Watkins has often been up against Greg Inglis for Australia, one of the biggest and strongest outside backs our sport has ever produced. I shudder to imagine some of the names mentioned against him.

In fact Australia's pure physicality, particularly in the threequarters, is often overlooked. Whoever they pick the backs will be fast and strong. We need backs who at the very least can mix it physcially, which is why the likes of Hall, Watkins and McGillvary have to be there ahead of the likes of Eden (looked a complete wuss playing for the Broncos), even if they are in poorer form at club level.

Indeed. Many said last year's Australian back line was one of the weakest ever, but it was certainly the biggest I've seen. All of them are at least 6'3 and over 100kg. The thought of scrawny kids like Percival, Crooks, or Gildart defending against them is frightening. I've not seen anyone in the academy grades who looks like they could one day provide that physicality at the moment.

The game will apparently be available streamed on line for a fee and not live on the BBC who wanted to screen it which is about dumbest idea I have ever heard.

RL is completely locked in a mindset of squeezing a bit more out of the same people and doing nothing to attract new fans. Few existing fans are going to pay for this game, attendances are being propped up by subsidised away travel, SL is locked behind pay tv.

International RL is the easiest hook for a new fan. Whether they have seen a game or not they already have an affiliation. It should be spread as far and as wide as we can. FTA live broadcasts get us audiences of millions. It is our greatest possible marketing tool.

Ridiculous decision.

I'm sure there will be a free stream somewhere online and because us northerners are quite tight.

The RFL will then not make any money from this folly.

Do the BBC already have the rights to broadcast international friendly matches?
If not, were they willing to pay for the broadcasting rights?

Regardless they should have been given the rights, more international games is how we are going to grow the game. It won't grow the game however if there only seen by a few hundred die hard fans online. Incredibly short sighted decision to try and make a couple of grand out of this.

Not sure I agree. How are you supposed to enter into future negotiations for broadcasting rights etc. and try and paint your sport in the most positive light if you've been giving broadcasting rights away for free in the past?

If the BBC really did want it for free then I can see why the rfl might have said no / asked for a fee.

Complete joke! As if we are turning down free publicity just to squeeze a few £'s out of diehard fans! This game should have been on BBC and streamed live online via the iPlayer.

It would be far easier to go to the BBC and say, "we got C2m people watching the last game, you need to pay for this one" than " we got 5000 people paying a fiver last time, give us money"

There is nothing wrong with investigating streaming as an option but the infrastructure isnt there yet, the market isnt there yet, and the game isnt set up to have all that much to sell. The FA tried it with England v Ukraine in 2009 and it was a disaster.

If the RFL are looking at streaming long term the problems and hurdles are many. They will take on the risk because they will need to outlay the costs of broadcast, they will need to take on responsibility for marketing, nobody is going to stumble upon the game, casuals will be put off, advertising revenue would be less, the value proposition is lower. We are nowhere near ready for that switch (and actually can't do so for another 5 years anyway) which leaves this as nothing more than a short term money grab that will make a relatively miniscule amount and will cost the huge free advertising of a game live on the BBC

Actually getting them to pay for it is an entirely different matter altogether. As has been mentioned, if they were such a vanguard of publicity for RL why don't they have the rights already?

Have the RFL ever offered a rights package to freindly internationals to anyone? outside of the World Cup and 4Nations its never clear who or where England will be playing. Why would the BBC or any broadcaster be willing to commit money to such an erratic, disorganised schedule? In contrast I bet the BBC know in detail when and where England RU will be playing for the next couple of years and can bid for rights packages accordingly.

They do have rights to some internationals, including the world cup at the end of this year and in 2021. They dont have the rights to this game for the same reason sky dont. The game itself wasnt confirmed when they sold the last set of rights.

The daily star is reporting that that the BBC did bid but the RFL rejected it.

As for the RFL handing it over to the BBC for free. That would be a very silly thing to do.

Maybe the BBC bid was really low. Can't see why else the RFL would turn it down

Just received an email about this. £3.49 is the "early bird price", so I'm guessing £5 later on. Can't see many fans paying for this.

So the RFL are set to charge £3.50 for people to stream the England/Samoa with it being free for those who brought Magic weekend tickets. What's everyone's thoughts (i can guess)

My views:-

Obviously the RFL think an SL fan supporting England is more valuable than a championship fan with Summerbash ticket holders being omitted from a free ticket.

Any RL fan considering paying for the stream (and i can't imagine they will be many to start with) will most likely be going to the magic weekend anyway so the amount of people paying will earn the RFL a bus fare.

I can understand them maybe using this fixture to experiment other options than the BBC who probably criminally underpay for RL rights. Them walking away from the BBC rather than just bending over for them might force them into paying more money for the rights. I think i read somewhere they paid £40millon for the 6 nations rights. Knock a couple of zeros of the figure and you'll probably get in the region what they pay for RL. While the 6 nations is bigger than RL, they won't get a million times more viewers than us. I would hope they maybe went to ITV or Channel 4 before using this crazy streaming idea.

It will be fine RL is a massive sport and doesn't need any exposure particularly at International level which is thriving.

Loads will buy it, excellent idea by the RFL.

I have emailed the RFL to make my feelings very clear on this subject! What a way to alienate their already dwindling fan base!

Its decisions like this which validate my position that supporting my club (Cas) will always come before supporting the national team, which it should'nt.

So are people moaning about the price of this? Or just the practice in general?
Anyone moaning at having to pay £3 to watch a game of RL needs to give their head a shake.

One journo is reporting that one of the broadcasters bid less than £10k for the rights to show this game. I can see where the rfl are coming from when broadcasters are taking the p!ss out of our sport with ridiculous offers like that.

Dumb, dumb, dumb. So dumb, it deserves to be boycotted. I spend plenty of my hard-earned on watching rugby league, but I wouldn't pay a penny for this. We can't afford to encourage such idiocy. It won't bring the game to any but the core support, and they will make precious little out of them, and serve them right.

If broadcasters are indeed 'taking the ' then I'm afraid the RFL have only themselves to blame. I have little doubt that they would have made more from a FTA broadcaster than they will from this doomed exercise.


As for giving my head a shake, I spend plenty on watching RL; until recently I was living down south and travelling to Wigan games regularly throughout the season, with hotel bills and travelling costs it wasn't cheap. So I'll take no lectures on being a skinflint, but I wouldn't stream this if it was £1.99; we can't afford to encourage such idiocy.

Of course it's not the price, hardly anyone's d about 3 quid but on top of SKY, TV license, Premier Sports plus broadband and line rental, it's a bit of a kick in the face to have to pay to watch a friendly that are usually broadcast on BBC.

Last week we talked about how paid sports TV packages have no future, this week we don't want RFL stream matches (which people said were the future), but want the rights to be given away for nothing. One thing is certain, no matter what they do, RFL will always do the wrong thing.

If its part of a focused, attempt to look into alternative revenue streams and way of doing things, great. If its one man streaming from his Nokia and the quality of production is bad it'll be a disaster.

A possible alternative would have been to stream the match via Facebook/ Youtube directly FOC.

Just a thought but are the Samoan players in super league going to be released for this game? If not, we won't be facing the best opposition after all.

Encouraged by your example, I have done the same, mate.