I doubt it, because the NRL is all about the money now. Its changing many things including how volunteers have to run clubs and its all about marketing and getting the maximum $s from everyone. The NRL has basically drawn a line in the sand and said, MR everyday fan, we do not care 1 little iota about you.
The amount of people refusing to have foxtel out of principle (based on superleague & media bias) would be tiny. But thanks for your post attempting to show yourself as a noble person, as if anyone cares.
In the good old days which many people here like to hark back on you got 2 games a week max on television. Remember the 90s when 9 gave us a 44 minute highlight package of their Sunday game? I'd prefer a live Sunday game. I'm sick of the broncos on Friday every night (in the NT it is always the first game) but compared to coverage 20 years ago let alone 25 years ago it's not that bad for a $1 billion + But then again everyone wants perfection.
And of those two games a week we got the top teams dominated airing - Canberra, Brisbane in the early nineties, Manly and Newcastle in mid to late nineties. Not to mention Parra, Canterbury and f**king Manly in the eighties.
All year my youngest child has been bugging me to take her to a Roosters game. But as she's 8 years old, taking her to a game that starts at 7.00pm on a Monday or 7.30pm on a Thursday, Friday or Saturday night isn't an option. If I did that I wouldn't get home until after 10.30pm So on Sunday I took her to Manly because that was about the only option I had before the season would end. Unfortunately, every other family had the same idea and the ground was so packed we couldn't get a decent view for someone of her size (the family hill was full and like a mud bath) Of the 8 games in any round - 5 of them are played at times that are unfriendly for many families. Of the games that ARE family friendly two of them are usually between the lowest ranked teams in the competition or are reserved for teams where the weather is a major factor if played at night. That means the Warriors and Canberra are more likely to be scheduled during the day. If your team is one of the cellar dwellars and you're getting pumped every week - what incentive is there for a kid to want to go anyway? I can see it now.... "Oh dad, can you take me to see your pathetic team get their arses handed to them again? I love watching you scream at referees and cry when they lose you pathetic old has been twat" This means ONE game a week is played at a family friendly times between teams that would actually get youngsters excited at the action The rest are all played at night, when the ball is slippy, the stadiums are freezing and kids should be going to sleep. It's a f**king travesty We should have a Saturday afternoon game and TWO Sunday games of IMPORTANCE. Espcially during the middle of winter. f**k off the useless Monday night fixture - it's absolute garbage At the start and finish of the season when it's warmer / dryer - sure have more night games. Thats when the huge blockbuster action is on anyway that keeps the sponsors happy. But mid season we need to schedule more earlier Saturday and Sunday games. It makes for better games and more access for families.
My theory is that Voss only became that bad because of the toxic environment he was working in. Just look how well he's reacted to being with a broadcaster that cares about the game, and treats it in an intelligent AND fun way. Fox still has a sense of fun about their shows - and there's room for shenanagans especially in the Monday Night show, but the entertainment part never overwhelms the rest of the coverage. Nine just don't have the balance right.
Just settle for a moderate 1.3-1.4 billion next deal (given an extra game every week with expansion). but take all the power back from nine. i'd say, try to get as much simulcast on FTA and Fox. maybe create a Fox League channel. 2x 7:30pm FNF 3pm, 5pm, 7pm Saturday 2-3x 3pm, 5pm Sunday. If money is needed then split the friday night into a thursday and 1 friday game. Thursdays better than mondays as long as they start around 7:30ish not 7:50pm.
I did once. Then we voted in a lunatic who doesn't understand the internet and made shit changes to a fine plan. Just like every other time I've tried it praying did jack shit.
Commentators in the EPL pretty much always comment on diving when it occurs in a match and say things to the effect of its ruining the game, they don't like to see it, etc. Just one example.
Bringing in a Perth team you have some flexibility, especially if you alternate home game coverage between Perth and Auckland. Means you can have every Sunday, for example, either warriors on at 12est and alternate week Perth on at 6pm est
An they never harp on about how "boring" the game is. Gould doesn't realise his influence, shit 90% of LU swallows his bullshit wholesale, and treats his words as gospel. This negative stuff then starts to influence the way people watch things and media covers the event. f**king Rugby Union has some of the most boring games of all time, yet they NEVER talk it down.
They talked down the match between Australia & New Zealand just recently in Sydney but said the weather didn't allow for an expansive game and that it would be played through the middle. They didn't harp on it for long though, just stated it and then got on with it. Union is a slower game however and open contests and free flowing isn't always the case. League has changed dramatically in the last few years and a lot of the older heads don't like where it's headed. Diving needs to be called out for what it is and hefty suspensions need to be handed down along with astronomical fines. It's absolutely disgusting and the lowest of the low. People laugh at soccer and it's theatricality but some of the dives in recent time in NRL are almost as bad. Guys who are dying until the penalty is blown and then miraculously are first in line to take the quick tap. It's not gamesmanship. It's pathetic.
I think he does, when he decides to labour a point he is no better than rothfield, hes just more subtle about the agenda behind it.
Most other sports that I know have appear to have a good relationship with TV. so what's wrong with the deal NRL and TV has?
Yes his conflict of interest is clear. I don't suppose a game with no wrestle, very quick play the balls etc would benefit the panthers considerably would it? Not that I don't agree the tackling needs some major sorting out.
I think he just doesnt realise how much the alternative to the wrestle would ruin games.... - Fast play-the-balls means more dummy-half running. - Slow play the balls forces lateral play/means off-loads are worth more. I honestly dont think he has the big agenda, i reckon he's just a nostalgic old man longing for "the good ol' days"....
That stuff should be complained about though, its negative and not in keeping with the game. Its when Gould whinges that "all teams have the same plays" and "How boring is this game etc." That's the stuff that shits me. Where he openly talks down the code, I've never heard any commentator in the world do that. When Hayne or Inglis is in full flight it's not "boring", the Cowboys V Cronulla game was very entertaining for a neutral etc. This stuff is rarely praised.
