[quote="dandaman":8glqq0o0]Was it decision day for salford today as to whether they had to sell players?[/quote:8glqq0o0] I’ve lost track. I thought D-Day was a week last Tuesday; then it became Salford were confident of having a takeover deal done last weekend. I think today is important as it’s pay day. I think if the players don’t get paid, then that can become a breach on their contracts and allow players to freely seek other employment. I’m sure others may know the exact consequences on not paying players on time.

[quote="Chris71":24tgsehx]Indeed, but as they say too much of a certain thing makes you go blind.[/quote:24tgsehx] And hey presto Rovers announce they are to be sponsored by Specsavers. Very apt when you consider how many Wan... sorry spectacle wearers there appears to be over there!!!

[quote="The Dentist Wilf":3uymeu2m]And hey presto Rovers announce they are to be sponsored by Specsavers. Very apt when you consider how many Wan... sorry spectacle wearers there appears to be over there!!![/quote:3uymeu2m] A total waste of a sponsorship on Specsavers part. Rovers fans can spot an opposition forward pass from 400 yards away.

I see Derek has been making comments that the game should leave SKY as the TV deal isn't big enough. His view is if the average TV audience all bought SL+ the game would get more money...which could be true but big problem there is SKY are filming and producing the games (and I dread to think what it would be like if the RFL were in charge, probably film on Sharp camcorder from the 90s ) That would be a big gamble for the game, it's not certain that causal viewers would buy the app and the game has a lot of older fans who aren't streamers. Also when SKY don't show a sport it's dead to them, no mentions on Sports News and we'd lose coverage that way.

[quote="UllFC":gnk049pb]I see Derek has been making comments that the game should leave SKY as the TV deal isn't big enough. His view is if the average TV audience all bought SL+ the game would get more money...which could be true but big problem there is SKY are filming and producing the games (and I dread to think what it would be like if the RFL were in charge, probably film on Sharp camcorder from the 90s ) That would be a big gamble for the game, it's not certain that causal viewers would buy the app and the game has a lot of older fans who aren't streamers. Also when SKY don't show a sport it's dead to them, no mentions on Sports News and we'd lose coverage that way.[/quote:gnk049pb] I have no idea what it costs to cover a game live with an outside broadcast but it must be significant for a main game you would think, plus the initial capital outlay. Who would pay for all of that? There must be a fair few people employed full time doing it at SKY

[quote="Rugby Raider":14shnqt2]A total waste of a sponsorship on Specsavers part. Rovers fans can spot an opposition forward pass from 400 yards away.[/quote:14shnqt2] At least we may be able to see you lot right down at the bottom end of the league table now?

[quote="Funk-Doc":2hq7ruhf]At least we may be able to see you lot right down at the bottom end of the league table now?[/quote:2hq7ruhf] You'll need more than Specsavers to be able to see anything in your trophy cabinet.

[quote="Funk-Doc":x2bdjddm]At least we may be able to see you lot right down at the bottom end of the league table now?[/quote:x2bdjddm] do hey have x-ray specs for those in the new golf stand?

[quote="Funk-Doc":2qd0ezyr]At least we may be able to see you lot right down at the bottom end of the league table now?[/quote:2qd0ezyr] You’ll need some really strong lenses to see all the way back to ‘85

do Specsavers do hindsight tests???

[quote="The Dentist Wilf":1lum6m3s]And hey presto Rovers announce they are to be sponsored by Specsavers. Very apt when you consider how many Wan... sorry spectacle wearers there appears to be over there!!![/quote:1lum6m3s]you should have sent tony smith there before last years recruitment