair way off but our timeline now is to wait until the middle of 2011 before we have a real serious look at expansion again and whether it is the right thing for our competition.”
oikee said | November 20th 2009 @ 3:05pm | Report comment
Col, glad to have the Bears back come 2013, the only reason you will have to wait until then, we dont have another team ready to enter the comp, so maybe the Bears should be out helping another team get set up and ready, all this effort in a team that already is safely coming back. Read between the lines, Gallop will take you yesterday, but he needs another team ready. So get your Bears mob over to Perth, (this is the team Gallop wants) and promote the game and help the Perth reds with their bid. Otherwise you might not even have a chance at 2013.
The reason i say this, think about it, if the game is being sold to the yanks, they expect good product, not a micky mouse comp. Cheers dude, take that to the barbie tonite.
Mick from Giralang said | November 20th 2009 @ 4:10pm | Report comment
MF: The article you posted demonstrates amply why rugby league is hamstrung in its efforts to realise its potential as Australia’s national game. Fifth columnists are at work to ensure it is screwed…I can’t see anyway out until News Limited cuts and runs.
oikee said | November 20th 2009 @ 4:28pm | Report comment
News was always going to cut and run, but Murdock has to make sure the game is in good hands, hence why the Commission is getting set up. As long as Murdock is alive, god bless him, the game will be OK, and when he cuts the string, the game will thrive, last year was a prelude of what we are about to see. No rule changes this year according to Gallop, the 1st time in rugby league history, so the product is spot on. But to tackle the world, you need the best product. So gallop has done a marvelous job. One day he will have a stature in his honour.
oikee said | November 20th 2009 @ 12:36pm | Report comment
Just going out to have lunch, will be back in about 1 hour to let you know the good news about what Gallop has done for rugby league if he gets this deal through. I have been locked out for making some naughty comments. ,, will try to be good from now on. Be back shortly with some points on what Gallop is going to acheive. Cheers.
I am back baby.
oikee said | November 20th 2009 @ 2:49pm | Report comment
Just for starters, the next T/V deal will be well in excess of what this deal is, he is taking the hit to the current T/V deal which will only be for the NRL season proper. So we still have the jewel “origin”, and also the Didge game as well as the WCC and some test matches to sell. So a 50 million drop is not what it seems. Anyone here think Gallop is running the show by himself??? Of course not, this is the start of a bigger deal that will eventually push this current deal into the shadows.
Bare with me, so we get 450 for NRL, lets say 150 for Orign, this is over 5 years these figures, and say about 30 million for didge game and 30 mill for tests, add another 20 for WCC, which is gaining importance. So add them up and it looks pretty good, but thats not the main aim. If he can get the networks to agree to the fixed Calender, it will be the best thing to ever happen in rugby league.??
Why you ask?
Because next year the game is being sold to spike t/v again, and if we have our current deal in place, teams like Brisbane Broncos, and whatever other team plays Friday nite, mainly Broncos, will become richer beyond your wildest dreams.
Why, i know your asking that now, because, the match schedule for spike t/v will always be a friday nite game, and when the NRL starts to boom baby boom in the USA, the Broncos will be the team to benifit most, so Gallop is trying to get all teams on USA t/v, so we dont end up with a MAN U situation. Niow you can either think in the future, and look at what has already been thought out by Gallop and his cronies, or you can just stay the way you are and be another NRL fan with no vision.
Gallop is doing fine, and by the time the Commission comes into play, these steps will already be thought of, so the Commision can just implement them. Cheers.
Mick from Giralang said | November 20th 2009 @ 3:58pm | Report comment
Oikee for chairman of the new independent commission.
Football said | November 20th 2009 @ 3:01pm | Report comment
With both 7 & 9 posting losses for the year there needs to be a massive turnaround in the industry for the deals to increase dramatically.
Mick from Giralang said | November 20th 2009 @ 4:01pm | Report comment
Very good point, that has been lost in a lot of this debate. Foxtel, on the other hands, has the readies to dole out a lot more more for league than they have…it basically underpins their whole profit in australia.
Oh wait a minute, I was just reminded News Ltd is a part owner of Foxtel… and rugby league…(sigh).
oikee said | November 20th 2009 @ 4:08pm | Report comment
Hey Mick, look buddy and i will tell you something no-one else really has a clue about, smell the air, sniff the breeze, and look for the signs??? The oikster is a fan of the Hulkster, and the Hulkster is a fan of the Roosters, (not that this helps me, bronco mania) but smell the air, rugby league is going places in America, and the big money is going to come, on the back of some very big names. Mcmanus is a huge supporter of the Axemen in Jax, and Mcmanus is a huge name in US of A. Their is something brewing brother, just you wait and see.
Mick from Giralang said | November 20th 2009 @ 4:11pm | Report comment
I’ve just lit a prayer candle, Oikee.
Midfielder said | November 20th 2009 @ 3:04pm | Report comment
Oikee
Great read reminds me of an old song .. your interperation of the DG speech … anyway your song .. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Y9gb3NUGkk
oikee said | November 20th 2009 @ 3:12pm | Report comment
If 9 or 7 could show rugby league 52 weeks a year they would have no loss. That is why i dont think their will be a massive increase in the NRL rights. And if you look at the figures, basically i have not taken the deal up much at all, its around what? 650, 700 million, not a huge gain on what we have had, and we sold the game reasonably cheap last deal. The biggest deals are going to be made in America, thats the cream on top.
M1tch said | November 20th 2009 @ 3:16pm | Report comment
without more money how can the game grow? or support country footy which is struggling?
oikee said | November 20th 2009 @ 3:49pm | Report comment
Mitch, glad you asked. Their is a program that supports Grass-roots rugby league, and that program has to be utilised by rugby league ASAP. The Government. They have a program where they will spend money on sports that create programs to help communities grow and keep fit, along with keeping kids out of miscief. Now rugby league does not utilise this program, the Arts and Opera communities utilise this fund to the full. And how many people benifit from this program. ???
I have been talking about this issue only today, this morning, and i have told a guy to fast-track the issue to Gallop and get some funding in place for grass roots. Streath, just look at England, the Government awarded 30 million in their budget to rugby league for grass roots development, and Australia is neglecting this area, if it is put into place, grass roots would be fully paid for by the Government,. Which it should be, because without rugby league, their would be Kaos.
Glad you brought the issue up. thanks dude.
oikee said | November 20th 2009 @ 4:38pm | Report comment
Just one final point, i know most people put Gallop down,, ??? notice when fans attend a meeting with Gallop, (which was only this week) nobody has any fears about the game, only the NRL fans, and lets be honest, most you would not be game to lend a NRL fan $20 , if he was in front of a tab outlet, they are nice people, i can vouch for that, i happen to be one of them, but when it comes to brains, well, the letters went out in the post this week for a reminder that rugby league is over for the year.
Not knocking league fans, i love them, best in the world, would not give up me millions for any other sport, but as i was saying, Gallop has created this comp, he has stood fast on the salary cap and not buckled under pressure, and the game today is thanks to Gallop, and he cares, he does not want 1 club to buckle, some might have 2 areas that they play out of, (Manly, Souths, Sharks,) but at least he cares enough to keep them in the comp. If league fans had their way we would have a team in Cook islands by now, losing 50 million a year, not to mention the riots in PNG because we had to cancel Origin. The guys a genious, and dont let anyone tell you otherwise. cheers.
B.C. said | November 20th 2009 @ 8:35pm | Report comment
You come up with the most hilarious stuff. I love how you go on in other posts about the game is going to take off in America. By take off, do you actually mean leave?
Col the Bear said | November 20th 2009 @ 9:07pm | Report comment
Great launch.. big crowds, lots of media, and a number of sitting members,everyone is very optimistic..
everyone had a great night, lots of representatives from the CCRL junior clubs, and all ,I talked to were very supportive of the Bears and our bid. computers were set up around the offices with the new website,,an ongoing project, but the CCBears are up and running.. now the work begins..if anyone on this site is from the CC.. you’ll see the Mobile CCBears logo moving around gosford as from tonight…
Mike Munroe a staunch Bear all his life was quite happy to mc the evening for us..and I don’t think anyone left dissappointed…
I have heard where Grahame Annesley come out supporting the Bears on 2SM tonight.. I didn’t hear this but a number of people coming to the event heard it while coming up the F3…did anyone else hear this.. if true ,, Very interesting..
Mick from Giralang said | November 21st 2009 @ 6:01am | Report comment
Time for an article on the launch, Col.
oikee said | November 20th 2009 @ 9:31pm | Report comment
Nice work Col, glad it all went well. Will get the sunday mail and read all about the Bears return. Cheers. I am laying low, B.C wants answers to my Posts. What i have not told him yet, is the fact we already have 2 Pope’s playing for the Tomahawks.
God is on our side. You dont get much bigger than that. 
Col the Bear said | November 21st 2009 @ 5:36pm | Report comment
NBN HAS JUST COME ON BOARD TO SUPPORT THE CENTRAL COAST BEARS…
Deja Roo said | November 22nd 2009 @ 12:21am | Report comment
oikee, oikee, oikee…………..(sigh)
The NRL’s very existence is News Ltd and Pay-TV aka Fox Sports. Gallop’s job is to get a good deal for News Ltd. News Ltd want to get as much out of the NRL investment as possible, they will probably sell off their stake in the NRL after the next TV rights deal.
The NRL is the most likely of all the football codes in Australia to sink, because once News Corp abandons the NRL this independent commission will have no leg to stand on and the game could end up in big trouble. No money flowing in from News Ltd to prop up struggling Sydney clubs that have little members and small crowds, while the commission has to finance the salary cap. Not to mention the Melbourne Storm who after 4 GF’s in a row have posted a $6m loss on this season. Do you think Gould, Searle and whoever else on the proposed commission can afford losses of millions especially with no money in the coffers?……..No
And you oikee are suggesting expansion when your mate Gallop has already ruled it out, you see you can’t expand your orginisation if you have no money in the bank. Its obvious the next TV deal will see the AFL eclipse the NRL by a long way and probably more this time around with the addition of 2 new teams helping that will see AFL played in NSW and QLD every week and an extra game on TV. If Gallop was such a clever man then how can he not match the AFL dollars?
Gallop and is News Ltd buddies are there to collect there cheques, they don’t care for the game long term because it will be someone else’s problem when they leave. And you wonder why Demetriou has a grin on his face all the time. It’s a case of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. The AFL and the big networks deal first and RL gets the leftovers.
I’m sorry to tell you how it is but you can’t live in la la land forever.
oikee said | November 22nd 2009 @ 12:01pm | Report comment
Deja Roo, you would love to have the Oikster knowleadge, no honestly, you really would. Mate when News pulls out, who do you think is going to buy into this share.? Any clues? Because i know who, and its not ozzie money. And the Storm is going to be paid for by the Melbourne government, not might,,, will be, because the Storm are going to be one of their best asserts.
The amount of dollars tied into the storm is what you see on the surface, and thats a loss, but underneath that loss lies a huge amount of dollars for the Victorian government. (your not political either roo, are you). Why would the government over the last 5 years inject so much money into rugby league, and i am not talking about the Storm.?
Mate, the Storm themselves are doing big bussiness for the government , and you dont see this, but those guys just playing in the WCC is like having a 10 million add for tourism for Melbourne, again, behind the scenes.
The independent Commission will bring the game under 1 roof, and will be a instant success because it will save millions each year. Plus if you looked lately, memebrships are the number 1 priority for rugby league, and growing at rapid rate. So rugby league dying, now i think we have heard that before. Its growing at the moment, i will let you know when rugby league has stopped growing, but until then, you have showed me little with your post. Just talk. Cheers.
Mushi said | November 25th 2009 @ 8:35am | Report comment
The Melbourne Government?
Pippinu said | November 25th 2009 @ 8:38am | Report comment
Oikee’s mistake.
That should have read: the evil Melbourne Government.
Col the Bear said | November 22nd 2009 @ 5:55am | Report comment
Rugby league survived for 90 years without Newsltd it will continue to survive when News have long and truly gone….
Col the Bear said | November 22nd 2009 @ 5:59am | Report comment
Just look at our clubs resilience, clubs like Newtown.. as well yes not in the top grade, but still running around..when News go,then the shake up might well and truly happen that the game has needed since Super league..
I see ribot has raised his head again and wants to take a stake in the Melbourne storm, with a consortium… there will always be someone to take News place…
Col the Bear said | November 22nd 2009 @ 6:38am | Report comment
and as I said Deja Roo in another post.. in 2004 the NRL said there won’t be anymore expansion plans.Singleton and his bid and the wellington orcas pulled out of the running..within a year Titans were entered… RL issues changes over night..
so this could be a Deja Vu about to happen…
kick,clap,kick said | November 22nd 2009 @ 8:57am | Report comment
In regard to AFL V RL viewing hrs.
Does it matter if an AFL game goes for3 or 12hrs,if less than 100k are watching out of 60% of the population..?
Why pay top $$$$ for a product ,when advertisers are not reaching the majority of OZ?
Pippinu said | November 22nd 2009 @ 9:18am | Report comment
kck
The answers to your question are to be found here:\
http://www.talkingfooty.com/tv_ratings_2009.php
I quote:
” So, it becomes apparent, that only two sports in Australia have the cultural power to command free-to-air TV exposure for club football – Australian Football, and Rugby League. An examination of the A-League and Super-14’s ratings on Pay-TV indicates a wide gap between those games and those of the AFL and NRL. Many Super 14’s games fail to reach 100,000 on Pay-TV, with some games being only one third of many AFL and NRL games. The A-League, is a similar story.
So, which is the biggest in Australia – the AFL or the NRL? With the AFL averaging 36,225 in 2009, compared to the NRL’s 16,065, the AFL is, has been, and forseeably will be the biggest crowd drawer. Those whose loyalties lie in the land of uprights would argue that Aussie Rules gets the crowds but the NRL gets the people where they count – in their loungerooms, watching their TV sets. And it’s with much frustration, that those whose sympathies lie with the NRL bemoan the fact that the AFL’s TV deal is worth about 50 million more per year than the NRL. It’s not fair, they argue. We should be getting just as much, if not more than the AFL, they say.
So, how do the figures stack up in 2009? Using the official Oztam readings, the average weekly audience for the AFL in 2009 was 2,956,000 per week, compared to the NRL’s 1,548,000.
Over the entire season, the AFL was watched by a total of 65,023,000 and the NRL by 40,272,000. But what many fail to take into account is the three hour running time of an AFL telecast compared to the two hour running time of it’s NRL rival. When this is taken into account, the AFL is viewed 2.4 times as often as the NRL on free-to-air according to Oztam figures. 195,069,000 cumulative hours were viewed for the AFL compared to 80,546,000 for the NRL. With advertisers able to slot in commercials every time a goal is kicked, the commercial value would also appear to be far greater than the NRL, which has far fewer opportunities to slot in ads of their own. “
Firestarter Bob said | November 22nd 2009 @ 11:08am | Report comment
Do those numbers include 3 State of Origin games?
Dogs Of War said | November 22nd 2009 @ 11:23am | Report comment
What your figures fail to take into account is that AFL is broadcast into NSW and QLD, while the NRL is not. AFL also has more games on Free to Air, which also accounts for more of the viewers. That whole article you presented is all about working the figures into something that makes NRL look like it’s about as popular as Rugby Union.
Either way who cares. I much prefer the game to be over in 2 hours, and it will probably work in Leagues favour down the track, as people get more busy. And obstacles like insert ads into the game can easily be solved with the game moved to quarters (2 minute break at 20min), 90 sec stoppage for any kick at goal etc. It’s also a plus for League that missing a try which doesn’t happen as often as kicks at goal in AFL happen means that people aren’t likely to get up and go and do something else while the game is on.
Not to mention that article just forgets that League has other elements like SoS and Test Matches, because it doesn’t suit the agenda of the article writer.
Pippinu said | November 22nd 2009 @ 11:30am | Report comment
Guys – I’m just offering a perspective as to why the AFL is currently getting more than the NRL.
I would agree that the NRL is hampered with its relationship with News Ltd – that doesn’t help matters – but it’s not the whole story – that’s why I put up the link.
That aside – the NRL numbers are massive in their own right – don’t worry about that – I”m not fool enough to say otherwise.
Dogs Of War said | November 22nd 2009 @ 11:40am | Report comment
I don’t think anyone says that the AFL shouldn’t get more in it’s current state, it’s the actual difference between what the 2 codes get, especially from places like Foxtel where NRL dominates, yet gets less per game than the AFL does, and where it becomes apprant that a conflict of interest exists.
We have the Foxtel chairman saying that it’s due to potential subscribers, yet would any sport in the world put up with that line of reasoning? Better yet, would the AFL accept that? I highly doubt it they would accept getting second best prices when they are the ones who generate the ratings. It’s like subsiding another sport.
Bring on the Independent Commission, at least that would be the first step in the right direction.
Pippinu said | November 22nd 2009 @ 11:56am | Report comment
DOW
that’s right – it’s a different discussion again when we get to Pay TV and there’s no doubt that the NRL relationship with News Ltd is a big factor.
I should point ou that the AFL didn’t sell its rights to Fox – it sold them to channels 7 and 10, who in turn onsold to Fox.
At one point, the two FTAs were threatening to hold onto all of the product (which would have hurt them), so Fox had to either play ball or pretty much forego the whole of their Southern market.
Dogs Of War said | November 22nd 2009 @ 12:15pm | Report comment
To have to pay so much though, at the expense of League, makes for a good reason to allow sports to directly talk to Pay TV. Seems so silly that they aren’t allowed to.
oikee said | November 22nd 2009 @ 12:15pm | Report comment
Hey Pip, i am never going to listen to Oztam figures ever again, so dont even bother putting them up, ? Why? Because its a load of tripe, yes tripe, and i will show you why with one simple example, Take Brisbane, we get 1 AFL game with the lions, Thats 3 hours, and bloody long hours at that, which is why most people just turn in late in the game for scores. Now rugby league gets 3 games on FTA, thats 7 hours of FTA coverage, with everyone watching, so go back to OZtam and tell them to stick their figures where they fit, i cant give you Sydneys figures because i dont know the shedule.
It would be simalar,
Woody Warambel said | November 23rd 2009 @ 11:27am | Report comment
That Big Footy article is disingenuous about the TV Ratings.
It quotes only OzTam numbers & OzTam numbers only apply to mainland capital cities. Over 30% of Australians live in regional or rural areas & the vast percentage of these populations are in NSW & Queensland.
For instance then these numbers are added the first FNF RL game consistently outrate FNF AFL games by a margin of 200,000 to 300,000.
http://www.agbnielsen.net/Uploads/Australia/e2_20090329.pdf
M1tch said | November 23rd 2009 @ 11:37am | Report comment
the article doesnt point out that afl gets 7 FTA games compared to RL 3
comparing the 2.8 afl mil to 1.5 mil it actually works out similar on a game per game basis
Michael C said | November 23rd 2009 @ 11:51am | Report comment
???
AFL provides 4 games to Foxtel and 4 games are FTA, 1 Friday night, one Sat arvo and one Sat night and one Sunday arvo. More often than not, the best we can expect is 1 of those being ‘live’.
There are though occasions where in a particular state – that Foxtel get’s live against the gate and there’s a Fox/FTA double up. Games can get carved up on a given weekend, which makes it ruddy hard to do any straight comparison to the NRL coverage.
Pippinu said | November 23rd 2009 @ 12:04pm | Report comment
From memory, there are 4 AFL games on FTA and 4 on Fox (or it might be a 5/3 split, can’t remember now)
Redb said | November 23rd 2009 @ 12:07pm | Report comment
It’s only 4 AFL games that are on free to air. The other 4 are on Foxtel.
Michael C said | November 23rd 2009 @ 12:27pm | Report comment
Woody -
did you look at what you’ve presented?
The link is the regular RegTam data set – - which is QLD, Northern NSW and Southern NSW and Vic-Tas.
The missing component is known as the “Diary” markets. These account for 80+% of the Australian land area. WA regional, SA regional, Mildura, Griffith and MtGambier, plus the NT-Central inclusive of Darwin, Alice Springs and Mt Isa.
About 1.4 million people that invariably are missing from the published results. The link you posted – clearly DOES NOT include this data.
Because of the manual diary nature – it’s not possible for this data to be included in the ‘promptly’ available ratings survey results.
Just be aware of that.
If you’re talking about a margin of 100K here and 200K there….at the ‘end of the day’ (so to speak) the bottom line reality might be a bit different. 1.4 million people can change it a bit.
kick,clap,kick said | November 22nd 2009 @ 9:25am | Report comment
Over the entire season, the AFL was watched by a total of 65,023,000 and the NRL by 40,272,000. But what many fail to take into account is the three hour running time of an AFL
But you advertising to the SAME people …over & over,& you are not reaching the majority of people in this country…..because they are not interested in watching.
Its like preaching to the same congregation every week….
But how do you reach all the others,who are not the slightest bit interested in listening.
Pippinu said | November 22nd 2009 @ 10:34am | Report comment
kck
that’s still 200 million cumulative hours viewed – it’s the sort of number that attracts sponsorship and a big TV rights number.
Yes – a large proportion of the population does not watch – that will probably never change.
The truth is that the very largest rating show in Australia out-rated both grand finals combined.
Sport is very important in the TV industry – but it would be a mistake to conclude it’s the be-all and end-all – people have plenty of choice to watch non-sports shows, and elect to do so on a regular basis, perhaps far more than many on the Roar would believe.
Michael C said | November 23rd 2009 @ 12:36pm | Report comment
the network bosses and marketing people aren’t silly -
they are fully aware of the larger than recorded viewership for major events such as the two GF’s and the Melb Cup too as a clear example of the OzTam ratings not nearly reflecting the reality.
i.e. not measuring number of people in workplaces, pubs/clubs, and missing a heap of group BBQ’s etc.
It’s known, it’s acknowledged.
Prime time is really the prime time to measure most accurately!!!!
that said, MasterChef was almost compulsory viewing.
oikee said | November 22nd 2009 @ 12:25pm | Report comment
Most of the AFL support comes from Melbourne, and the 2 other cities,. Pip, their is no way in the world AFL will ever become bigger than rugby league, we have not even started to telecast into the southern states, and they will, so watch the ratings over the next 5 years. And dont say i never told you so. Rugby league with a new commission will send rugby league to every state, and that will be the next T/V deal. Money is not the main option, yes it helps, but their is other monies to be collected, most of that is overseas money, about to flood into the game, Wait and see.
The oikster is out their baby, and he is loving every minute of it. Way out, beyond the stars.
Just wondering if you know who much Spike paid for those 4 games.? It would make your eyes water.
Firestarter Bob said | November 22nd 2009 @ 1:20pm | Report comment
Wasn’t it reported somewhere that the NRL gave it away for free just to get the US airing? I’m sure I read that Russell Crowe hooked the NRL up with Spike. But he was very annoyed when the NRL just gave the rights away.
oikee said | November 22nd 2009 @ 2:10pm | Report comment
I will tell you what you read, Russell Crowe said , and i quote, “even if they give the game away for free, at least it will get shown over their”. But the ARL, ozzie rugby league would not give the game away, hence why it was never shown over their, and the rules and game was not ready to be sold. Look, i can tell you your eyes would water if you knew how much they sold 4 games to the states for, and it wasn’t chicken feed.
But it was the response they got from spike which is really encourageing. They are ready to hop on board for the full season.
Firestarter Bob said | November 22nd 2009 @ 3:07pm | Report comment
So why hasn’t that $ amount been made public? Where did the money go?
oikee said | November 22nd 2009 @ 3:54pm | Report comment
Grass-roots. Always has gone to grass-roots. Thats why league has no money. Melbourne is getting alot of that money. Men on the ground in Schools. All costs money. What you forget is rugby league has had 3 codes to deal with in 2 of the largest states. AFL had a dream run on 3 states without much competition. You wait and see the money fly out the door with expansion into our states.
Cheers.
In the meantime, league is slowly gobbling up the outskirts of Melbourne, and sinking cash into schools down their , with development officers. All yet to come out in the press, but rugby league has sur-pressed alot of its head-lines. They are sitting back and waiting for the right time. Let AFL exhaust their media coverage before returning serve. Like i said, i will be here all next year for comment, so can produce facts as they happen.
Deja Roo said | November 22nd 2009 @ 1:25pm | Report comment
Oikee
You seriously need to take off the rose coloured glasses. Talking about the NRL expanding into WA, SA and VIC is just not realistic. The Storm are kept afloat by News Ltd and when the Storm start sliding down the ladder you can expect it to get worse and this proposed independent commission won’t know what hit them on top of ailing Sydney clubs and fans like you screaming for expansion when they look at RL empty bank balance.
And as Pip has pointed out reasons for AFL getting significantly bigger TV deals NRL, WCC, SOO, Tests etc rolled into one are no match for AFL. The TV networks and sponsors clearly see AFL as the big fish hence why they get bigger deals and I don’t blame them. I would rather televise and sponsor a product that is played in big stadiums with big crowds as opposed to suburban park grounds where fans sit on grass hills and empty seats everywhere. Oh yeah and last time I checked Oikee the AFL was the #1 code.
That’s Fact……………………………
You can keep spinning these stories that companies are gonna poor billions into RL, NRL expanding down south, Storm are somehow sitting on a gold mine but your only telling yourself that because you don’t want to hear the truth.
oikee said | November 22nd 2009 @ 2:24pm | Report comment
What you dont realise, Origin sells its game to most countries, every year they add more broadcasters to the games. And ask yourself, why does Melbourne want part of that action? Its being shown to nearly every country. And being watched by most punters, its fast becoming known as the greatest contest on the planet. Cry me a river man. I am trying to point out to you some points, either except them or make up your own.
Yes, i agree, the AFL is number 1 code, but only in Melbourne. And thats a sticking point. Rugby league thrives off being only 2 states, we have origin,.
The greatest challenge in the world. Its growing a cult following, its on everyones lips, “whats that taste in my mouth”? That my friend, is the future. 
Seen that on a add. 
Firestarter Bob said | November 22nd 2009 @ 3:10pm | Report comment
I think you’re overstating how much $ the NRL gerts from overseas. If it was a decent amount there would be a media release telling everyone how many $ the NRL gets from overseas.
oikee said | November 22nd 2009 @ 4:06pm | Report comment
Not really Bob, you and i know the international game is a huge revenue. Take for example NZ rugby league, this is the 1st time they can show a good profit from their 4 nation tour, and never made the final. That cash will be used to grow rugby league back into NZ. So the money is their, and where do you think it comes from, Crowd figures, ? hardly, its the people watching the game,. Which is why i keep telling rugby league followers not to worry about crowd figures., what counts, is t/v revenue, the armchair follower, and their is millions and millions of them around the world, all wanting to watch.
So for the 1st time in many years, NZ has got cash to spend, and they are now governed by Sparc, a government sporting body.
So the money will be spent wisely, probably grass-roots.
oikee said | November 22nd 2009 @ 2:14pm | Report comment
Hey, i can back it up with next season alone, sit back and we will have this conversation next year same time. And i know who will be eating his own words, and it wont be the oikster. cheers.
westy said | November 22nd 2009 @ 5:38pm | Report comment
I think you should be very careful in castigating Gallop for the next TV deal for the NRL competition.He has made clear there is no longer any package deals. When he talks of the NRL competitionit is now only home and away matches minus a premium game on a designated timeslot. You are no longer buying the whole apple just the core . the nicest bite may cost you more or go to other bidders
I have heard Gallop say 500 million will no longer buy the package. It will get you regular coverage but not the cream. . He no longer includes the semi finals and grand final which will be a separate package as the SOO.
Thet have made clear just as channel 7 and 10 share AFL games and only one gets the finals so to with the NRL.
There will be a premium on the separate finals and SOO packages.. It is here the other networks will have a genuine competitive interest against nine.
Make sure you clarify what gallop is selling before you compare prices.
Pippinu said | November 22nd 2009 @ 6:00pm | Report comment
There’s definitely good sense in separating out SOO as a TV deal in its own right – there’s little doubt if the regular season brings in half a billion, that SOO will bring in plenty extra on its own.
All three FTAs would go after it – and those who don’t have any League will pay a premium for it.
Deja Roo said | November 22nd 2009 @ 6:27pm | Report comment
Remember SOO is NSW and QLD. Cult following? in those states perhaps but having a contest between QLD and NSW in VIC isn’t going to win alot of support is it. Yeah VIC’s love sport and will tune in but SOO is exactly what RL is, NSW and QLD. It’s why RL are so stupid because they are fencing themselves in while the AFL are expanding into new turf. But then again if the NRL had the war chest that the AFL have they would probably be expanding now too. Internationals and WC’s are also a farce as we have seen.
Geez oikee with SOO, WCC, WC’s, Internationals and the NRL you would expect RL to smash rival codes in TV rights dollars.
Dogs Of War said | November 22nd 2009 @ 6:34pm | Report comment
Internationals and WC’s a farce? Maybe to you mate, but I love them myself. Nothing like seeing the best of the best play each other. It’s one of the things that always surprises me about AFL. Why they don’t have an All Star game of some sort. That’s pretty much what SoO delivers, and in the future, I am sure that they will find some way of including other players who miss out, either via a Barbarians type setup, or a weekend where the Pacific Island teams play each other, NZ have their own version of SoS.
League must play to it’s strengths, and it’s strong regular season comp, combined with it’s rep program, is perfect for this area of the world.
Pippinu said | November 22nd 2009 @ 6:43pm | Report comment
DOW
No use bringing the AFL into this particular discussion – the support from the average AFL fan just isn’t there.
The AFL’s strength is club loyalty – it means the game loses out in other respects – that ’s just the way it is.
Dogs Of War said | November 22nd 2009 @ 6:51pm | Report comment
The AFL did have a rep program, obviously having SoO years ago. I can’t see it hurting to have say an end of season (or even start of season) All Star game, that let’s fans see the best of the best playing together. It’s great to see how players actually perform in that environment with very few weak links around.
Pippinu said | November 22nd 2009 @ 7:17pm | Report comment
DOW
you’re right – and it was pretty good during the 80s, but once the AFL expanded to include West Coast and Adelaide, interest progressively died, and to be honest, WA and SA always cared that little bit more than your average Victorian.
We’re fine without it – it’s no biggie – RL has its two-way SOO with now almost 30 years of history, and the 4 nation annual comp is a great idea too – that’s fine – it’s good to have a point of difference – AFL fans can enjoy these events as well.
In fact – a 5 to 6 month off-season is good for the soul – watch some international rugby, A-League, Socceroos, cricket, tennis – it’s all good!! It’s part of the rythm of life.
Rock Star said | November 22nd 2009 @ 7:24pm | Report comment
It’s a myth that the VFL had a successful State of Origin going and that rugby league copied it.
You can see from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_matches_in_Australian_rules_football#State_of_Origin that it began in 1977 with one game. Then in 1979 and 1980 it was multi states tournaments that were financial disasters. It wasn’t played again until the end of the 1980s.
Pippinu said | November 22nd 2009 @ 7:49pm | Report comment
Rock Star
1. I’ve already said above that no one has ever cared enough, with perhaps WA and SA caring a bit more than Victorians.
2. The article you refer to says the first aussie rules State of origin game was back in June 1977.
3. This wikipedia article on RL SOO says straight out that the idea was influenced strongly by the aussie rules idea:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_League_State_of_Origin
I honestly don’t care enough to debate it – and I’ve already said – aussie rules fans don’t care enough either – that’s why it’s not played.
The RL situation and culture in relation to SOO is completetly different (players really want to wear the state jumper – aussie rules players only really care about premiership medals).
But historically – the Qld situation was identical to that of SA and WA – identical.
Firestarter Bob said | November 22nd 2009 @ 7:27pm | Report comment
Deja Roo: By your logic no one outside of Melbourne would be watching Melbourne AFL teams play each other.
Paul J said | November 22nd 2009 @ 6:44pm | Report comment
“Lack of info is frustrating for fans.
The first state of origin this year was the highest rating ever. The NRL grand final was only 300k behind the AFL for nation wide audiences. NRL games ratings have increased for 3 straight years.
Great!!
We still don’t know what the NRL is expecting to get or even wants for the next TV deal or when the independent commission will be up and running.
I guess as a fan i’m guilty of being impatient but surely they can give us more to go on than the usual political speak which sounds professional but basically tells us very little.”
To add on to my quote from a few days ago it can be very frustrating for the fans with the lack of info.
The AFL tries to tell their fans that their TV audience is 2 or 3 times bigger than the NRL with grossly incomplete data.
The NRL tries to tell their fans that they have closed the gap by showing no data at all – just referring to confidential reports.
The link Pip (and other AFL fans continually show) shows a clear lead for AFL in Australian capital city free to air viewers only. It doesn’t show:
Regional viewers in NSW & Qld (over 5 million people).
Pay TV figures (where NRL dominates because they only have 1 free to air provider).
NZ ratings for Warriors games, SOO & test matches.
I have no doubt that the AFL has superior ratings but not by as much as that AFL link would suggest.
I would like to see the full picture but it seems only the networks, the AFL & the NRL have this and the fans never get to see it.
Deja Roo said | November 22nd 2009 @ 9:08pm | Report comment
If you think an independent commission will be able to negotiate an extra $300m to be on par with AFL compared to Gallop and his News Ltd buddies then your dreaming. The networks deal with the AFL first and the NRL gets the leftovers, thats just how it works.
Dogs Of War said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:31am | Report comment
Mate, stop posting on the NRL side of the forum if you are just going to post crap about how much better AFL is. AFL may be getting a better deal now, but that doesn’t mean it always has to remain the same.
The NRL pre super league also had a decent war chest for it’s time, and was in a position to take the next step nationally until the Super League war started. And by most AFL supporters admissions, the game is tribal which is one of the main reasons you get the crowds you do (even in Sydney, though struggle to get them watching on TV), but what if something was to tip that balance? People put off the game because an outside influence was trying to do something to the game that the tribe didn’t agree with? That was Super League, and plenty will never watch the NRL due to it ever again.
As for the independent commission, I think you need to stop thinking it’s a threat to AFL, it’s about making the NRL stronger, and stopping the conflicts on interest that exist, and removing many of the duplications and dinosaurs from the game. Only when you get the administration side of the game right can the game actually plot a direction forward.
Deja Roo said | November 22nd 2009 @ 9:10pm | Report comment
Do you have a prediction for the next TV rights deals for both codes Pip?
Pippinu said | November 22nd 2009 @ 10:55pm | Report comment
DR
I’m not an expert in the field – there are plenty on the Roar who know more about these sorts of things than I.
For what it’s worth, and on info currently available, I reckon:
1. The AFL, at a minimum, will end up mid way between the present $780 mill and $1 billion, with a decent chance of inching towards the $1 billion mark.
2. The NRL rights will easily surpass the present $500 mill. There’s no doubt in my mind that their TV rights are currently undervalued and that they have a poorer bargaining position because of the relationship with News Ltd. A 20% increase gets us up to $600 mill and I would see that as the absolute bare minimum.
But many factors go into these sorts of negotiations that are difficult to predict from where we currently sit:
1. where the technology is going;
2. viewing habits and changes in leisure patterns;
3. the advertising dollar that is available; and
4. whether there are sufficent players interested at the same time to bid the price up.
Also – things like scheduling, willingness to work with networks and fit into their demands, timing of finals, etc can all impact on the value of the product to the networks.
westy said | November 22nd 2009 @ 9:49pm | Report comment
Deja Roo you make a good point then go in for emotional overkill. If this is intentional then ignore what i say. I think you are right in that the AFL is positioning itself well both in fact and perception to increase its broadcast deal.
Even using Pips figures the NRL is probably worth 575 to 600 million( not the 500 they got )relative to AFl’s 750 million. The AFl positions itself in QLD and NSW to pesuade broadcasters for its one billion deal.
I think that if this 900 million to one billion bid is forthcoming the NRL will get a genuine increase in its deal espacially with its intent to basically copy AFL and potentially split its product between broadcasters.
Channel 7 or 10 may genuinely be very interested in SOO ( remember 9 has the next Olympics and intends to get the next one). despite your assertion it is only three games it basically gives you three grand finals midweek and is a rating success.. Moreover it genuinely hurts your competitior where it hurts most.. those weeks it is on are some of the few 9 won.or got close to 7.
There positioning of separate deals for the finals and grand finals and a Monday night game and test matches although not mind boggling in AFL terms ad a premium to their product even if that is restricted to QLD and NSW . Ten would love to have both the AFL grand final and the NRL grand final.
Personally i do not think nine will let them go . If the AFL get their billion rugby league will get their 700/750 million.
This is hardly leftovers.
Redb said | November 22nd 2009 @ 9:55pm | Report comment
Westy,
the whole point of raising TV ratings was to dismiss Roy Masters drivel above that the NRL gets equal ratings to the AFL. Clearly it does not.
Redb
westy said | November 22nd 2009 @ 10:28pm | Report comment
Redb just not for the sake of agreement i accept the footy figures that roy does not. What Roy should concentrate on is that on relative basis NRL is about 75/100 million underdone on those ratings. Secondly NRL matches up to AFL very well on an hour to hour basis it is simply the AFL has more hours. No brainer. But on mere ratings basis nine does get ratings per hour close to the AFL for some nrl at amuch cheaper price. This will not continueat the current margin.
I have never suggested equal ratings and if that is his position he should look again. What i do accept is that if the NRL get their act together and AFL succeed in getting their one billion I think the NRL will not only get a proportionate increase but some premium for its better product.. If nine cannot get the AFL it cannot lose the NRL let alone its separate SOO and finals and grand final.
The NRL have finally learned from the AFL.
Redb said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:50am | Report comment
Westy,
Getting more money for RL SOO looks very likely and deserved.
Redb
oikee said | November 22nd 2009 @ 10:41pm | Report comment
True Redb, its clearly not, but maybe the NRL are in the box seat so to speak.? Well, whatever the AFL gets from their deal, the NRL will know exactly what they are looking for in a deal. And also by then, the NRL will know weather we are looking at strong growth. Either way, its a bonus for NRL, and AFL knows it will be spending its money in mostly 2 states.
So the only way i can look at this, is a win/win for Qld and NSW. Whats your veiw.
I dont read roy masters, or Peter Mortimer, they are both paranoid. I normally tell them in their postings if i get the chance.
They are like most ex leaguies (dinosaurs) had years to do stuff, done nothing, and now are rabbits caught in the headlights.
Their is more growth coming outta England, massive compared to OZ, and they are behind 2 other codes over their.
Dogs Of War said | November 23rd 2009 @ 1:46pm | Report comment
It was Steve Mortimer, and he wasn’t saying that AFL is trying to take over, rather he was pushing the Independent Commission, which he started pushing about 3 years ago, and it’s taken this long to get feet. And sometimes you wonder why people say League is struggling when good ideas take this long to even be considered.
Paul J said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:50am | Report comment
We talk about the footy codes but what about the networks? How healthy will the networks be in 2-3 years? Will they be able to pay the AFL 1 billion and the NRL 800 million or whatever the codes will seriously ask for?
The AFL have said they want 1 billion, the NRL have said they want a big increase without giving a figure. I’ve not heard the networks say that they have a least 1.8 billion lying around to spend on the codes.
Redb said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:57am | Report comment
Paul J,
Certainly late 2008 and early 2009 the TV markets looked flat, 1-2 operators in trouble.
Channel 7 in today’s Fin Review are sounding very bullish, talk of a second digital channel,etc. I sense a turn around given the economy’s improving position and digital channel war to follow, these channels are going to need content and plenty of it.
Foxtel is the risky proposition here with the intro of new digital channels – could have a bidding war between both to secure the rights to sport.
Redb
Dogs Of War said | November 23rd 2009 @ 1:43pm | Report comment
It won’t be an issue unless channels are allowed to show sports on there secondary digital channels exclusively. At that point sports like AFL and NRL become even more valuable as they can show them on those secondary channels into markets that currently don’t rate, and hope that enough interest gathers from that exposure. Really I think it would be a win for all sports if it was allowed to happen, and an even bigger win for sports fans.
Redb said | November 23rd 2009 @ 1:48pm | Report comment
Snippets to date from the Fed Communcations Minister suggest a relaxing of the anti-siphoning laws around the new digital channels. So I agree the AFL and NRL are well positioned to reap the ‘content’ push by the free to air channels and their digital networks.
The Fed Govt will also be pretty keen to encourage take up of the digital channels given its been trying to retire the analog signal for some years.
Redb
AndyRoo said | November 23rd 2009 @ 1:59pm | Report comment
Seems a mixed bag for the AFL. I guess it can earn more for it’s TV rights as the Swans clause wouldn’t be a negative and actually a positive for the TV networks if they can put it on their digital channel.
But perhaps it would be different in 3 years time but I wouldn’t think the AFL would want the Swans to be on Seven 2 for example. At least One HD is right after channel 10 on my TV
For the NRL having the Storm on a digital channel at adecent time would be better than analouge at midnight that is for sure.
Redb said | November 23rd 2009 @ 2:10pm | Report comment
People forget the Swans ratings were better when they were winning, these things go in cycles.
AndyRoo said | November 23rd 2009 @ 2:21pm | Report comment
But in Sydney even when they were winning they weren’t something a Commercial TV executive would want to put on prime time during the regular season. If the clause didn’t exist I am sure they would have got shafted by the networks.
I am not having a go but if the Swans were put on Seven Two I think that’s a negative for the club but perhaps good for the league overall $$$ wise.
oikee said | November 23rd 2009 @ 10:21am | Report comment
Just to confirm my post about Mortimer and Roy Masters. This is exactly why rugby league needs a independent Commission.
Today Gallop had to come out and down-play fears by these 2 blokes. One saying we are “doomed, doomed i tell ya” , the other sprouting off about how much league is worth. Mate, Gallop has enough on his plate, without having to meet the press everytime these fools open their mouths. He has a truck-load of people(consultants, rugby league officials) working on this project, so like i said, its not just coming from Gallop., So everytime one of these Dinosaurs gets worried, Gallop has to make comment. Gooses.
A commission will allow this crap to stop happening, because we will only listen to reports from them, not Dinosaurs.
Anyhow, he had to play one of his trump-cards early, letting us know that next T/V rights deal will be a whizzer, but i already knew that, shame we have these other gooses sprouting crap. I have made mention that the game needed to be in good shape, as Gallop has also mentioned, and this is why going forward we now have a product to sell, not a complete mess like it was last year.
M1tch said | November 23rd 2009 @ 2:01pm | Report comment
Its a shame we only seem to hear from the past champs when all they say is how RL is dying etc..
Didnt hear from Gary jack for years until he started saying how much better AFL isfor young players, had all past players in early noughties when rah rah tried to sign up everyone and now guys like Mortimer who spew this rubbish.
oikee said | November 23rd 2009 @ 2:39pm | Report comment
Well if Mortimer was trying to get a commission up and running for 3 years dogs of war, maybe his time might have been better spent out West Sydney and having some of that 40 million funding for a rugby league ground in black-town. Because the reports i am hearing, is the residents out their feel left out.?
I dont know the area so cant comment myself, but looking on a league map, their seems a massive hole out that way, ?
I know Mortimer is a rugby league diehard, but comments like his and Matty Johns, “we’re doomed, Doomed i tell ya” are not what we need to be hearing at the moment. That is why Gallop is good, he sits back and is just getting on with it, until someone else says, “we’re doomed, doomed i tell ya” We were doomed 100 years ago, ? …… I just looked, we are still here.
Firestarter Bob said | November 23rd 2009 @ 3:02pm | Report comment
“but looking on a league map, their seems a massive hole out that way, ?” Go and have a look at Melbourne and see where the AFL clubs are located. They are all in the inner city.
Mick from Giralang said | November 24th 2009 @ 6:43am | Report comment
Time to get that second rugby league team into Melbourne’s west, FB.
Col the Bear said | November 23rd 2009 @ 7:32pm | Report comment
Hmm maybe the NSW cup can start being broadcast on one of the digital channels…
Tom Alexander. said | November 24th 2009 @ 1:18am | Report comment
The headline should read “Rugby League forced to take another pay cut to satisfy a Conflict of Interest group of bastards”. I love how Mr Scallop and the rest of that bunch can actually make these “we are the victims too in all of this” type statements, and still keep a straight face. The sooner some of these people are forced out of our game and replaced with fellas who have both the business sense and guts to stand up to these Networks instead of bending over the boardroom table every 4 or 5 years, the better it will be for both the immediate and long term future of our game. Once again it will be the fans, the clubs and the players who will be forced to keep the game prospering and afloat.
oikee said | November 24th 2009 @ 9:44am | Report comment
If we can double our memberships we would not have these problems. So to blame Gallop is a bit harsh. Look i blame bruno Cullen for the Broncos memeberships, he has done nothing while in Power to increase memberships to at least 40 thousand.? Now a team that has over 1 million fans, why has he not got members, ? Because he has sat on his laurels of it does not matter. So useless, incompetent and other words i wont use come to mind.
Andrew said | November 24th 2009 @ 9:27pm | Report comment
It has never been the culture of the sport. THings are changing now, and about time they did. As League supporters you need to understand that you also need to support your club financially. That could be becoming a member of some sort (via one of the numerous packages on offer, even if it’s the cheapest one available), or buying your supporter merchandise from the club directly so 100% of the money goes to the club, rather than save $10 and see only 10% of that amount go back to the club.
It’s all these little things that AFL have done, which has seen the gap widen between the codes, but NRL can do the same things, and very quickly this gap will close.
More than enough room and variety with the 2 footy codes that we should consider ourselves lucky to have a choice.
Pippinu said | November 24th 2009 @ 9:59pm | Report comment
Very true about choice.
I know we’re a tiny market compared to the US, but there you have the choice of top line NFL, NBA, MLB, Ice Hockey and now the MLS – and the sorts of discussions we have here in Australia do not appear to arise in the US at all.
jus de couchon said | November 25th 2009 @ 8:04am | Report comment
Perhaps , this might be a time to reflect apon Leagues dissjointed atempts at global domination. If you were trying to popularise the game of R.L could you do a worse job?
Mick from Giralang said | November 25th 2009 @ 8:20am | Report comment
Yes you could. Adopt the boring kick-a-thon that has become rugby union….that’d keep ‘em aweay in droves.
Paul J said | November 25th 2009 @ 8:30am | Report comment
If you look up Midfielders very interesting Roar article from September ‘Inside word on the next TV rights deal” He stated that his “source” tipped the NRL to be only 5-12% behind the AFL in the next TV deal which would be a huge increase for league.
Even if the NRL does take up to a $50 million hit to get a fixed schedule it could be $50 million from $900 million which would make the NRL stronger than it has ever been.
Dan said | November 27th 2009 @ 10:03am | Report comment
The NRL will definitely catch up this rights agreement but still be 100mill or so behind. The next one will be the big one. There’s so much going for them. A FTA saturday night game would be huge. What do you reckon the swans and lions ratings would be like up against a league game each week. Multi-channels will also benefit league alot. The number one thing against league at the moment is coverage.
Tom Alexander. said | November 27th 2009 @ 10:47am | Report comment
Like in NZ, i reckon it’s about time pay tv in Australia created a Rugby Channel with both Union and League content, with the red button option available for when live games of either code clash. Then we will see the real pay tv value of our code’s in this country. Anyone who thinks this will be overkill should check out the wall to wall Soccer on a Friday, Saturday and Sunday nights on all the pay tv sports channels. Surely this type of exclusive coverage would give us the true dollar value of our respective codes. Eventhough AFL tried it and failed, i reckon with the combined resources and fanbase of both Union and League, this channel should have a far better chance of success.
Redb said | November 27th 2009 @ 2:14pm | Report comment
It was Foxtel who ran with Fox Footy Channel not the AFL.
The main reason it didnt work was that all AFL games were replays, free to air had all the live games so their was no need to subscribe.
I had Foxtel anyway and loved the footy channel but as a stand alone for most AFL fans you did not need Foxtel.
No doubt for rugby fans (both codes) a dedicated channel would be great but realisticially what do you miss out on now with Fox Sports 1,2, 3. ?
Free to air generates more dollars.
Redb
Dogs Of War said | November 27th 2009 @ 2:15pm | Report comment
Old games. I loved both Optus and Foxtel’s offerings during the Super League war when they had dedicated channels.
Redb said | November 27th 2009 @ 2:25pm | Report comment
I particularly liked Wednesdays because they would replay all games from the previous weekend’s round. With IQ nowadays would be heaven. They also had a WAG’s show which was pretty decent on the eye.
Working Class Rugger said | November 27th 2009 @ 11:14am | Report comment
Tom
The AFL did try and fail but an exclusive Rugby Channel featuring both codes could be more successful due plainly to the accessibility of more content from both here and abroad. You could have the NRL, ESL and possibly the French Elite Comp alongside maybe both the NSW and QLD Cups and Super Rugby, NPC, Currie Cup, well there’s alot of Rugby content. But you’d always have a good variety regardless of which code you support.
Dan said | November 27th 2009 @ 1:52pm | Report comment
Love to have a combined league and union channel with analysis shows etc but the big risk with these is that it eliminates the passing fan. I still remember happily flicking past the afl channel when i was looking for something to watch.
oikee said | November 27th 2009 @ 3:28pm | Report comment
Probably wont ever happen, because if you tried to do this for a separate channel, what is stopping anyone who likes that code, codes, to just leave the chanell going all day.? To prove apoint, my old man started to watch the cricket the other day, fell asleep and the T/V keep playing with soccer, golf, tennis, even tiddley winks was on, so its not a good idea. Other wise you can just play 1 channel all day and never really know if people are interested. ?
Better off the way we are, selling sports to the highest bidder, and not having de-acated channels. The sports channels probably already realise this problem. Besides, 1 code 24/7 would soon become boring. Dont want to bore us fans.
Col the Bear said | November 29th 2009 @ 9:52am | Report comment
WHAT A DIFFERANCE A WEEK MAKES IN RUGBY LEAGUE.!!! GO THE MIGHTY CENTRAL COAST BEARS…