Look what the NRL has just landed. Show's how big the game is in Oz. It dwarfs everything else. www.code13rugbyleague.com/2012/0 ... e-history/

Look what the NRL has just landed. Show's how big the game is in Oz. It dwarfs everything else. www.code13rugbyleague.com/2012/0 ... e-history/

They are helped by the fact that they don't have soccer bleeding broadcasters dry, and there are a number of competing sports broadcasters, where as SKY dominate the market here. Plus it is of course massive over there, so they can make much more from advertising- look at the crazy amount of ads you get with Channel 9 Friday Night Footy. Despite Super League having great viewing figures, SKY don't make all that much out of ad breaks.

Speaking of publicity, you would think the BBC would at least give some publicity to the CC during its programme links ,haven't seen anything yet , but plenty about the Paralympics.

I've seen a few CC adverts on BBC. Not alot, but some.

I love watching the NRL, I get embarrassed when comparing it to the super league it's absolutely miles ahead of our league as a spectacle and a business. Every NRL game is televised 3 of which are on free to air tv!

"Three non NRL matches each week played in conjunction with the Telstra Premiership game (which will be shared between Toyota Cup, NSW Cup and GIO Schoolboys Cup)"

They will have more lower grade rugby games televised than we have first grade, Super League is a laughing stock in comparison.

Under the new deal only one game will be live on Channel 9. Comparing the two deals is pointless, it is like an Australian soccer fan comparing their soccer league to the Premiership.

I disagree we have to compare our selves to the bench mark which is the NRL, I know super league will never be the superior competition but we have to strive to be the best we can and I think most fans feel that isn't happening. I agree with you the gap is huge our product is participated and watched regionally where as down under it is nationally recognised, but like us they also compete with tough competition in the form of AFL (the biggest sport in the country), cricket, rugby union and soccer. Lessons can be learnt from the NRL in regards to promoting the sport and making it more accessible to the nation, two games a week on Sky and a pathetic highlights show on BBC is laughable, I'd like to see ESPN or Premirt Sports take up two games a week similar to the Aviva Premiership.

AFL is not the biggest sport in Oz, it's NRL.

NRL is equivalent to FA here, followed quite closely by AFL,
and all other sports are minor.

The major difference is that the county's media gives the time
and coverage as deserved, and is not rooted in historic,
class-related bigotry.

Even if RL became the most popular sport in this country it
would still have to battle all the way for coverage because of
the above mentioned reasons.

NRL has the highest TV audiences, AFL the highest spectator attendances. Don't forget also that some away games are too far away for travelling supporters ( Sydney to Melbourne or Brisbane, for instance ). This helps secure TV audiences but in the UK more live TV would probably reduce match attendances.

It's a good thing for NRL and Rugby League in general. We don't have to go all negative on why SL isn't at the same level as NRL.

Great to hear the NRL have done such a good deal, but to focus on Super League, I'm disappointed by our tv rights not because of this deal but because of our viewing figures compared to that of football. Last time I checked the ratings Premier League games were getting 2-3 million viewers, and Super League games were getting 0.2 million viewers - 1/10th. Yet our latest deal was for £18m per year, while football rights for the UK alone have just been sold for £1 billion per year - more than 50x as much. That doesn't really seem fair to me, and even a doubling of the tv rights would grant clubs another £1.125m each per year, more than enough to prevent the current clubs going bankrupt and possibly allowing us to raise the salary cap some more.

As for televised games lowering attendances, it makes sense but does anyone have any reliable figures for this? Or can anyone tell of how much attendances changed when Sky started broadcasting Super League games? The first games I was taken to as a kid were not long before the Super League era began so I can't compare them myself.

All well and good, but, isn't TV revenue based on a bit of competition, does anyone else want it and advertsing rather than viewing figures? I know that viewing figures should dictate to some degree advertising rates but...