No game on Sky on Friday night, I know, let's tune in to some other 3. fook me, What's going on?

Not the middle 8’s again! Who has the guts to go for it? Who has the deeper pocket?

I dont care what the structure is, aslong as they bloody stick to it.

Personally Id have two 11 team leagues, put a group stage in the challenge cup and turn magic weekend into a nines tournament. No doubt though, they will come up with some backwards gamble that will always be destined to fall flat on its face, then change it again.

Simplicity is best, that will have more chance to gain fans we are in a world now people cant be bothered to learn complex stuff.

Just stop with double header semi finals and lower prices, some clubs are cgsrging nearly 30 quid for a ticket and in finals nearly 80 quid for top tier sales. Behave RL have a look at yourself.

3 of the four teams involved known to chicken out of games at short notice.

Viewing figures for super league are in terminal decline due to the product on show being boring. Therefore sky reduced the money they pay.

Then show the other Leagues they hold broadcasting rights to.

How did your day at SKY headquarters go when they let you sit round the table to advise on this new TV deal

Several factors drive this new short term deal, no other potential bids (BT were interested last time) loss of value to SKY during covid, the utter failure of including the Championship and "middle eights" etc. We have had low deals before if you go back over the history of SKY deals with the RFL but I don't suppose you care for the facts.

Union beat us to the punch when they moved a major team to Coventry. We talk a lot about expansion but unless we let the likes of Marwan Koukash freely spend their cash we will not get the investment. Perhaps we should look to real licensing and announce that the best developed plans in ten years will be in the top flight. Let's see if all of these possible investors will put their hands into their pockets. If that means moving away from the traditional heartlands then so be it.

Actually think it's good to not have sky games on sky due to teams playing Fridays

Deffo doesn't help the viewing figures when other games are on at the same time as the sky game and of course vast majority won't watch it as theyve heard the score

Actually think it's good to not have sky games on sky due to teams playing Fridays

Deffo doesn't help the viewing figures when other games are on at the same time as the sky game and of course vast majority won't watch it as theyve heard the score

Just have 1 game playing on Thursday, then one on Friday. Cats are usually on Saturday,and the rest just play on Sunday

Not sure what you mean there.

Usually you have 2 or 3 super games on a Friday along with the sky game

If us Wigan or Leeds on the same night that's 30,000 at a game instead of figures on sky

Play Saturday night and Sunday 6.35 like they used to

I don't know if you're making this up or just have bad information but you're completely wrong. Super League viewing figures are up for the 3rd straight year and are at a 7 year high. I work for a media company and have access to all BARB viewing data before you question my source.

Sky paid less because they could, simple as that.

I know that's a logical assumption but it just doesn't work like that, viewing figures are largely unaffected when games are played at the same time.

Even if 30k were at home and not at a game, less than half will have Sky and not all of those would choose to watch so in practical terms you'd be lucky if there were 5-10k extra viewers.

In reality, viewing figures are measured by BARB boxes which are connected to TV's across the country, there are 5,000 of these boxes collecting a random sample, audiences for these boxes are then multiplied up to estimate the total audience across the country. Statistically its unlikely any of those attending games that would be watching on Sky otherwise actually have a box and would show up on the viewing figures at all.

The main influence on viewing figures are what channel the game is shown on, Sky Sports Main Event adds 20-50k viewers and what else is on TV at the time.

I just despair at the constant chopping and changing, rebranding and spreading glitter on. 90% of the ideas that the powers that be come up with alienates a big proportion of the existing fans base. Growing something shouldn't mean losing the existing.
You only have to look at other sports to understand how hard it will be to get grass roots thriving, huge sports like the NFL have never broken through outside there homeland. Yes people will watch it on the tv but they'll watch the US teams not the diluted uk version, baseball is another even go as far a Basketball which although it has a big following just hasnt caught on at uk club level. All these sports get huge media coverage with household names playing but yet very little participation, home crowds or TV coverage. What chance has RL have of spreading abroad if these behemoths cant manage it.
The only way to grow RL is to get the home product better and grow crowds steadily from within, dont scrap clubs, try mergers or set up a league akin to scottish football. The cap needs looking at but not to return to the days of Lindsays Wigan.

As someone said above sky funding reduced but that wasnt just RL, it was across the board and they did it because they could, they know leaving sky would be the deathknell of professional RL and as such they can name the price.