Sky have announced that next season they will show the obscure Celtic Rabodirect competition in Rugby Union. They already show the Aviva Premiership, Heineken Cup, Amlin Cup, LV Cup, Super Rugby, Autumn internationals, international sevens, National Leagues, and above all the forthcoming Lions tour. Contrast this to their dropping the RL Championship, NRL and any involvement in the RL World Cup. Why should this be? It's an interesting question as Sky are one of the most hard nosed of organisations purely interested in what generates revenue.

To me this signals the loudest possible alarm bells for the future of Rugby League. Anyone connected with raising sponsorship will tell you the millstone round the neck of Rugby League is that it is Northern and Working Class. Any attempts to change that, as Sky did in creating Super League has failed. So instead they now emphasise the down to earth qualities by using people like Mc Dermott and O'Connor to front their presentation. However that has severe limitations in national appeal, as anyone supporting RL in London will tell you. A case in point was the joint venture of Harlequins and London Broncos. Quins are sponsored by Etihad, an international global airline. After a league game I asked a Quins fan who watches Broncos regularly why Etihad didn't also sponsor the then Harlequins RL? He said take a look at the people around you- how many of them are serious users of executive travel? He was right of course, very few.
With the likely reduction in player quality in Super League, defections to NRL, no more big signings from Union, no more top class Australians, what will Sky decide is best for their business? Whilst they need the separate airtime to fill their 4 sports channels then fine. But what if they decide that a merged entity would create more synergy and a super product with greater appeal than the combined effect of 2 separate competitions? If Sky ever reach that conclusion then the future for Rugby League looks bleak, and you will find Leeds and Wigan playing in the Aviva Premiership.

I speak as a RL supporter for 50 years and I have never before felt that our destiny lies in somebody else's hands.

The trouble is, there's no money coming into RL. When a club reaches out and gets itself a decent paying sponsor as Bradford have this year with Provident, then out come the pitchforks and cries of immorality.

There's this belief that SL is some how the best watched sport on Sky after football, however I'm not sure that's still the case. It may have been 10 years ago, but it seems clear that we're not pulling in big viewing numbers as the lack of an recognised sponsor for the league suggests that companies don't feel that our product reaches anywhere near enough people to be worth investing in.

As it stands, Sky have 4 sports channels to fill with programming. SL isn't that expensive a sport to show and provides about 6 hours a week. But really, Sky have us over a barrel. If they turn round and say at the next negotiation "He's 75% of the last deal, take it or leave it." then SL would have to take it.

Sky and ESPN and lost the rights to the Aviva Premiership next season, the games will be shown on the BT sports channel which will have such a small audience, it seems such an idiotic move considering there's a world cup in this country in 2 years time. I do believe BT where trying to get a deal for a new European competition format which again would be shown exclusively on their sports channel. Without the domestic English union league being shown I sky I suggest they would be more inclined to focus their attention on the super league.

ESPN put a competitive bid during the last TV rights negotiations. I don't think things are as bleak as people make out, why would Sky want to lessen the quality of the 2nd most popular team sport they show through reducing their investment?

Sky need the Pro12, it will fill the gap in their schedules left by losing the Aviva Premiership.

Fact is, Sky has nothing else outside T20 cricket to fill its summer evening schedules. Its rugby union coverage is not in direct competition with Super League.

Whilst I appreciate what you are saying, even though the demographic of RL fans is pretty well known, I think you need to look at the situation from Sky's perspective.

They have a sport which provides a level of viewership second only to PL football, for a fraction of the cost. When you consider Sky deem SL worthy of filling the PL Monday Night Football void, I would speculate they are more than happy to continue showing SL and the return on their investment it provides.

In my humble, SKy will continue with SL and be happy to do so.

Thanks for the reply. My question is really - what if they don't want to continue? More likely, they'll stay with certain conditions. What if they don't want too many teams in Yorkshire for example, but want Birmingham, Bristol, another London side for example? Surely this has prompted the restructure of Championship one. I also think they'll set up a special competition pitching say Saracens against Wigan or Leicester against Leeds.

None of us can be sure, I just sense there needs to be major changes to the way the game is presented.

Whether Sky, or some other broadcaster in the future, we need to constantly be aware of the imperative within the sport to seek the highest media profile we can, irrespective of the TV deal, because that's what allows us to negotiate a good deal. We've got to be very careful of those people that think we should ( for example ) reduce the cap to give poorer clubs help, despite the damage this does to our media profile (because of lack of star players). Its all very well saying that Sky will probably keep broadcasting RL - that may be true, they've a lot of airtime to fill - we get netball coverage FFS, but seriously, how much do you think they pay for netball? The danger isn't a total pulling of the plug, just diminished money.

Weekly viewing figures published by BARB show that RL consistently gets higher viewing figures than RU. A few weeks ago for example, 228,000 watched Leeds v Warrington. 159,000 watched the European RU. I think around 35% of viewers are based down south with a fair few in Wales and Scotland too.

I think you are right, in so much it is in Sky's interests to have untapped areas gaining an interest in SL to enable them to increase sales.

Should this come to pass, I would see it as purely a positive as it would provide a variation on the current demographic.

Seems a bit of a win-win, to me.

Simple equation. RL = Summer. RU = Winter. The Pro12 deal would have been for absolute peanuts, the games were on BBC's Welsh and Scottish channels over here previously.

I think your post seems to have come through a wormhole and arrived from 1997.

Sky had an expansionist agenda in 1995 as did the RFL since then expansion clubs with the sole exception of Catalans have been a disaster. RL hasn't proven to be the game that it was hoped to be.

I cannot imagine why Sky would want poorly supported clubs in Birmingham, Bristol etc that moved grounds and changed names every 3-4 years.

The restructuring of CC1 isn't a new thing particularly, the RFL have wanted new blood in the then national leagues since National League three was introduced; we were supposed to have promotion and relegation betwwn NL2 and NL3 afterall. And they have always welcomed new sides whether in Blackpool, Gateshead, London, Wrexham or Bridgend.

There is no market for union vs league clashes because the union clubs would win under union rules and the league clubs would win under league. No third code is going to come into existence without the say so of countries like South Africa, Ireland, Scotland, Italy, Argentina, France, New Zealand, Wales etc and in most of these countries league barely exists. Why would they agree to merged rules?

Sky and the RFL might no longer believe that professional clubs outside the heartlands can simply be wished into existence but seemingly RL fans haven't given up believing in fairy stories.

Take a look at which regions had pro clubs at the birth of SL. Now look at what exists today. The only changes are that France had a struggling side in Paris but now has a strong one in Perpignan; London were a strong side but are now struggling to stay alive and Cumbria & the North East have lost their pro clubs.

It's more of an M62 league than it was back in the day.

What if sky decide RL is the product for them and decide to triple the money they give the game. Will we see the cash strapped RU clubs like the welsh regional sides, falcons and sale demanding to join superleague?

It will be interesting when the new tv deal is done. With them not showing union i personally wonder if they would want more matches on and whether they would happily invest more money for a better and bigger comp.

Does anyone know if the RFL will have sounded out Sky as to what they think about their proposed league changes?

Its the first thing i would do. Point out good viewing figures and opportunity for tighter games etc etc and see what they would want and offer.

I really just hope they show more RL tbh. I hate the facts there is only two matches a week. Increasibg to three or even four should be schedule wise very easy.