• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Broadcast options for Australian Rugby

kiap

kiap

Steve Williams (59)
The Ghost of Raelene said:
He makes me second guess if I have even less of an idea about Rugby than I do. Don't know what he's watching at times.
Click to expand...
TBH, I don't hate the guy and, while he's not the greatest comentator, I'm sure he knows more about playing rugby than me.

Think he just runs out of something to say about the game at hand, then starts filling the space with generalities - which unfortunutely is all too often the result of the previous game(s).
 
Rebel man

Rebel man

Jim Lenehan (48)
When it comes to broadcast deals we simply have to play more


A League/FFA Cup $40m per season, $208,333 per game, 192 games

Super Rugby/Home Wallabies tests $30m per season, $309,278 per game, 97 games

NRL/Origin $409m per season, $1.8m per game, 216 games

AFL $643m per season$2.9m per game, 216 games

Including the women’s game

A league, W league and FFA cup, $40m a year, 150,375 per game, 266 games

Super Rugby, Super W and home tests $30m a years, 260,869 per game, 97 games

NRL, Origin and NRLW, $409m a year, 1.5m per game, 264 games

AFL and AFLW, $643m a year, 2m per game, 315 games
 
WorkingClassRugger

WorkingClassRugger

David Codey (61)
Rebel man said:
When it comes to broadcast deals we simply have to play more


A League/FFA Cup $40m per season, $208,333 per game, 192 games

Super Rugby/Home Wallabies tests $30m per season, $309,278 per game, 97 games

NRL/Origin $409m per season, $1.8m per game, 216 games

AFL $643m per season$2.9m per game, 216 games

Including the women’s game

A league, W league and FFA cup, $40m a year, 150,375 per game, 266 games

Super Rugby, Super W and home tests $30m a years, 260,869 per game, 97 games

NRL, Origin and NRLW, $409m a year, 1.5m per game, 264 games

AFL and AFLW, $643m a year, 2m per game, 315 games
Click to expand...

Yep. It's why people calling for shortening the current season make no sense to me. Using SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) as our vessel we probably should be looking at making that a double round robin. That would take the number of games from just 84 to 132 plus 7 inbound Tests for a total of 139. Using your breakdown that would then work out to be $309,333/139= $42,997,287. Add in the fact that in the next cycle there will be a Lions Tour and Two RWCs and with that bloc of games we could do okay.
 
Rebel man

Rebel man

Jim Lenehan (48)
WorkingClassRugger said:
Yep. It's why people calling for shortening the current season make no sense to me. Using SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) (Super Rugby Pacific) as our vessel we probably should be looking at making that a double round robin. That would take the number of games from just 84 to 132 plus 7 inbound Tests for a total of 139. Using your breakdown that would then work out to be $309,333/139= $42,997,287. Add in the fact that in the next cycle there will be a Lions Tour and Two RWCs and with that bloc of games we could do okay.
Click to expand...
Couldn’t agree more
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Worth mentioning in terms of broadcast deals is that there is actually significant value in the overseas markets for rugby unlike AFL and to a lesser extent NRL.

An inbound series against England is worth a lot of money.

The Lions Tour is also worth a lot of money there. I am unsure how the broadcast revenue sharing agreement works because I know the Lions get a split of it but the host nation would retain a significant chunk of those overseas market deals.
 
Rob42

Rob42

John Solomon (38)
The spidercam and plyaer focus options for last year's Wallaby tests were good on Stan, as well. I don't get the frustration with their service, I've never had the problems with catch-up games that others have mentioned, and I do watch a few games on catch-up. The only issue I have is when I watch part of a game and come back to it later, it sometimes doesn't resume in the same spot and I have to start over and fast-forward. Generally with the 6 Nations games.
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Is it a reasonable expectation that the results of earlier games in a weekend aren't mentioned in later coverage?
 
John S

John S

Chilla Wilson (44)
Rob42 said:
The spidercam and plyaer focus options for last year's Wallaby tests were good on Stan, as well. I don't get the frustration with their service, I've never had the problems with catch-up games that others have mentioned, and I do watch a few games on catch-up. The only issue I have is when I watch part of a game and come back to it later, it sometimes doesn't resume in the same spot and I have to start over and fast-forward. Generally with the 6 Nations games.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's one frustration I have - it no longer comes up on the continue watching option (prior games from two years ago that I stopped watching at full time however still show up on the continue watching - go figure)
 
Adam84

Adam84

Nick Farr-Jones (63)
Braveheart81 said:
Is it a reasonable expectation that the results of earlier games in a weekend aren't mentioned in later coverage?
Click to expand...
I dunno I see a few in uproar about this on Twitter; and I think it’s simply a numbers game. Commentators discuss other matches and scores as content fillers and value add products for the broadcast package, the majority of people either watch the games in sequential order or have no intent to watch earlier games.

This issue impacts a very small percentage of people and to rectify they would mean removing value add content that benefits the majority. Not to say it isn’t frustrating for those it impacts, but I doubt Stan Sport are really going to change because of that.
 
dru

dru

Tim Horan (67)
Adam84 said:
I dunno I see a few in uproar about this on Twitter; and I think it’s simply a numbers game. Commentators discuss other matches and scores as content fillers and value add products for the broadcast package, the majority of people either watch the games in sequential order or have no intent to watch earlier games.

This issue impacts a very small percentage of people and to rectify they would mean removing value add content that benefits the majority. Not to say it isn’t frustrating for those it impacts, but I doubt Stan Sport are really going to change because of that.
Click to expand...

It would be no different to keep that coverage to the end of the previous game, and to keep the game to be broadcast, as scheduled. Simply swap the time slot to the previous game and shorten the intro to the next game.

It isn't rocket science, the previous game post discussion is the filler, and stick to the job as advertised.
 
Adam84

Adam84

Nick Farr-Jones (63)
dru said:
It would be no different to keep that coverage to the end of the previous game, and to keep the game to be broadcast, as scheduled. Simply swap the time slot to the previous game and shorten the intro to the next game.

It isn't rocket science, the previous game post discussion is the filler, and stick to the job as advertised.
Click to expand...
And halftime discussion?

If you are watching on delay can’t you just fast forward through any pre-match discussions if the concern is seeing other scores?

I get it’s frustrating and I’m not saying it should be that way, I just think it’s a small minority who it impacts who don’t watch games sequentially thus Stan won’t put much effort into it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top