With one condition (or 3 if you wish) that there are teams in France, Wales and London. www.walesonline.co.uk/sports/rug ... -27729005/ Fifth from last paragraph. Some will no doubt be happy, I think the majority will as it is a significant amount of money making it's way to rugby league, but others will be spitting feathers.

With one condition (or 3 if you wish) that there are teams in France, Wales and London. www.walesonline.co.uk/sports/rug ... -27729005/ Fifth from last paragraph. Some will no doubt be happy, I think the majority will as it is a significant amount of money making it's way to rugby league, but others will be spitting feathers.

Quote crucrucrusaders="crucrucrusaders"With one condition (or 3 if you wish) that there are teams in France, Wales and London. www.walesonline.co.uk/sports/rug ... -27729005/ Fifth from last paragraph. Some will no doubt be happy, I think the majority will as it is a significant amount of money making it's way to rugby league, but others will be spitting feathers.'" I think it means £3m over a three year period rather than per year, which I think is a £100k increase.

Quote crucrucrusaders="crucrucrusaders"With one condition (or 3 if you wish) that there are teams in France, Wales and London. www.walesonline.co.uk/sports/rug ... -27729005/ Fifth from last paragraph. Some will no doubt be happy, I think the majority will as it is a significant amount of money making it's way to rugby league, but others will be spitting feathers.'" I think it means £3m over a three year period rather than per year, which I think is a £100k increase.

I'd like to think it was correct. However I suspect its a case of a confused journalist on a local rag getting it wrong.



For clubs to receive £3m a year each the Sky contract would have to treble in value !



I don't wish to be negative but I just can not see that happening.

Also if it was £3m per year I think the game would be better served if £1m of that was distributed into the CC/C1 (£14m per season investment) rather than all the money been confined the SL clubs.

It is unclear and probably nearer £1 million per year than what I thought it was initially.



I was of the thinking that clubs initially get £1.2 million per year so it would be a decrease if it was £3 million over 3 years surely.



Typical stab in the dark South Welsh journalism and it would be spot on if it was an article on Shane Williams' dogs latest bout of flu.

or even better if it was spent on jnr development!



as said me thinks he is getting his figures a bit mixed up!

Remind me again....who exactly runs Rugby League in this country?

News Ltd

Eddie and Stevo

the clubs

the RFL





take your pick!

Harlequins.

ps Paris SG, Gateshead Thunder, Crusaders, and still we learn little about how to succesfully expand the game.

I just don't get it. How can the RFL talk about clubs becoming better run and more self efficient yet whenever SKY dangle a bit more money out on certain conditions they seem to jump at it.



Yes SKY play's a big part in the pro game BUT don't forget compared to other shows they show we don't get a huge amount so it's not as if they don't get their money's worth out of RL anyway and if anything i'd take more exposure ahead of more money.



Let's be honest as said you give 90% of clubs extra money they'll be straight on the phone down under to see who is available! Only conditions that should be set are that any new money must go on development of the club off the field and / or youth development!

As football has found more money simply leads to higher wages, then when income stream's go down (recession - sponsorship etc) often the fans are asked to cough up through ticket prices, shirt sales etc, or rely on a big benefactor to underwrite millions of pounds in losses.

football does not have a salary cap.

Quote crucrucrusaders="crucrucrusaders"With one condition (or 3 if you wish) that there are teams in France, Wales and London. www.walesonline.co.uk/sports/rug ... -27729005/ Fifth from last paragraph. Some will no doubt be happy, I think the majority will as it is a significant amount of money making it's way to rugby league, but others will be spitting feathers.'" I suspect that the figure may be nearer £300000 / year rather than £3000000. Given the finances of clubs an extra £300k / year is a huge incentive to have the 3 'satellite' clubs.

Quote crucrucrusaders="crucrucrusaders"With one condition (or 3 if you wish) that there are teams in France, Wales and London. www.walesonline.co.uk/sports/rug ... -27729005/ Fifth from last paragraph. Some will no doubt be happy, I think the majority will as it is a significant amount of money making it's way to rugby league, but others will be spitting feathers.'" I suspect that the figure may be nearer £300000 / year rather than £3000000. Given the finances of clubs an extra £300k / year is a huge incentive to have the 3 'satellite' clubs.

Catalan Dragons?

So, nobody thinks that if there really was an increase in SL TV rights fees, in the middle of a current contract, it might actually be reported on the RFL or SLE websites, rather than tucked away toward the end of a local rag story by a non-specialist reporter?



Instead, rather than conclude the reporter has got his 'facts' - introduced by that tell-tale phrase 'it is believed' - wrong, we're all prepared to jump on the RFL for doing wrong. It says a lot. And not about the RFL.

No deal has been done yet for 2012 onwards, so the RFL have nothing to report. You'll be saying the debts being reported are just rumoured. Administration is not a rumour, neither is the fact the club has not been sold yet, neither is the fact that the RFL themselves state they are owed £700k from last season, I think that classes as propping up doesn't it. Especially if they back down and write off the debt

Football=No salary cap.

Rugby League=Salary cap.

Work the rest out for yourself.

Because part of being better run is to bring in more money. Sky paying £3million a year, cost free would double a fair few clubs turnovers, they would be idiots not to bend over backwards to take it.



you dont have to pay the bills. More exposure would be nice, but you have to look at what you exposing. Getting the pennine league on ITV would give us a huge amount of exposure but not a lot of money as very few people want to watch a relatively poor standard of rugby



as poorly constructed as it is, we have a salary cap dont we?

where has this being reported?

I would have no doubt the RFL (through IMG again i think) will have already started negotiating with Sky for the 2012 contract. Considering it will be signed next year I would be very very surprised.



It wouldnt surprise me actually if the RFL were looking for around £3m a year for SL clubs. I know its a big jump but the RFL will be selling this on the basis of franchising, the investment that will improve the game at the level Sky prioritise, on the fact the SC hasnt risen for 10 years and the increased coverage of the game with regards to expansion.



I would be disappointed if the dialogue between the RFL and Sky wasnt planning for longer than each TV contract.

The game is worth much more than the current amount it get, whether or not there are other bidders. Rugby League is always in the top 10 in viewing numbers, beating Union comprehensively and deserves to get more money.

More SKY money will result in an increase in the salary cap , with the Aussie dollar getting stronger against the pound they will raise it to keep the top English talent here and still be able to bring their retirees over for a holiday

They should be paying £5m a year to clubs given what fantastic entertainment they get in return. Our game is worth so much more than we get currently. If it takes a few plastic clubs outside the M62 to get the extra funding then so be it - bring it on.

If it is worth 3 million a year each for 2 games a week over a 30 week season , what is one Championship game a week worth ?



And if it isn't worth anything , then do we still want it given for nothing ?