I intend to renew all 3 passes but it's going to be a strain to get there on Thursday nights. Yes, at least we know in advance, but what's tve betting some of them still change?

If Thursday games are really promoting the game, increasing awareness and income then fair enough. But if not, it is simply inconveniencing true fans. I still await evidence either way.....

This is true but, there are two points with this.

Firstly, there is a different culture in RL, the fans are very passionate about the sport but, large parts of the support base just don't travel to Thursday games and to a lesser degree Friday games.
If you look at the mix of fans in RL, compared to football, there is a greater percentage of kids and older fans and both of these groups are less inclined to travel for mid week evening games.
The second point is that Premier League games are extremely well marketed and demand for these matches is usually very high.
If you look lower down the leagues, this is not the case but, these games are not shown on tv.

Finally, we sold our soul to Sky 20 years ago and if anyone thinks that they are actually bothered whether the crowds drop by 10% for Thursday night games, they are seriously deluded.

As other posters have suggested, it would certainly help fans if they didn't have to travel long distances for Thursday fixtures but, how important are we in the grand scheme of things.

On the plus side, the armchair viewers love having games to watch as often as possible. Therefore, there wont be a change any time soon.

Love how people refer to the RFL standing up against Sky. Like they are aware of the conditions of the binding contract between the RFL and Sky. Feel free to post extracts from it so we can all see where the RFL can show some backbone. You're talking about an absolutely immense organisation that towers over little old Rugby League and they only care about value for money to X amount of viewers. They don't and never will give a t0$$ if Barry from Widnes has to travel to Hull on a busy M62 on a Thursday night and he might not make it.
Lets go just go along with it for a moment and presume the RFL can/do "Show some backbone", we back the RFL on taking on Sky. Tanish the Rugby League relationship with Sky and watch the sport wilt. Ah its okay the mighty premier sport will save us, or we can board the BT dream, they seem to throw the cash about a bit....

Some people are so unaware of how the world goes round its frightening.

All you say is valid but wont alter the fact that I have given up on my season ticket as I don't do late nights, Yes I have Sky but if I & others loose contact with our teams we might not renew next time round, I know I make no difference to Sky or the overall health of the game but I still feel let down & disillusioned by the whole mess & I suspect I wont be the only one in the long run.

So basically you want the sport to keep bending over to Sky just becuase they throw a bit more cash? No wonder the sport is in the state its in. Whoever agreed the new sky deal needs shooting.

Turning down sky sports latest deal and going FTA with BBC for peanut's would have been madness and simply not an option. People scream for more FTA coverage but never mention how the money that BBC would be willing to pay for super league would be so small.

Also does anyone really think the coverage would be any good. Don't get me wrong, I like the live BBC challenge cup coverage but you would get 1 game per week if they had super league rights and it would be on a Sunday afternoon.

Oh and considering the RFL cannot even convince the BBC to show the super league show down in the south at a respectable time what do you really think they would achieve by ditching sky sports.

I know there is some people who have this vision of Rugby league going to BBC and becoming a prime time viewing sport and one of BBC crown jewels. Honestly its time to get in the real world.

You people were quick to say how before the last RL world cup, BBC would have england players all over TV shows promoting the sport. We got nothing and I would argue that the BBC gave the union world cup way more promotion and they didn't even have rights to show it.

BT sport would probably keep Thursday's as they have football and rugby union all weekend. So it would still go head to head against sky sports Thursday night TV coverage.

Thursday night isn't the best but i don't see any other way. Sunday afternoon wouldn't work.

I dislike Monday's more if we're scrapping weekdays.

To be fair, I've got nothing personal about Sky. They're a decent company, if a little pricey. However they are in it for sales of subscriptions and advertising not for the good of any one sport, they are a profit making company after all (and there's nothing wrong with that).

However, there could be a long game here. Sky keep moving to mid week games. Supporters are forced to subscribe to see their team. Crowds fall and because of this Sky can reduce their offer to RFL as the game has become 100% dependant on it. We're then into the territory of Sky actually running the game, merging teams etc. This is all very self perpetuating, even if it is not intended.

So I still remain open to some true figures that prove Thursday nights are a massive success, are spreading the word of the game (rather than just stealing support that would have attended the game if it was on a weekend) and not just a filler for an empty slot in their schedules.

I don't know of any broadcaster that doesn't have some degree of influence over when a sporting event does or doesn't happen. Even the BBC dictates when we play the Challenge Cup (remember the Friday semi-final?) so the idea that BT Sport wouldn't have us playing at a time to suit them is complete fantasy.

So we're largely left with two options. We can either accept the demands and the cash of television, and continue trying to grow the sport as a successful commercial product, or we can go back to semi-professionalism or amateurism because so few clubs will be able to offer players and staff a meaningful living from the game.

I completely understand the sentiments of those who feel that they can no longer support their club as they would like, but that's a harsh reality of modern professional sport.

Are you a Season pass holder? Do you have school age children that you also take with you?

No kids. I was a season pass holder at Leeds but I'm now just a member supporter (basically, I have a card that I just add individual games to, but I still qualify for priority purchase benefits for final tickets). The way the pricing at Headingley works, a season ticket works out at around 2 games free -I'll miss more than that through holidays, business travel and various other commitments.

Thursdays / Fridays aren't an issue for me (certainly for home games) but I totally get why they're an issue for some people. My point is that if you want the sport to be a well-run, professional form of entertainment that can attract a certain calibre of talent, you need the finances to do that. TV is one way to secure that finance.

And for you, know doubt, having games on TV on a Thursday is pretty good. However, you fall into the category of a season pass holder who now just watches on TV, therefore leading to a decline of sales through at the actual club. I realise you probably still do get to quite a few games.

So, apart from supporters who watch on TV when they would normally attend, are Thursday games bringing in new support or continue to lead to a decline in gate tickets?

If there is no benefit to the sport and in fact it detracts from viewing/attending, the RFL has to understand that allowing this to continue affects the entire fixture list meaning that even when not on TV, it causes clubs not to be able to play their matches on the preferred day. Rovers only have 4 home games on a Sunday but only appear on sky at home 4 times (none on the sunday). That means 3 games not on the preferred day and not on Sky just because of the knock on effects of the Thursday games. Ticket sales on those days will probably be lower and no sky compensation.

I wouldn't say "pretty good". I can make it work, but it's hardly my preferred KO time.



Not sure how you've come to that conclusion. I've probably attended 11 of Leeds' 14 home league games, the CC quarter final, semi final and final, Grand Final and I'll be attending Friday's game with NZ. As a supporter, I've put a lot of money into my club. I fail to see, however, how this is relevant to Sky Sports' TV scheduling?



You need to ask BARB, your club, Sky and the RFL that question. If your club's gates are declining on Thursdays, how hard are they working to attract a new audience on those days? Surely there are plenty of people around East Hull looking for something to do on Thursday nights? Why isn't HKR getting them through the door?



But the issue isn't one of Thursday vs AN Other day, it's more likely an issue of TV coverage vs no TV coverage (or the current level of coverage vs a lower level of coverage).

As part of the deal, Sky is allowed to have an influence on when certain fixtures are played. That arrangement applies in broadcasting contracts with any sport, including Premier League football, and it would exist whether we have a broadcasting contract with the BBC (who insisted that a CC semi final being played in Warrington should be played on a Friday night), BT Sport, Premier Sport (who insisted Championship games should be on Thursday nights), Made in Leeds or any other broadcaster.

So far in this thread, nobody has suggested a way in which we can guarantee more sociable KO times without reducing income into the sport or compromising the sports audience reach. That (in very simple terms) leaves us with the option of either sticking with the status quo (and acknowledging the drawbacks that come with Thursday KOs), finding a new way to get £146m to the Super League clubs over the next five years, or largely forgetting the idea of being a full-time professional sport.

Which one is it?

Apologies if I insulted, didn'tmean to. I did also state that you orobably did get to a few games though.

You also didn't include my last comment. Three of pur games are also disrupted in order to accomodate other Thursday games, but those other three are still not at our regular slot and not on TV either so supporters are hit and gain no advantage and the club is also likely to suffer at the turnstiles.

As a Rhino's supporter it is easy to state 'why not get better support' but 80% of other clubs also have the same support issues (if not worse) than our own.

I have nothing against Sky per se but allowing Thursday games to continue will continue to erode attendances. Sky will continue to get money, but the income of the clubs will decrease. Sky will likely reduce their funding next time if ontetest in the sport reduces because they will not ve able to sell advertising around it as easily.

The RFL (or fictional ESL) need to face up to Sky a little otherwise clubs are likely to fold in the future leaving only 4 clubs in SL like Leeds and Wigan. Sky will then definately ditch RL because a 4 club league is pretty boring.

Oh and remember, Leeds were rubbish once. It could happen again... (although admittedly this is doubtful).