Aviva Premiership on TV- Overkill or Important?

[TheLeicestrianOne]

Hello!

Sorry to be one of these first poster people who ask questions, but I wanted some valued feedback from fans of Premiership clubs and viewers of the live TV coverage.

I'm writing a feature article on the impact of television on Rugby Union. Of course the number of live games for the Premiership has increased from 33 to 69, which is a massive step up.

I was wondering whether this, among the hardcore set of Union fans, has gone down well. Is the money important to your club? Is it better than teams get more exposure on the national stage?

Is it fair that all teams receive the same money, yet some sides (Tigers for example) are shown substantially more than others?

Plus as fans who may attend matches, is it a huge disruption to you with many kick-off changes, and have you been forced to miss games as a result?

Finally, despite your feelings either way, do you feel that ESPN/Sky treat the game with respect, rather than just treat it as live 'filler' content?

It'd be great to hear what you think, and if you have any other general comments on the deal/issue of increased live TV coverage in Rugby, then please let me know.

Thank you if you have the time, it's much appreciated.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Living many hours away from the nearest team I think the increased number of games shown is great,
I can't comment on how the kickoff times effect me, as I don't go to very many live games at all

I'm not sure about the filler content though - It certainly doesn't get as much 'respect' as football is given, even the lower leagues, but I'm just glad it's getting the exposure it does
Especially now that they're starting to show the more important matches of the RFU Championship, it can only be good for the sport, as people are more likely to take an interest if they can see more games



P.S. Welcome aboard

 

[snoopy snoopy dog dog]

I think ESPNs coverage is quite good. They seem to put more effort into it that Sky where rugby coverage has gotten quite poor- the Rugby Club and highlights of Heineken Cup and Super Rugby are now a joke. Perhaps there is a bit too much rugby on TV but more exposure results in more sponsorship revenue and a higher profile for clubs.

On a related topic, I could have watched Munster v Edinburgh on TG4, Scarlets v Ulster on BBC Wales/NI, Gloucester v London Irish on ESPN, Brive v Stade Francais on Setanta or a Super XV game on Sky last night at the same time. Overkill!

 

[SelimNiai]

The level of live games on sky/espn is good. Its terrestrial domestic competitions that needs looking at. ITVs highlights package is ok but its on the wrong channel and its on at a strange time. Itv 1 is the best channel as more people can watch it.

 

[KingsHolmKid]

You are well served if you have Sky and ESPN. And, I do.

The studio that Sky use for Rugby Club instantly gives me a thunderous headache, and makes we want to vomit up my internal organs, but on the whole, the pundits are insightful and engaging; Will Greenwood in particular. ESPN's new fangled portable studio is also interesting, as the team found out last night at Kingsholm when the closing analysis was amusingly punctuated by a rabble of cheeky Gloucester fans shouting incoherently and smiling uncontrollably at themselves on the TV monitors. In general, I think televised rugby benefits from a much higher standard of punditry than football, because rugby culture produces must more rounded, modest and thoughtful human beings. Even player interviews can be compelling sometimes. As a rule, footballers have little charisma, and watching them giving interviews makes me wish I had never been born.

 

[snoopy snoopy dog dog]

In general, I think televised rugby benefits from a much higher standard of punditry than football

I definitely agree with that mostly.

Sky have a mixed bag of pundits- Will Greenwood and Dean Ryan are very insightful and while Stuart Barnes deals in hyperbole, his enthusiasm makes him a useful co-commentator. Only Dewi Morris of Sky's team is inadequate.

ESPNs approach is more laid back than Skys. I like how they place the studio amongst the fans much like the US College Football coverage which they've modelled their approach on. Austin Healey is a smug git but he's a decent pundit whereas Peter Richards and Ben Kay are just average.

BBCs punditry is plain awful without a single redeeming feature. I don quite enjoy the Eddie Butler/Brian Moore commentary team though.

RTEs punditry is pathetic. George Hook, Brent Pope and Tom McGurk is a tired setup with Hook and McGurk completely out of touch with modern rugby. Only the voice of reason Conor O'Shea saves their coverage. What's refreshing about O'Shea is that even though he's involved in coaching, he's still not afraid to put the boot in to other coaches and players.

Setanta is/was the best of the lot. At present they have Matt Williams and Neil Francis heading up their coverage. Francis throws out grenades while Williams always gives constructive analysis. Over the previous seasons Liam Toland and Emmitt Byrne were bloody good pundits too since they were recently involved in the sport and were able to explain the minute details of forward player brilliantly.

All in all, rugby punditry is far superior to the drivel the likes of Jamie Redknapp comes out with. When Redknap is on TV I literally feel like I've been shot in the head. Literally.

 

[KingsHolmKid]

When Redknap is on TV I literally feel like I've been shot in the head. Literally.

That's a cruel irony. Because I'm suspicious that Harry Redknapp may have actually been shot in the face.

I'm going to hell.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

That's a cruel irony. Because I'm suspicious that Harry Redknapp may have actually been shot in the face.

Come on now.....


He's obviously ran into a wall face first

 

[TheLeicestrianOne]

Thank you to those that responded, I thought I'd give it a coupld of days to let people give feedback.

One of the interesting points was raised by snoopy snoopy. Is there overkill in general of Rugby Union on TV? With so many competitions live, like football, there's a vast array of choice now, with several games at the same time almost.

Add that to the extensive coverage of the Euro Challenge and the Heiniken and international, you could argue you're spoilt!

It's great to hear that quite a few like the coverage, especially ESPN. Many are pleased that they've been good with their FA Cup coverage this season, so it's no surprise that they're pleasing most Rugby fans!

Also an interesting note with terrestrial. Is there enough Rugby on terrestrial, or do you feel it's in the best interests for the domestic game that it remains on premium pay-tv? Or would you like some (even if it's the Anglo-Welsh cup back on the BBC) domestic rugby back on free TV?

I have to say it seems that Union has never had it so good in so far as TV coverage is concerned, it's just whether some clubs and fans are suffering as a result, with the drop in attendances due to shifted KO times, and team disruption.

Again, thanks for the respondees!

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I'd like to see more rugby on terrestrial, definitely, though I understand that BBC (for example) wouldn't be able to put up the cash that Sky/ESPN could for the rights

Being able to watch the Magners games on BBC-Wales/S4C/BBC Alba is good, as is the 6N being on BBC and the WC being on terrestrial too
Only thing that annoys me is that with the AIs all teams apart from England are on terrestrial, with England being on Sky only - but again, it all comes down to money

 

[Peat]

Amongst the many reasons I've ended up supporting a non-English team, the fact I can follow them for free on tv rather than having to pay/indulge in illegality helps. The fact a lot of Ulster games are friday night helps too. I play pretty much every saturday. I'm busy a lot of sundays too. Following a club in the flesh would be very hard so TV coverage is important to me. A bit on free to air would be lovely, but at the same time, I can live with things the way they are.

 

[cherry'n'white army]

For me it is fine, a couple of home games will be moved but that isn't too bad as i can still get to them, but it can make things awkward for away games such as the recent Gloucester game at Wasps but all in all it doesn't bother me too much as at the end of the day it is giving more money and wider coverage to the clubs which is good for the game in our country.
Would like to say that the quality of rugby on sky, especially the rugby club has decreased. It used to be an hour and a half of decent rugby analytical talk and discussion but now it is mostly a programme to advertise all the rugby which sky is showing whoch thankfully is still good.
I have not got ESPN but have heard good things and when Healy was working for Sky he seemed a good pundit. The ITV highlites show are not bad consiering they only have an hour slot so I think they do well with what they have, maybe an hour and a half would be better and less time talking at the featured game.