1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

TV deal short-changes NRL, says Crowe

Discussion in 'Rugby League Forum' started by Berkeley_Eagle, Jul 8, 2008.

  1. Berkeley_Eagle

    Berkeley_Eagle Current Status: 24/7 Manly Fan

    +2,125 /14
    TV deal short-changes NRL, says Crowe
    By Liam FitzGibbon

    Hollywood star and South Sydney co-owner Russell Crowe believes rugby league is being short-changed by an unfair television deal compared to other codes.

    Crowe, who attended the Rabbitohs' come-from-behind win over the Bulldogs on Monday night at ANZ Stadium, said he felt league was "the poor cousin" in Australian sport.

    Rugby league's television deal is worth around $500 million over six years, compared to the AFL's which is worth $780 million over five years.

    "I just don't think the game is balanced correctly with how the money the game can generate is divided," the Oscar-winning actor said in an interview on Sydney radio station Triple M.

    "The TV deal we have - based on the figures of who watches the game - I don't think it's fair in comparison to what AFL can generate or other sports.

    "We've got the greatest TV game but we're in the situation where we're the poor cousin when it comes to money and that's not good."

    Crowe said the NRL must negotiate a better deal when the current one expired in 2012.

    "But we'll work on that as we build to the next negotiation and it simply won't happen again," Crowe said.

    On Monday night, the Rabbitohs completed a four-match winning streak for the first time since 1994 and Crowe said their recent form showed that the players' spirits had never dipped despite their poor start to the season.

    He denied there had been a fallout between himself and fellow club owner Peter Holmes a Court, although he said he asked his colleague to stand aside as chief executive for the good of the club.

    Holmes a Court is now on a two-month break and his future at Souths is uncertain with Nicholas Pappas and Shane Richardson assuming the day-to-day running of the club.

    "There was no personal fallout, but at a certain point sometimes you've got to give someone a tap on the shoulder and say 'get someone else to take the ball this time'," Crowe said.

    "Pete's going to have a break and going to be away for a couple of months doing other things and clear his head and regain some objectivity.

    "One of the things that surprised him was that he always thought he could be, to a large degree, dispassionate.

    "But that's never been the calling card of South Sydney.

    "He came in the door and the next thing you know he's the one with the sleeves rolled up yelling abuse at the officials and creating his whole life around the team."

    Crowe admitted he had been surprised at the size of the commitment since becoming a co-owner at the club but said he had no plans to turn his back on the Rabbitohs.
  2. DSM5

    DSM5 Well-Known Member

    +516 /0
    Crowe's a complete arrsole, but he's right.
  3. Guest

    Guest Guest

    +0 /0
    Based on the AFL figures the NRL should be getting over to $900 million dollars over 6 years.

    Basically double the current NRL grant to each club and league is in much better shape. 

    Anyone know what union receives for its TV rights?  A couple of leather patched jackets?
  4. eagle_predator

    eagle_predator Active Member

    +0 /0
    Well i guess that explains why Holmes a Court has not been seen at any of the Rabbitohs games of late. Ill say one thing about Russell Crowe i think he's the more passionate between the two of them both as far as the Rabbitohs go and i agree something should done.
  5. Canteen Worker

    Canteen Worker Well-Known Member

    +214 /5
    Crowe is right. While they are trying to get more money they also need to deal with the scheduling. All clubs should get airplay and a mixture of the timeslots for games, plus a season draw to allow for fans to plan carefully.
  6. Chip and Chase

    Chip and Chase True Supporter Staff Member Administrator Premium Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

    +7,601 /60
    Now why would the NRL sell the TV rights below market cost ?? I wonder.

    Maybe because there is no such thing as an arms length transaction for them. Too much back scratching going on between, News Ltd, NRL, PBL (Channel 9) and Fox Sports. It's a feckin joke and the clubs and the game in general are being done a great disservice because of it. The NRL will continue to do as they are told by the big end of town and Gallop will bend over on demand. Transparency isn't high on the NRL's agenda
  7. Chip and Chase

    Chip and Chase True Supporter Staff Member Administrator Premium Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

    +7,601 /60
    By the way, re the Rugby TV rights (it's from Wiki so not pretending it's Gospel)

    In September 2004, SANZAR began negotiations for a new television deal to take effect in 2006. That December, SANZAR announced that a new TV deal had been signed, with News Corporation winning the rights for the UK, Australia and New Zealand and Supersport winning rights for South Africa. The contract is worth USD 323 million over five years, which is a 16% annual increase compared to the previous deal.[8] It covers international fixtures as well as the Super 14. SANZAR remained free to negotiate separate deals for other markets, such as France, Japan and the Americas.

    The TriNations is the "cash cow" for the SANZAR partners as it provides nearly 60 per cent of the money from News Ltd. The Super 14 made up about 30 per cent of the deal.
  8. SilentBob

    SilentBob Well-Known Member

    +4 /0
    Holmes a Court gave a lengthy presentation to the NRL at the start of the season focusing on raising revenue for the game, including the TV deal, Crowe is just jumping on the bandwagon that has been rolling along since the deal was signed.
  9. Ryan

    Ryan Well-Known Member

    +8,066 /366
    David Gallop is to blame here. He doesn't seem to have a corporate spine. He needs to be more ruthless.
    What was said above is true. We should have driven for an additional $64 million per annum, that was to be divided up $4 mill per annum for each club. The salary cap should have then gone up $2 million per team (STILL leaving an extra 2 million per club to pour into juniors, stock etc).

    We would then be able to rival the ESL. The Yawnion.

    Euopean Rugby will always be better, but hey, if the very rare player wanted to head there as being desperate (Gasnier, Gower, B Mcdougall) are the only one's I can think of, then see ya later.

    This is Gallops fault.

    We may have then also have been able to sustain another team in WA again or something...and I believe they were the only profitable frnachise out of the one's canned.
  10. The Wheel

    The Wheel Well-Known Member

    +2,267 /74
    Very hard for Gallop to have spine when the board that employs him has a vested interested in the media that is pitching for the NRL TV rights.
  11. Matabele

    Matabele Well-Known Member

    +511 /14
    You can't compare AFL and NRL.  AFL has far more reach and appeals to more female fans and a wealthier demographic right across the country.  NRL is watched by the eels and sharks supporters and who really wants to sell anything to them apart from beer companies peddling oblivion?

    There are also up to 5 AFL games of free-to-air whereas there are only 2 live NRL games. 

    Crowe needs to go back to making dull B Grade movies.
  12. The Wheel

    The Wheel Well-Known Member

    +2,267 /74
    Additionaly who is going to bid next time around Channel 7 has AFL, V8 etc, Channel 10 has AFL.

    Channel 9 against the ABC/SBS..........
  13. Fro

    Fro Well-Known Member

    +286 /0
    And the Pay TV component is not going to get much bigger, we will have fox bidding against.............fox!!
  14. eagle_predator

    eagle_predator Active Member

    +0 /0
    Holmes a Court gave a lengthy presentation to the NRL at the start of the season focusing on raising revenue for the game, including the TV deal, Crowe is just jumping on the bandwagon that has been rolling along since the deal was signed.

    All i'm saying is he seems to be the more passionate of the two as far as souths go however i could be wrong of course.
  15. Jatz Crackers

    Jatz Crackers Moderator Staff Member

    +1,298 /7
    Crowes outrage needs to be demonstrable. It loses its impact without the image of phones being hurled across a room with gladiatorial force.
  16. deadlyeagle

    deadlyeagle Member

    +11 /0
    a couple of wins by souths and crowes name is all back i the papers...

    Crowe is right but this news is really old news and he is just trying to spread the souths brand.

Share This Page