NRL CEOs slam Channel Nine over favouritism

[the_crusader]

CHIEF executives from clubs including Penrith, Canberra and Cronulla have launched a scathing attack on the NRL broadcast arrangements that continually deny their clubs free-to-air coverage on Channel Nine.

The officials yesterday called for wholesale changes to the broadcast deal, labelling the current system "unfair".

The Knights, Sharks and Warriors were left furious on Tuesday when the NRL announced they would not have a single game shown on free-to-air television for at least the first seven rounds of the competition.

The Panthers and Raiders are also seething at being allocated only one Sunday match on Channel Nine in the first seven weeks.

"There needs to be equality across the board because it's not a level playing field at the moment," Sharks boss Richard Fisk said.

Fisk and Panthers CEO Michael Leary said they were sick of having Channel Nine repeatedly select clubs with broader commercial appeal for its Friday night and Sunday afternoon games.

Both stated the NRL must follow the AFL's example of giving clubs a guaranteed fair share of free-to-air game-time with a fixed season schedule.

Raiders chief executive Don Furner agreed it was essential for NRL boss David Gallop to push for a fairer allocation of free-to-air games in negotiations for the league's next broadcast rights deal, which is set to start in 2013.

They want action now, but are resigned to their clubs being a regular feature of Super Saturday on Fox until the NRL's contract runs out with Channel Nine at the end of the 2012 season.

In a sign of how rare a Friday or Sunday match is for the Raiders, Furner said his club was thrilled to get even one game shown on the more lucrative free-to-air broadcaster after going through 2009 with Fox Sports showing all but two Canberra games.

Last year, the Sharks, Roosters and Warriors all had less than six matches on Nine. The Broncos (18) and Dragons (15) had the most coverage.

"We bring it up with David Gallop and [chief operating officer] Graham Annesley every year but it's always the same thing," Furner said. "There has to be a minimum number of games we play [on free-to-air] each week. I'd set the number at eight or 10 so it's fair for everyone."

Leary said that the allocation of free-to-air games should be performance-based.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...over-favouritism/story-e6frexnr-1225842080206

 

[bLaQDoG..]

Well maybe if their teams weren't so ****ing ****house, they'd get an offer for Friday Night games.

WTF have teams like the Raiders, Warriors and Knights done in the last few seasons to warrant their selection?

The last thing I would do is stay home on a Friday night to watch the Raiders versus the Sharks. What a ****ing sleepfest.

 

[the_crusader]

Id rather watch the Raiders than watch the Roosters

 

[bLaQDoG..]

Id rather watch the Raiders than watch the Roosters

Speak for yourself. There's a reason why Channel 9 select certain teams. It's because they're the kind of games people actually stay home to watch.

 

[Hansta]

rami its true though.

What have the roosters and tigers done in the past 5 years? Jack **** yet they have quite a bit of free-to-ayr tv.

Roosters got the wooden ayr but still will be heavily broadcasted in the first 7 rounds.

 

[the_crusader]

Speak for yourself. There's a reason why Channel 9 select certain teams. It's because they're the kind of games people actually stay home to watch.

or its because the GM of Nine is good mates with Nick Politis

 

[bLaQDoG..]

Thing is though the Roosters will be very interesting to watch this year.

I agree with the "jack ****" arguement because that's all they've done last year especially. But I think they will be interestign games to watch regardless.

 

[Rodzilla]

if the club is at the top of the ladder then they will be shown

so these clubs must get themselves up there

 

[morgandogs]

roosters got tv games atleast first 5 round, raiders and tigers have some exciting attacking play, even if they do stuff all else

 

[Ahecee]

Can't blame 9 for looking out for their ratings............. put on Cronulla v NZ or similar and they may as well just re-broadcast 7 or 10 cause nobody would be watching them.

 

[PantherPower83]

This has been the story for quite some time now. I think majority of the supporters of those clubs (like myself) are used to watching Super Saturday these days.

As long as my team doesnt get the Saturday 5:30pm shift, I'm happy.

Penrith only had one day game last year.

 

[The Beer Baron]

There should be a 'minimum' amount of air time for every club. 3 games per week are shown on free to air, times that over 26 rounds makes 78 games to be shown on the telly. Less with short rounds due to state of origin. Surely there can be a deal where every team get a minimum of 3 games per year.

 

[Hansta]

with the new tv rights deal there should be more than 3 free to air games per week so hopefully other teams get a fair go

 

[roc-a-fella]

rami its true though.

What have the roosters and tigers done in the past 5 years? Jack **** yet they have quite a bit of free-to-ayr tv.

Roosters got the wooden ayr but still will be heavily broadcasted in the first 7 rounds.

lmfayro

 

[kimlo]

rami its true though.

What have the roosters and tigers done in the past 5 years? Jack **** yet they have quite a bit of free-to-ayr tv.

Roosters got the wooden ayr but still will be heavily broadcasted in the first 7 rounds.

Tigers are very entertaining team to watch regardless of their actual standing on the ladder. I would also Watch the Roosters over the Warriors/Canberra any day.

 

[Chris Harding]

Ch.9 chase the ratings. The more viewers, the higher they can charge their advertisers.

The bias I don't like is the commentary from some of the air heads calling the game. I seem to recall an ex-Knights player last night saying that he would be disappointed if the Bulldogs made a comeback because he wanted to see the Dragons post a few more tries. Then there is the way they selectively review incidents on the field when the favoured side is on the receiving end, and gloss over the same incidents when the situation happens in reverse.

How many times have we heard the elation and excitement in their voices when Parramatta, St. George or Manly score a try, compared to matter-of-fact pronouncements when their opposition score. Ever noticed that the same teams also score tries with dazzling brilliance, while the opposition tries were a result of poor defence.

And don't get me started on the ABC!

 

[chris_e_fresh]

**** free to air

give it to foxsports

 

[Toey .H.C.]

when are the 2009 premiers going to get there first channel 9 game?

 

[B-Train]

You guys are completely missing the point. Of course 9 want to look after their best interests with ratings and well supported teams but all 16 teams are supposed to have equity in terms of the TV deal.

How can clubs like Penrith, Cronulla, Canberra or Newcastle get more money into the game by getting more money from sponsors and getting more money from members/fans, and be as profitable as they can be when the NRL doesn't put pressure on 9 to give them free to air games? Talk about Foxtel all you want but not everyone has it and even low rating games on 9 dwarf the ratings for high rating games on Fox.

So these clubs can't be sustainable and get the exposure they need to survive if their product isn't being broadcast on free to air.

It isn't fair and while they should only have a game here or there, they should at least be getting something.

It's just example #456889990222 of how the NRL run the game terribly and let channel 9 or News Ltd get away with murder.

And let's not even bring up the fact that the NRL doesn't make 9 show games in VIC, SA or the WA at a reasonable hour to grow the game in those states and give the game maximum exposure across the country.

Honestly there is not one bit of thought, planning or intelligence behind anything the NRL do.

 

[chris_e_fresh]

dam i wrote this whole thing about how i hate channel 9 and it didnt post