Chris Irvine now made redundant as RL correspondent at The Times. Rugby League has a serious PR problem and the RFL are oblivious to it. Perhaps now that Ralph Rimmer will be paid a handsome £250K by the RFU, whoops, sorry RFL, we may see a u-turn?

Shame on The Times.

Like so many others in London this paper ignores anything from the north and that includes Scotland.

The boys at Twickenham must be sing now (little weasles).

Thanks for your efforts Chris.

Can Hector McNeil or the RFL make a strong protest do The Times.

Ideally i'd boycott the Times and the rest of the southern based media but as I no longer buy any of these Tory propaganda sheets, that wouldnt change anything. So instead Ill just continue with my barrage of twitter posts to the varous sports desks. Again that wont change anything but it will make me feel better.

The RFL have got every game for he 2021 World Cup to be shown by the BBC.

For 2013 there were only England and a couple of other games on BBC and 2017 we only had England games on BBC.

Give The Sunday Times' 'Putting the Boot in' article a read from just after the Bradford City fire. I can't believe it was written in my lifetime. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DXoqsnsXkAUST_2.jpg

Give The Sunday Times' 'Putting the Boot in' article a read from just after the Bradford City fire. I can't believe it was written in my lifetime. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DXoqsnsXkAUST_2.jpg

Does anybody actually buy newspapers anymore

Not since the improvements in toilet paper and chip wrappings have made them redundant.

Unfortunately, even if the Beeb did show weekly RL games from all leagues, the nation is so round ball focussed and Union focussed, it would take a lot to get people interested. Most true sports fans subscribe to BT or Sky anyway so if we can't get viewers already.

The only way to truly know though is to abandon Sky, take a massive financial hit, tons of adverising (another financial hit) and show weekly or twice weekly games on the Beeb or another free terrestial channel. This is similar to how the NFL got so many viewers when it came ocer in the late 80s on C4. However, this is a risk SL is not willing to take, and I can't blame them really.

Sky own the rights to show Championship games as well as SL. I guess there's probably more to it, but wouldn't it be in everyone's interests if live Championship games could be on the BBC instead at minimal cost to the broadcaster just to cover expenses and reduced attendances for the home team?

That way there'd be more exposure for the game, which wouldn't be harmful to Sky if a few folk then decide to subscribe because they enjoy watching the Championship games and want to watch some SL as well.

The BBC made most of their Outside Broadcast staff redundant about a decade ago and contract out all major Outside Broadcast events like Wimbledon, FA cup, Challenge Cup and the 6 Nations.

The set-up at an OB usually involves a command truck worth about £4,000,000 and costing £10,000 a day to hire, a team of self employed contracted 6 riggers/runners, 6 cameras (minimum) and another Transport vehicle as well as Camera operators, producers, directors, presenters, commentators normally BBC employees. If the game involves the crew driving from London, then 1 game takes a minimum of 2 days and an overnight stay.
Knowing how much a driver/rigger get's paid, I would estimate the cost of putting on a Live game as between £65,000 and £75,000........so 2 games a week will run the BBC £3,500,000 or so over the season and that's for a pretty basic set up......
...the question needs to be asked if the RFL were to offer to bankroll this themselves for 3 seasons, would the increased exposure help the game and would the increased exposure attract a big name sponsor to cover the costs through naming rights?

IF....and it's a BIG IF.......we were to get 1,000,000 a game, then that would be essentially 69,000,000 sets of eyeballs over 3 years for £10,000,000.......I am a risk averse person by nature, but I reckon the games got more to lose by not trying something like this.....if sky come back with less money and more conditions in a few years time, I'd let them keep SL, but not the rights to the championship......

100% agreed. Though my preference would be for a halfway house - 3 televised games per week, 2 on Sky (or.another subsricption service) 1 on FTA. Sky get 1st pick each week, FTA get 2nd pick, Sky get 3rd pick. Would see a short term reduction in revenue from broadcast deal, but would hopefully have a long term benefit. Super league key well still have to subsidise the footage on FTA, or come up with a clever deal with a production company, maybe for a free 4th pick per week?

The nation isn't Union focussed by any stretch of the imagination. The Times readership and/or editorial staff might be though.

That would be utter madness and most clubs would go broke. Why not instead ask the BBC or any other terrestrial channel to pay the going rate for TV rights.

How about we try and sell super league highlights show to a network that's gonna put it on in a timeslot which will attract viewers instead of the joke times the BBC give the competition

You saying so won't make it any less true......But rather than me falling into the age old trap of rolling out statistics, why don't you respond with proof of how Union isn't a popular sport in England.

League needs to raise its public profile and FTA TV is the best way to do that.

It's inevitable that Rugby League will dwindle IMO. It'll be back to the pre-Super League days over the next ten years. The decline we're seeing now will continue and we'll see a reduced TV deal from now on.

The main problem the sport has is that it's bankrolled by Sky. Sky don't give a damn about anything other than football, hence the incredibly poor presentation they do of Super League. But Sky itself is probably in serious trouble, it's whole business model is being scrutinised and the vultures are circling. The likes of Amazon, Netflix, Facebook and Youtube are going to make a move into broadcasting sports very soon. Once they do, if they price it right, Sky haven't got a chance, they'll lose Premier League football and subscription numbers will plummet. With such a small fan base, Super League would be lucky to get a deal at all.