Thats spot on. But look at the bigger picture.

SL gets £90 Million over 5 years
NRL TV Deal - 1 billion Australian dollars = £656 million British pounds over 5 years

Thats a massive difference, and we aint gonna compete for players etc are we?

RL is (in a couple of Aussie states) THE sport
RL is massivly behind football in it's heartlands

Britain is a selection of countries OBSESSED (beacause we are browbeaten with it, by the media) with football.

We're never going to come close to the Aussie's, until we get more media attention, which in turn, will get more people interested in the game, which will generate more money, which will improve us, etc, etc.

Until we get better media coverage, we're piddling in the wind

We all know, ours is the best game in the world, it's just a pity Joe Public isn't [ureally[/u aware of it

Media coverage doesn't have anything to do with it.

We have had wall to wall media coverage of football for decades and what have England achieved in football since 1986? There's far more media coverage in England of football than there is in Germany, Netherlands or France. Those countries follow football but I wouldn't say it was the national obsession like here. But those three have had far better track records in football than us.

I don't buy this argument that in England all the super talented athletes are turned away from rugby and go to football instead. Are guys like Gerrard, Lampard, Terry etc better athletes than say Morley, Graham, Peacock?

Even RU, which has far more media coverage than league, is there any evidence that RU gets the superior athletes?

That is the salient point. This is a GOOD deal.

My point, Sal, was aimed at money received from Sky, in comparison with the Aussie package the NRL receives, rather than success on the field (it was a reply to RP's, earlier)

Good job it was an improved offer now that Sport England has cut Rugby League funding.