What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Rugby League and TV

madunit

Super Moderator
Staff member
Messages
62,358
Moving on, Can we keep this to the World 9's tournament please and keep the pissy attacks out of this forum.

If you want to do that, we have a fight club.
 

titoelcolombiano

First Grade
Messages
5,276
Your question was I'll directed and facetious in intent! That's a fact!

The question was serious. Were you part of the negotiations? If not, how can you presume to know what the discussions with FTA TV stations contained? They might have told us to p!ss off and that they weren't interested. What then? Do you ignore Fox's money?

If you were running the game tickets would be $5 - $10 each and TV rights would be given away for free to FTA networks and then guess what? You will definately never compete with AFL or Union because there will be no revenue in the game.
 

Stallion

First Grade
Messages
7,467
The question was serious. Were you part of the negotiations? If not, how can you presume to know what the discussions with FTA TV stations contained? They might have told us to p!ss off and that they weren't interested. What then? Do you ignore Fox's money?

If you were running the game tickets would be $5 - $10 each and TV rights would be given away for free to FTA networks and then guess what? You will definately never compete with AFL or Union because there will be no revenue in the game.

Your question is still facetious and not credible. You allude to a low pricing policy which may or may not work. So taking a cheap shot at someone else is your core intent! Get real if you want to participate in constructive discourse. Otherwise you are just out to ridicule. Do I reply and ask whether you were in the negotiations as well? No, as I know this is a scurilous and a demeaning approach. Something you like doing on this site. Not my go mate! When pushed or slighted I do respond but am avoiding to do so. Wasting time and energy isn't wise. Genuine discourse yes. Fanciful comments and leading questions after a desired response: No! BTW; Are you apologizing to the people you have labeled as not being real persons yet? I know I haven't seen an apology. Nor has someone like Tri_Colours. To think you created a thread with such insidious and misdirected intent reflects a very poor character. (Just saying as it may go through to the keeper like many other things,,,,,,)
 
Last edited:

titoelcolombiano

First Grade
Messages
5,276
Your question is still facetious and not credible. You allude to a low pricing policy which may or may not work. So taking a cheap at someone else is your core intent! Get real if you want to participate in constructive discourse. Otherwise you are just out to ridicule. Do I reply and ask whether you were in the negotiations as well? No as I know this is a scurilous and a demeaning approach. Something you like doing on this site. Not my go mate! When pushed or slighted I do respond but am avoiding to do so. Wasting time and energy isn't wise. Genuine discourse yes. Fanciful comments and leading questions after a desired response: No! BTW; Are you apologizing to the people you have labeled as not being real persons yet? I know I haven't seen an apology. Nor has someone like Tri_Colours. To think you created a thread with such insidious and misdirected intent reflects a very poor character. (Just saying as it may go through to the keeper like many other things,,,,,,)

So were you in the negotiations or not? You seem to assume you know what went on.

I'll answer your question. No, I wasn't but I'm not the one claiming to know what went on in them.
 

Stallion

First Grade
Messages
7,467
So were you in the negotiations or not? You seem to assume you know what went on.

I'll answer your question. No, I wasn't but I'm not the one claiming to know what went on in them.

Oh dear. I didn't claim that at all! ! You guys are really bad ! Aren't you!? I have always suggested that the efforts or intent of the rugby league administrators look questionable as the end results are not progressive for a code that clearly deserves more and is not achieving it. A fair comment! No more .No less!
 

Pommy

Coach
Messages
14,657
Oh dear. I didn't claim that at all! ! You guys are really bad ! Aren't you!? I have always suggested that the efforts or intent of the rugby league administrators look questionable as the end results are not progressive for a code that clearly deserves more and is not achieving it. A fair comment! No more .No less!

Perhaps it’s because you won’t even acknowledge the possibility that they did their best and this is the best outcome they could achieve.
It is also possible that they didn’t, they certainly wouldn’t be the first league admins that were crap at their job. But the story that no FTA station even bid seems to be a pretty telling one.

This isn’t a dig at you or a rant I’m just trying to explain why people get frustrated with your stance.
 

Stallion

First Grade
Messages
7,467
Perhaps it’s because you won’t even acknowledge the possibility that they did their best and this is the best outcome they could achieve.
It is also possible that they didn’t, they certainly wouldn’t be the first league admins that were crap at their job. But the story that no FTA station even bid seems to be a pretty telling one.

This isn’t a dig at you or a rant I’m just trying to explain why people get frustrated with your stance.

Just calling a spade a spade! It's these sort of things that are going through to the keeper and then we get guys wondering why rugby-league is not progressing as it should. A great sports product going nowhere fast!
 

titoelcolombiano

First Grade
Messages
5,276
Oh dear. I didn't claim that at all! ! You guys are really bad ! Aren't you!? I have always suggested that the efforts or intent of the rugby league administrators look questionable as the end results are not progressive for a code that clearly deserves more and is not achieving it. A fair comment! No more .No less!

FTA weren't interested and didn't but you were adamant that we should have negotiated something with them even though they weren't interested. That is why I asked you if you were involved in the negotiations.... a question that you still haven't answered BTW
 

Pommy

Coach
Messages
14,657
Just calling a spade a spade! It's these sort of things that are going through to the keeper and then we get guys wondering why rugby-league is not progressing as it should. A great sports product going nowhere fast!

But you’re not calling a spade a spade as you don’t know all the facts.
You’re adding 1+1 to give the answer that fits your narrative rather than 2.
 

Stallion

First Grade
Messages
7,467
But you’re not calling a spade a spade as you don’t know all the facts.
You’re adding 1+1 to give the answer that fits your narrative rather than 2.

My concern is that rugby league administration is not up scratch as you have alluded to! That's my point. To have such poor coverage in a deemed rugby league heartland region is not a good outcome. No sitting on the fence here Pommy!
 
Last edited:

Pommy

Coach
Messages
14,657
My concern is that rugby league administration is not up scratch as you have alluded to! That's my ppint. To have such poor coverage in a deemed rugby league heartland region is not a good outcome. No sitting on the fence here Pommy!

As an opinion that’s fine but to insist that their could have been another outcome is beyond what any of us actually know.
It’s worth noting that the RLIF need these events to earn money to invest in developing nations, so as much as I can see why you want it on FTA that might not be the best outcome for the sport at large.
 

Stallion

First Grade
Messages
7,467
As an opinion that’s fine but to insist that their could have been another outcome is beyond what any of us actually know.
It’s worth noting that the RLIF need these events to earn money to invest in developing nations, so as much as I can see why you want it on FTA that might not be the best outcome for the sport at large.

Beg to differ. Could have been a win/win scenario with both funding for international development and a much needed international relevance for rugby league enjoyed by a wider audience. Aussie kids particular would have been encouraged by the International flavour and presence of such a tournament. With just Pay TV just 30% if that will get the opportunity to view such a tournament. A very poor outcome for rugby league!
 
Last edited:

Pommy

Coach
Messages
14,657
Beg to differ. Could have been a wun/win scenario with both funding for international development and a much needed international relevance for rugby league enjoyed by a wider audience. Aussie kids particular would have been encouraged by the International flavour and presence of such a tournament. With just Pay TV just 30% if that will get the opportunity to view such a tournament. A very poor outcome for rugby league!

It’s not a win win if the tournament makes less money though.
Fox might not have had any interest in a split broadcast or simultaneous broadcast. They need reasons for people to keep subscribing, it being on FTA reduces the events value to them dramatically.
 

Stallion

First Grade
Messages
7,467
It’s not a win win if the tournament makes less money though.
Fox might not have had any interest in a split broadcast or simultaneous broadcast. They need reasons for people to keep subscribing, it being on FTA reduces the events value to them dramatically.

Understand these considerations. My stance hasn't changed. An international tournament on Australian shores of a deemed heartland rugby league playing nation. If that does not warrant FTA TV coverage not much will. Simulcast or not!
 

Pommy

Coach
Messages
14,657
Understand these considerations. My stance hasn't changed. An international tournament on Australian shores of a deemed heartland rugby league playing nation. If that does not warrant FTA TV coverage not much will. Simulcast or not!

But it’s got nothing to do with Australia. If Australia needs this on FTA we may as well f**king give up.
 

Stallion

First Grade
Messages
7,467
But it’s got nothing to do with Australia. If Australia needs this on FTA we may as well f**king give up.

For international relevance and an advantage on other rival codes in Australia and elsewhere. Yes it's a big bonus to have rugbyleague seen as internationally 'alive'. It helps spread the word so to speak. And God knows there are enough barriers about inhibiting the growth of the international game as it is! But NO! Let's just siphon off this 'showpiece international event" to a 30% audience instead! If international exposure and relevance is what rugby-league is aiming to achieve than this is not happening with such limited exposure through pay tv alone. That's the way some of us see this and it's a fair call.
 

Pommy

Coach
Messages
14,657
For international relevance and an advantage on other rival codes in Australia and elsewhere. Yes it's a big bonus to have rugbyleague seen as internationally 'alive'. It helps spread the word so to speak. And God knows there are enough barriers about inhibiting the growth of the international game as it is!

Having a cash strapped governing body is pretty high on the list of barriers I would imagine.
Not having 9a on FTA in Australia would be pretty low.
 
Top