If they opened up the rights to broadcast a live sunday afternoon fixture, something Sky wouldn't be interested in as it clashed with there beloved Football

That would offer the BBC or even ITV to broadcast RL to the nation, opening up access to our sport to more people..... Like has been said RL is a selling point for sky so for those that don't have it having the Beeb or ITV broadcast games allows others access to it.

I think the rights for the international game should be bundled so that major competitions drag lower profile competitions onto TV.


It worked for the World Cup.


As for the British game itself, what are you looking to split? You have SL and thats all TV stations would be remotly interested in.

Two flaws. One - cost of producing live sport is a lot more than sticking on a family film for the millionth time. Two - is it really worth showing a live game at the same time most Championship(1) games are being played?

Thirdly, it [istill [/iassumes that terrestrial broadcasters are interested in live SL. ShITV certainly aren't and I don't see any evidence why the Beeb will be either.

Sky aren't interested in showing a match on a Sunday afternoon but they are interested in (and willing to pay for) no-one else showing a match on a Sunday afternoon.



Having someone else broadcast games makes it less of a selling point for Sky. Paying 20/30 quid a month for two additional games a week is less enticing than 20/30 quid a month to watch games at all.

Firstly, my idea does not involve offering Sky less. They can have exactly the same as they have now.

What it does involve is offering a small number of games to a terrestrial broadcaster alongside this.

The BBC already have the infrastructure to cover RL, and I think they could be tempted to cover a SMALL number of games. After all, considering what tb has said, they've never before shown an interested in showing live Football League games, but they are now in small doses.

You never know; Sky might like the idea of the SL getting some more attention on terrerstrial TV, thus winning the game some more fans and them some more viewers.

Everyone said that removing Sky's monopoly over Football fixtures would result in a smaller TV deal. It didn't, and I personally feel that all Sky's monopoly serves to achieve is for them to get the game at the price they want.

Because, realistically, no-one else is interested in showing that many games.

Err – yes it does. At the moment they buy exclusive broadcast rights for live SL in the UK. Your idea offers them less (ie non exclusive rights to a fixed number of games). Do you really think they wouldn't offer less money in return?

edit:


Precisely.

Ten or so SL games over the course of a season is not a game every week. It's a perfect amount to entice a terrestrial broadcaster, showcase the competition to new viewers, whilst also keeping Sky in a virtual monopoloy.

Well all the evidence suggests that having more competition over packages will in fact drive up the price.

All you have to do is cleverly identify possible bidders and tailor the packages towards them.

A small token package of Sunday matches reserved for a terrestrial broadcaster, a medium sized Saturday one for ESPN to bid with Sky for, and the meaty Friday night 'marquee fixture' one for Sky.

In all likelihood, Sky would end up with two, the BBC with the small one, and the RFL with more money, and the game with more exposure.

It does.



If you're talking about infrastructure in terms of OB units, then probably. But they cost a considerable amount to actually mobilise. You also forget that BBC Sport run on very different restrictions to other broadcasters.

Aside from budget constraints, the BBC (and to a lesser extent, C4) has a public service remit. Any sports rights that it splashes out for has to be justified. It can do it for F1 and Football League - those competitions have national and even international reach. Does the same apply for SL? Given that the Super League Show is only shown regionally and that it's usually impossible to listen to Super League on Radio 5 Live MW, I think it's safe to say that the Beeb obviously don't think so.



They won't like it. I can guarantee you that. Having the challenge cup on the BBC doesn't encourage any noteworthy take-up of Sky so the chances of Sky giving up their exclusivity for similar negligible benefit are zero.



That's because live Premier League rights are a desirable commodity. RL, by and large, isn't. When other sports have tried to go the same way that you're proposing (see the SFA/SPL, Guinness Premiership, Euro Tour Golf), it's ended in tears.

Thats exactly why this is a non-starter. Sky wouldn't offer anyhwere near the amount they do if they lost this.

Only for Premier League football?

As long as FTA are offering at least what Sky drop by then we are still streets ahead. Getting SL on to FTA will provide a massive boost to viewing figures and increase sponsorship to clubs and the RFL.

I beg to differ.

Exclusive rights to show the Super League is not a desirable commodity, except for Sky.

However, the recent developments re Championship football show that the BBC are more willing to invest in league sports when they are not committed to screening 40 odd games a season.

I genuinely think that SL rights would be desirable in cleverly devised packages. Maybe forget the middle package, and just devise a terrestrial package. As I say, such a package could include 1 international, 10 Sunday SL games, and the Challenge Cup.

Having ten games a season on the BBC would not stip die-hards subscribing to Sky, it would not stop people who subscribe for football/cricket but who also watch SL from watching, and it would not stop pubs from seeing weekly friday night rugby as a worhtwhile investment.

Terrestrial coverage would bring in new interest, new sponsors, and would generally help develop a sport which Sky would continue to dominate.

You've again ignored the key point though.

The BBC currently has access to Super League content which, for whatever reason, it doesn't believe has national appeal. Therefore it makes it difficult for the BBC Director of Sport to ask the Director General for £xm to screen what the corporation considers to be a regional sport, given the terms and conditions of its public service charter.

Football League has national appeal. F1 has international appeal - the BBC can easily cover those sports as part of its public service charter. The same cannot be said for RL.

Maybe, but the BBC also screen the Challenge Cup nationally.

The RFL could easily ensure that the package should include at least one Quins home game, one Celtic home game etc, and I think the BBC would treat live sports better than they do a highlights show.

At the end of the day, there is no way of knowing for sure how receptive the BBC would be to the idea of screening a small number of SL games on a Sunday afternoon.

But, one thing is for sure, the way SL rights are currently sold effectively prohibits terrestrial television from screening live SL, which is a shame.

The Challenge Cup final is a protected event and so legally, it has to be shown nationally. The Beeb shows the competition from round four nationally but I suspect that's more to build up to the final.



It's all ifs / buts / maybes. The reality is that if the BBC were that bothered to show Super League nationally, those down south wouldn't be watching Country File instead of the Super League Show.



I'd say that the current levels of coverage on TV and on Radio Five are a good indicator.



The way they are sold now is geared towards what is mutually best for all involved. Ie, the best value package in terms of finance and coverage for the RFL, along with what suits Sky. There is nothing to stop any other broadcaster from coming in with a comparable, or better, offer. It's just that to date, nobody has done.

Because nobody else wants to show two live games every week, which is pretty much the minimum if you want to storm in and win exclusive rights.

The way the rights are packaged and sold stops anyone else being interested.

And they've got the rights to the whole comp … how many games do they actually choose to broadcast?

The fact they don't choose to broadcast lower league clubs playing to 500 people doesn't mean they wouldn't broadcast Wigan V Hull in a Super League tie.

The main reason this is unworkable comes down to Sky's exclusivity. They aren't going to give anything away, especially not for the same place. There would be plenty of households that maybe struggle to afford Sky every week but keep it for the rugby league. If you gave them the option of 10 games a year for free then they might choose that instead. Therefore Sky have lost money.

It seems to me that Sky give us an offer take it or leave it, non-negotiable. Don't forget the one time we did try to negotiate over the issue of internationals then they came back with a reduced offer.

Declaration mentioned that they aren't a charity and they aren't. They pay the minimum they can to keep the sport at the level that it is at safe in the knowledge that nobody will bid anything like they do and that we need them to survive. They have us by the balls and they will take everything they can, it makes perfect sense for them.

If this new package resulted in one person cancelling their sports package then Sky have lost out. So they simply won't allow it to happen.

The idea in principle is a good one, but as has already been mentioned, is unworkable due to Sky and how much money they would offer for non-exclusivity.

Why not try this with the other competitions we have though?

Challenge Cup for instance. Sky are now showing NL/Championship games. Could they not show a lower-level Challenge Cup game also? Split the rights up so that BBC get the first two choices, and Sky (if they want them) the third choice? Better publicity would result (as Sky might actually acknowledge the Cup more if they're showing it!). Possibly even a third-round game.

BBC don't have us by the balls, so it's less of a gamble doing this with them.

I've just checked the veiwing figures for sky for the last month and the numbers are dropping like mad,the lions tour was pulling in 500k compared to our 36k national league to a high of 170k for a super league game....some games didn't reach 100k for a super league game....now thats a very big worry

As most of you expansionist believe we will get more veiwers with these far flung teams...seems people are voting with there remotes

500k isn't good for the Lions.

Hmmmm international touring team which only plays every 4 years against a club matches on 28 weeks a year (plus playoffs).....I wonder!