Ch9 RWC coverage

[Braveheart81]

There is no link in terms of ownership and control between Channel 9 and Foxtel/Foxsports.

It's hard to know what the ARU should do. Channel 9 did broadcast the Samoa and 3N tests live which the ARU had control over. The ARU doesn't have control over the RWC so aside from behind the scenes lobbying, it would seem there is little they can do.

Trying to grow the public interest by putting more rugby on TV (on somewhere like SBS) by accepting a lower offer might seem like a good idea although they have nothing to offer with Super Rugby on Foxtel only.

 

[Slim 293]

It's pretty clear that the on-sell to Channel 9 was to maximise Fox Sports' ratings by knocking back the bigger offer that included one live SupeRugby match per week...

OneHD is also Fox Sports' FTA competitor, and while it's dying a slow death they certainly would not have wanted the rugby broadcast on there...

In hindsight Channel 10 would've worked out better long term as they're without a football code...

But going back to my previous point - we should not be grateful to Channel 9 for giving us scraps.

 

[Braveheart81]

I disagree. Foxsports supports rugby and the Super XV very well.

Channel 10 clearly weren't going to take a 1am game in South Africa as their weekly match. I am not surprised Foxsports didn't want to onsell their rights to one of their best couple of games each week.

 

[Slim 293]

I disagree. Foxsports supports rugby and the Super XV very well.

Channel 10 clearly weren't going to take a 1am game in South Africa as their weekly match. I am not surprised Foxsports didn't want to onsell their rights to one of their best couple of games each week.

Of course they wouldn't be happy with that.

Just pointing out that the outcome we now have wasn't in the interest of the fans or growing the game.

 

[Braveheart81]

SANZAR did the original TV deal though (of which ARU obviously has a stake). The ARU or SANZAR would have had no power to make Foxsports onsell a game a week to Channel 10.

I think the only way for rugby to grow in Australia is to grow the grassroots game. I once heard a description or a sport (in relation to the AFL) as being like a pyramid. The professional game is at the top of the pyramid and the only way to make the top of the pyramid higher is to increase the width of the base which is the grassroots game.

Increasing participation at all ages and levels seems to me as the most likely way of giving rugby the pulic interest required to get more broadcast hours and interest from FTA TV.

 

[Rob42]

SANZAR did the original TV deal though (of which ARU obviously has a stake). The ARU or SANZAR would have had no power to make Foxsports onsell a game a week to Channel 10...

No, the ARU could have split the rights and sold FTA rights separately to the pay TV rights, similar to what the AFL and NRL do. But of course that would have required them to accept a much smaller offer from Foxtel, who profit from making people pay for 100 channels of rubbish just to watch Super Rugby. And then, having made a much smaller profit from TV rights, the ARU would be suffering from even more complaints about how there's no money for grassroots development.

If the ARU really wants FTA exposure for Super Rugby, they have to be prepared to take a big hit in terms of TV money. And who thinks the ARU has plenty to waste?

 

[Braveheart81]

How much is the SANZAR deal a split between the three countries though?

Would the ARU really have room to manoevre on how the rights are split in Australia when presumably the three unions are taking slices of the same pie, not just the share that relates to their specific country.

 

[XVProps]

And that may be the problem. All of the SANZAR nations would have to agree to take a cut in TV revenue to aid FTA exposure. I'm not sure that would be an easy sell at board level.

 

[Roundawhile]

I believe it was just after the 2003 RWC that JON signed (resigned ?) all games to foxtel with no FTA. My thoughts at the time, and still are, that if you wish to grow at grassroots level it must be on FTA. As many on here point out, if you can't afford cable go to a pub/club to watch games.

1) I do not want cable TV in my house!
2) I do not want to go to my local pub where union is considered an annoyance to the league watchers
3) I Will NOT TAKE NOT SON TO A PUB SO HE CAN WATCH A GAME OF RUGBY. Why should I?

Grassroots development involves the juniors FIRST and FOREMOST. Our game will never develop as it should whilst the ARU consider money (cable) more important than the game.

The fact that even S15 rugby is not available on FTA just reinforces the elitist, private school image of OUR sport. I don't want US NFL type competition and huge $$$ for players and franchises and CEOs, I WANT MY SON AND I TO BE ABLE TO WATCH RUGBY ON FTA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OK sorry end of rant

 

[XVProps]

No, by all means rant away. Totally agree. I love our sport, but cannot afford/justify spending money to watch a sport which should be available to everyone. Every weekend in winter you can watch up to three live games of AFL and many delayed games on FTA. Where's the rugby? Well you can watch Shute Shield on Sat. but to be honest most Rugby people are probably at a suburban ground somewhere with their local club. Besides this isn't S15's or the WC. Kids will play what they watch the most and at this point Rugby is a long way behind the other codes in terms of coverage and exposure.

 

[lily]

Roundawile you have missed the boat by maybe 10 years. Theoretically you should be able to see rugby on free to air, but the main problem revolves around the fact that nobody wants to pay for the broadcasting rights. This is due to the product being garbage. I have always disliked league but at least when I watch Manly play I see a flyhalf who can tackle and doesn't run around like a headless chook when his first and second options are denied. The ARU have shot themselves in the foot with both advertising and boots on the ground. For those who haven't read between the lines I'm talking about Foran.

 

[Da Munch]

As far as SANZAR goes and it's pie - anyone know what's the FTA coverage like for S15's in NZ and SA? is OZ getting it's fair slice?

 

[Braveheart81]

We are a very different market. In both South Africa and NZ rugby union is the dominant sport. In Australia it's the third Winter football code.

 

[liquor box]

Well you can watch Shute Shield on Sat. but to be honest most Rugby people are probably at a suburban ground somewhere with their local club.

Not in QLD!

I disagree about the being at a club game bit as well. Many fans are working on Saturdays and if by "most rugby" people you mean most of the viewing audience then it is no wonder it is not on free to air. If you add up all of the supporters at games live then the number is nowhere near enough people to support the code.

To develop grass roots you need expansion, and this only comes through increasing the audience.

The only way I see this happening is for the ARU to produce its own broadcasts of the Sydney and Brisbane club comps and supply them for free to FTA broadcasters. This makes it a great deal for the broadcasters and will hopefully develop a following that will eventually lead to the FTA network paying for these games in the future. I dont think Saturday afternoon is a great TV timeslot for the non AFL channels during winter so there is an opportunity to put Rugby on TV.

To pay for this broadcast the ARU needs to find extra income- as much as it will annoy supporters I would propose an extra Test (or international gamem Baa Baa's?) each year where the funds are put aside for this TV production. To maximise the funds raised I would have it as a "back to Ballymore" or "back to Concord" game and hope that the NSWRU/West Harbour or QRU will supply the use of their grounds for free to help the game. Obviously if you can make more at another stadium then do it.

 

[XVProps]

What I meant was that club games are played from 3pm sat arvo. People are either at sport or work. S15 is played Fri nights, Sat, and Sun. When it can be watched and there would be an audience. Not a bad idea with the ARU controlling the broadcast, however, there is a lot to go into that, with film crews, commentators etc. But had merit. What I did like was back to ballymore or Concord days. Great idea. You could play say, Randwick v Uni, as a curtain raiser to a Waratahs game at Concord. And the same at Ballymore before a Reds game.

 

[grievous]

Roundawile you have missed the boat by maybe 10 years. Theoretically you should be able to see rugby on free to air, but the main problem revolves around the fact that nobody wants to pay for the broadcasting rights. This is due to the product being garbage. I have always disliked league but at least when I watch Manly play I see a flyhalf who can tackle and doesn't run around like a headless chook when his first and second options are denied. The ARU have shot themselves in the foot with both advertising and boots on the ground. For those who haven't read between the lines I'm talking about Foran.

Well if that is true then rugby will truely be a boutique sport for the rest of its days in this country.

The tv issue here is one of rugby's greatest unsolved issues in this country and seems it will for some time yet

 

[Rob42]

Not in QLD!

I disagree about the being at a club game bit as well. Many fans are working on Saturdays and if by "most rugby" people you mean most of the viewing audience then it is no wonder it is not on free to air. If you add up all of the supporters at games live then the number is nowhere near enough people to support the code.

To develop grass roots you need expansion, and this only comes through increasing the audience.

The only way I see this happening is for the ARU to produce its own broadcasts of the Sydney and Brisbane club comps and supply them for free to FTA broadcasters. This makes it a great deal for the broadcasters and will hopefully develop a following that will eventually lead to the FTA network paying for these games in the future. I dont think Saturday afternoon is a great TV timeslot for the non AFL channels during winter so there is an opportunity to put Rugby on TV.

To pay for this broadcast the ARU needs to find extra income- as much as it will annoy supporters I would propose an extra Test (or international gamem Baa Baa's?) each year where the funds are put aside for this TV production. To maximise the funds raised I would have it as a "back to Ballymore" or "back to Concord" game and hope that the NSWRU/West Harbour or QRU will supply the use of their grounds for free to help the game. Obviously if you can make more at another stadium then do it.

I think you'll find the ARU already pay the ABC to show the Shute Shield. Probably costs less that way than trying to produce it themselves and then give it away.

 

[Rob42]

Roundawile you have missed the boat by maybe 10 years. Theoretically you should be able to see rugby on free to air, but the main problem revolves around the fact that nobody wants to pay for the broadcasting rights. This is due to the product being garbage. I have always disliked league but at least when I watch Manly play I see a flyhalf who can tackle and doesn't run around like a headless chook when his first and second options are denied. The ARU have shot themselves in the foot with both advertising and boots on the ground. For those who haven't read between the lines I'm talking about Foran.

I doubt people change their code allegiances based on whether a fly-half can tackle or not. Though Quade and his Reds team-mates can take credit for bumping up the ratings of Super Rugby somewhat this year.

People seem to think that FTA Super Rugby coverage will change the world. But will it? I mean, for all the millions the NRL and AFL have poured into advertising, grass-roots development, etc, etc, over the past couple of decades, has much changed for them? The AFL has succeeded after many years in establishing one Sydney team, I thik they'll struggle with two. But it's still primarily a Victorian league. And the NRL is still strongest where it has always been. Soccer flares up occasionally and then drops away again, as it always has. Why do we expect rugby to be any different?

 

[XVProps]

It may not change things, but as it stands now only those who have PTV get to watch it at home. Surely that isn't helping, when other codes are on screen. You only have to look at the WC coverage which I believe was purchased by Nine to control the competition while the League finals were on. Why else would you pay the money and then not play live matches. I understand the IRB sold the rights and probably were not aware of what was to come. If the Rugby in particular S15 rugby was on FTA, it would mean exposure to a greater range of viewers.

 

[Da Munch]

People seem to think that FTA Super Rugby coverage will change the world. But will it? ... NRL ... The AFL has succeeded after many years in establishing one Sydney team, I thik they'll struggle with two.

Ignoring the mungo's, who I hate now more than ever after Channel 9's shite coverage and why they have done it.

AFL coverage into Sydney (not country NSW) has been abysmal, no live game Friday night on 7, normally 1 live game Saturday (maybe 2 if the swans played) on 10 and Sunday on 7 on average a shortened replay thing so don't base that on how well AFL is going in Sydney.

After next year, when the coverage for AFL is changing, then maybe make some assumptions between ALF and FTA and what effect it has. Not that it'll matter as most of the kids in my kids kindi play kick to kick (say that fast pissed) and it'll take time for that to flow through to team support - and that's due to the money the AFL is spending. Join up to kick to kick and you get this, that and blah. Join up to a rugby and you get what? it's a real question and parent love doesn't count.