https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/ru ... l-27234442 Quite an interesting article. Note the link with Eddie Hearn's Matchroom Sports. Potential to stream every game. https://www.dazn.com/en-GB/welcome

https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/ru ... l-27234442 Quite an interesting article. Note the link with Eddie Hearn's Matchroom Sports. Potential to stream every game. https://www.dazn.com/en-GB/welcome

Quote ="Wires71"https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/dazn-super-leaguebroadcastdeal-27234442 Quite an interesting article. Note the link with Eddie Hearn's Matchroom Sports. Potential to stream every game. https://www.dazn.com/en-GB/welcome'" Making the product more expensive for the existing RL fan, while eliminating the casual fan. Nice one.

Quote ="Wires71"https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/dazn-super-leaguebroadcastdeal-27234442 Quite an interesting article. Note the link with Eddie Hearn's Matchroom Sports. Potential to stream every game. https://www.dazn.com/en-GB/welcome'" Making the product more expensive for the existing RL fan, while eliminating the casual fan. Nice one.

I hope it makes Sky make a bigger offer than last time.

May provide some competition to TV rights so that Sky keep the deal reasonable.

True. More likely though is that they would simply let it go and we become an even more niche sport than we presently are.

Look at the amount of stuff that Sky has let go in recent years. I'd suggest that SL isn't the jewel that some of us might hope or think, so losing us wouldn't be a huge deal for them.

Reality is, Sky know that as long as they retain the Premier league football rights, then they will keep hold of the vast majority of their custom - most other sports that move to more obscure channels seem to shrink, rather than increase, their follower base.

That worries me, but Sky no longer have the monopoly on the Premier league. BT, Amazon and I think there is another getting more and more of a share of that. Recently Sky have pumped near on a billion into the Championship for coverage of that. I was and still am hoping that some of the premier league money would filter down to us.

If they do and without sounding too misogynistic, they'll be filtering it through plenty of Women's Sports, which is fair if there is an appetite for it.

However, SKY do have an agenda and set that appetite, so as to affect their market which again is fair as it's their money and might represent best value ROI for them. I get that they are a business and not a public service provider so there's a stocking filler level that they'd like to maintain rather than help making us the UK's second biggest sport BUT when/if we are further marginalised by the likes of Women's Basketball from the USA, then that would be hard to take.

you not a fan of the WNBA??? shocking.

Spot on, i was always hopeful that with them losing the monopoly on the Premier League that we would get a bit more of the pot. But clearly they gone down a different route as you have pointed out. Not sure if I can say this but I wouldn’t say no to coverage of women’s beach volleyball.

P.S once got battered off the wife for watching that, it didn’t matter when I said it was the olympics

Now you're talking karetaker.

Where is the info on the pricing ? If they do stream every game then £ per game represents much better value. They may offer game / day / week passes we don't know yet and it can only help the sport negotiate the best deal.

I have said for a long time splitting up the fixtures and selling them as packages to various broadcasters is going to make the most money rather than letting sky keep exclusivity and do nothing with it.

They aren't going to show them for nothing, are they?

So, any new subscription is more cost, as most people don't get Sky Sports just for SL.

Also going to DAZN would mean less casual fans, purely as they have less subscribers than Sky.

There is a market out there for out & out supporters of any particular team who ,for whatever reason, can't go to matches . The old ,the infirm ,people who work away. People who would still like to be able to watch their team.

Yes and for those thousands who go to home games but don't go away. I'd get a subscription if I could.

Genuine question, do you already have Sky Sports, and if you did, would you drop it if they lost SL on there?

I already pay a lot of subscriptions I’d rather not pay for another. Hope this is just a way to get Sky to up their offer, they could get rid of Wilkin to help toward cost.

I know you asked Wires71 but that’s a good question. Damn hard because I do watch some other sport on there, not football but the rugby is main reason I keep it. Just means if I have to go to a different platform how much would it bother not being able to watch the other stuff.

A very good question indeed....and to be honest, I'd be more likely to stick with Sky for the NRL than pay elsewhere for SL

I borrow my mates Sky go account and rig it onto the TV. I only watch Super League on Sky nothing else (oh a bit of the mens Ashes).

I don't have sky sports ,i prefer going in the flesh to watch the Wire but can't always get there & not interested in football .

I'd be tempted to go for Watch NRL which is only £150 a year.

The Channel 4 deal runs out this season also.

https://www.seriousaboutrl.com/reports- ... hts-78407/

https://www.seriousaboutrl.com/reports- ... hts-78407/

That could make it interesting if true about the Sky offer and TNT formerly BT sport throwing their hat into the ring.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugby ... ights.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugby ... ights.html