Broadcast options for Australian Rugby

[Braveheart81]

The simplest change to scrums that would improve things would be to stop the clock as soon as the first scrum is unsuccessful and only start the clock again once a successful scrum has been completed and the ball is back in play.

I think fans would get a lot less frustrated by scrum resets if they didn't see 2+ minutes disappear from the clock over the course of two or three scrum resets.

@Lindommer - I agree with your sentiment about scrums being about restarting play quickly, safely and fairly. I think this is the key reason why knock on advantage should be very short. A team really only needs to have clean possession of the ball to have gained their advantage from the other side knocking on.

 

[Lindommer]

Agree, Bh. As a former ref I reckon one clean pass from a breakdown's enough advantage from an infringement which would've led to a scrum. Advantages from infringements which could've led to a penalty, however, are a bit different. The laws say "Advantage can be either territorial or tactical.", Law 8.1 (b), it's gotta be clear and meaningful in my book not to whistle a penalty. I must say I don't like the Saffer approach of very long advantage in the red zone, there are far too many instances when time's wasted as the ref goes back for the penalty. Surely, in their ref training sessions someone's brought up the many, many times when advantage was pointlessly played in these instances.

The suggestion the clock stop for scrum resets is a tricky one, on one level I'm all for no time wasted once play starts (what about stopping the clock for shots at goal?), I'd prefer referees and players solve this problem of endless scrum resets.

 

[Hawko]

Foxtel figures for the weekend:
RL charity Shield: 151k
Tahs vs. Force: 122k
Brums vs. Reds 108k
Melbourne victory vs Adelaide: 70k
Sydney FC vs. Newcastle 62k
Wanderers vs Perth: 62k

The media beat up about the A-League going great guns was just a beat up. Rugby has to get a better broadcast deal next time round.

Those numbers are VERY interesting. Saturday night should rate better than Sunday afternoon. Top two teams last year in the Australian franchise should rate better than 3rd vs 5th, yet the Tahs/Force game outrated the Reds/Brumbies. Not sure what to make of that.

To get numbers that close to the League charity shield numbers is a major step forward for us. We're not that unpopular.

P Tah I don't think that's the only figure to look at. When we get a week where Aus teams are facing overseas teams both there and here we may not fare so well.

I would think that most people on the eastern seaboard would think the Tahs game was almost against an overseas team. Western Australia regards their connection to the rest of Australia as something of an historical anomaly.

 

[TOCC]

TOCC, Wamberal's mentioned his past work history with "a very successful sporting organisation" many times previously, maybe you've just missed it. I'll stick up for him on this point.

Rolling mauls? How 'bout the letter of the law be insisted on? Law 17 states "A maul occurs when a player carrying the ball is held by one or more opponents, and one or more of the ball-carrier's team-mates bind on the ball-carrier.". This modern notion of holding the ball at the back of rolling mauls (or Saffer conga lines) away from the ball-carrier's opponents doesn't conform to the Laws of Rugby. IF the letter of the law was adjudicated properly by referees there'd be proper competition for the ball, as there is in any other breakdown.

While I'm on the laws, what about Law 20? In definitions it states "The purpose of the scrum is to restart play quickly, safely and fairly,." Sorta makes one think about endless mincing of a weaker scrum by a stronger opponent, keeping the ball at the number 8's feet isn't restarting play quickly in my book.

Here is the thing, we need to be conscious of what impact mauls currently have on the ground because removing the treat of a maul has some side-effects which could hinder other areas of the game.

Lineout's currently provide a fantastic set-piece platform, quite a number of tries were scored from line outs over the weekend... The reasons line outs provide such a good set-piece platform is because a large number of the forwards are committed to the line out, the reason for committing so many forwards to the line out is to counter the rolling maul threat.

Imagine we remove the rolling maul threat, a team kicks for touch and gets a line-out 5m from the opposition try line. If there wasn't the threat of the rolling maul the defending team is going to commit minimal numbers in the line out and the rest will be spread throughout the back line plugging up defensive holes.

For me i don't see what the issue with rolling mauls is when say compared to scrums, i think one of the loudest cheers I've heard at Suncorp Stadium was in support of the Reds when they were going with a rolling maul 5m from the opposition try line.

Scrums and the negative tactics used are definitely an issue, rule interpretation at rucks is another issue for me.. But i think the way that the mauls are currently been refereed is fine..

 

[Badger]

As discussed in Podcast 136, hope this gets off the ground.....

SYDNEY club rugby presidents are currently weighing up a proposal to play one Shute Shield game per round on Sunday, which will be screened live on clubrugbytv.com.au.

The man behind CRTV, John Murray, has drawn up an alternate fixture list that will see two clubs play on a Sunday arvo. A free webcast of the game — funded by sponsors — would then be streamed live on Murray’s site. In the past, CRTV showed a Saturday game but on delay.

Murray’s idea is believed to already have the support of the ARU, NSWRU, SRU, the ABC and the majority of clubs. And, for what it’s worth, this column as well. The more club rugby exposure the better, and you suspect Sunday afternoon games would be a hit for crowds as well.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/p...rss&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

 

[Badger]

The AFL CEO, Andrew Demetriou, was interviewed on AFR Sunday this morning and said the AFL was investigating the feasibility of offering a digital component to AFL memberships where you could get access to all the games of your team.

Also mentioned they were ready to set up their own channel and provide a digital option now. But it would all depend on the next broadcast agreement.

With such forward/innovative thinking, I can see why they are arguably the number 1 football code in Aus.

Awaiting (in vain?) for something similar for rugby.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

The AFL CEO, Andrew Demetriou, was interviewed on AFR Sunday this morning and said the AFL was investigating the feasibility of offering a digital component to AFL memberships where you could get access to all the games of your team.

Also mentioned they were ready to set up their own channel and provide a digital option now. But it would all depend on the next broadcast agreement.

With such forward/innovative thinking, I can see why they are arguably the number 1 football code in Aus.

Awaiting (in vain?) for something similar for rugby.

Well, with the re-tuning of the FTA digital platform there is the possibility of doing this on a subscription basis which will in all likelihood be the intention of the AFL. This would be the means to financial independence from the traditional pay masters for an organisation such as the AFL. A potentially lucrative one at that. Imagine them launching this channel charging say $20 a month. They'd easily secure 1 million subscribers. Probably twice that. All of a sudden their current TV deal looks like chump change.

We could do it. By we I mean SANZAR and it could secure the alliances future. It would allow us to effectively set up Super Rugby as a HEC comp with focus on our domestic competitions. There's plenty of content and we do have a market both here and internationally for it.

 

[qwerty51]

Super Rugby being such a global sport (especially in the future with Argentina/Japan joining) should go the way of the NFL/NBA/MLB and sell their product directly themselves through a 'gamepass' model.

Super Rugby itself isn't enough content but would include all SANZAR Tests being the TRC and possibly the June home internationals. Super Rugby 7s is also a must to compete with the NRL 9s.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Super Rugby being such a global sport (especially in the future with Argentina/Japan joining) should go the way of the NFL/NBA/MLB and sell their product directly themselves through a 'gamepass' model.

Super Rugby itself isn't enough content but would include all SANZAR Tests being the TRC and possibly the June home internationals. Super Rugby 7s is also a must to compete with the NRL 9s.

Add to that the Currie Cup, ITM Cup and NRC. Could also look at things like the Top League, Pacific Nations Cup etc. There's a world of content available.

 

[qwerty51]

Yeah but SANZAR don't own those competitions but I'm sure they could work something out with each nation's governing body.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Yeah but SANZAR don't own those competitions but I'm sure they could work something out with each nation's governing body.

SANZAR doesn't own them but as SANZAR is the alliance of the three unions that do or will own those properties a platform that they could sell independent of traditional broadcasters to potentially a far greater audience would be beneficial to each of them.

It would also make the transition and integration of the likes of Argentina into the competitive structures easier. They could look to broadcast the Compenato Argentino which in turn exposes Chile, Ururguay and Brazil to new audiences and revuenue streams.

It actually could be a platform that could drive a few rising nations into the top tier while allowing the three Southern powers to generate their own income independently and profitably into the future.

 

[Badger]

^ Should be looked at on a global level by the IRB. They could set one channel or a range of channels with the various national unions getting a cut of revenue generated from their respective competitions.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

^ Should be looked at on a global level by the IRB. They could set one channel or a range of channels with the various national unions getting a cut of revenue generated from their respective competitions.

As long as it's established from a strictly commercial stand point in terms of generating revenue and a strict agreement in regards to the distribution of that income.

It would be interesting. A global network running 24 hours a day broadcasting content from all corners of the globe. I think it should certainly be investigated. It could certainly potentially generate a great deal more than the current revenue streams for development works as well as possibly finally open up new territories through the establishment of professional competitions that would have the security of knowing that during their key establishment phases they will still have the necessary funding needed to remain operational.

Hell, if done right there may not need to be any need for a subscription basis. Could generate enough advertising revenue by itself to make it worthwhile.

 

[boyo]

Well, with the re-tuning of the FTA digital platform there is the possibility of doing this on a subscription basis which will in all likelihood be the intention of the AFL. This would be the means to financial independence from the traditional pay masters for an organisation such as the AFL. A potentially lucrative one at that. Imagine them launching this channel charging say $20 a month. They'd easily secure 1 million subscribers. Probably twice that. All of a sudden their current TV deal looks like chump change.

Aiui the FTA retune is to allow for a restack of channels, e.g. SBS moving to the channel that used for analogue 7.
This allows the government to sell off the vacated spectrum (for 4G, mobile 'phones, etc.).

 

[Crashy]

Tahs reds game attracted 150k viewers. Highlanders chiefs a solid 93k.
As a comparison, test match at the same time was 275k and soccer ( syd FC vs Central Coast - 67).

 

[qwerty51]

So the media's assertion that rugby is now 4th behind soccer was absolute bullshit..

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

So the media's assertion that rugby is now 4th behind soccer was absolute bullshit..

It certainly appears to be the case. I think they seem to think that they can get away with it because the Rugby media (what little there is) tends to be the most critical of all the codes.

They see us criticizing our game and they jump on board snowballing the effect.

 

[Rob42]

It certainly appears to be the case. I think they seem to think that they can get away with it because the Rugby media (what little there is) tends to be the most critical of all the codes.

They see us criticizing our game and they jump on board snowballing the effect.

More likely because the soccer media is the most excitable of the four. That's right, soccer media, I called your game soccer. Freak out.

 

[Crashy]

I actually sent that vile oxygen thief Phil Rothchild of the Telegraph a spray via email today as I am sick at his pathetic unprofessional, (jealous?) jibes at Rugby. I might email Payto and tell him that I'll stop reading unless this fuckwit starts to at least write with something resembling balance accross the codes.
I think the mungos might have a interesting year with crowds and various clubs in substantial financial difficulty. ( not that I can throw stones).

 

[Pfitzy]

Hope you used small words.