Talking Footy

Beaussie wrote:

AFL Warrior wrote:

And who really cares about what those sheep shaggers in NZ do? They can stick to their boring league while in Australia we can have AFL all to ourselves. If you love NZ so much King-mywifeisaewe then stay there and don't come back.

People in NZ don't like RL, they love Union.

gee... the million NZ'ers that watched the NRL Grand Final must have been confused about what they were watching then ?
& the 50K plus who'll be attending the first warriors game next year at eden park will be quite baffled when that game starts won;t they


what a wally you are beaussie

Millions??? Bwhahahaha

Sky New Zealand, a monopoly pay-TV company part-owned by News Ltd, holds NRL rights across the Tasman.

Unlike the Nine, Fox Sports and Telstra contracts, which expire at the end of next season, the Sky NZ deal has already concluded. Sky has made it clear it wants to pay less than the current $14 million a year, and has cited depressed ratings figures

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... =text-only

Beaussie wrote:

Millions??? Bwhahahaha

it says ..........
million

as in one ...... million NZ'ers

the number that were glued to their sets for our GF

the number glued to their sets for the singletball GF

ah
umm..

was it 50............? ....................

Bullshit

Beaussie wrote:

Bullshit

you're right

it wouldn't have been 50 watching the boggerball GF

more like 30

Beaussie wrote:

Millions??? Bwhahahaha

Sky New Zealand, a monopoly pay-TV company part-owned by News Ltd, holds NRL rights across the Tasman.

Unlike the Nine, Fox Sports and Telstra contracts, which expire at the end of next season, the Sky NZ deal has already concluded. Sky has made it clear it wants to pay less than the current $14 million a year, and has cited depressed ratings figures

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... =text-only

$14 million a year from a country in which RL supporters claim solid support? By that precedent by Sky New Zealand, the NRL can not possible hope for much more than what they got for TV rights last time, leaving it half as important as the AFL.

Hilarious isn't it. Worse still, Sky has made it clear it wants to pay less. Ratings must be abysmal just like the crowds for the Warriors.

Topper wrote:

Beaussie wrote:

Millions??? Bwhahahaha

Sky New Zealand, a monopoly pay-TV company part-owned by News Ltd, holds NRL rights across the Tasman.

Unlike the Nine, Fox Sports and Telstra contracts, which expire at the end of next season, the Sky NZ deal has already concluded. Sky has made it clear it wants to pay less than the current $14 million a year, and has cited depressed ratings figures

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... =text-only

$14 million a year from a country in which RL supporters claim solid support? By that precedent by Sky New Zealand, the NRL can not possible hope for much more than what they got for TV rights last time, leaving it half as important as the AFL.

its better then the .. ... $14 they pay AFL

Beaussie wrote:

Hilarious isn't it. Worse still, Sky has made it clear it wants to pay less. Ratings must be abysmal just like the crowds for the Warriors.

It would be hilarious if it wasn't so incredible in a supposed heartland.

Topper wrote:

Beaussie wrote:

Hilarious isn't it. Worse still, Sky has made it clear it wants to pay less. Ratings must be abysmal just like the crowds for the Warriors.

It would be hilarious if it wasn't so incredible in a supposed heartland.

a rapidly growing new frontier in a foreign land is NZ for RL .... massive growth in interest in this Rugby union heartland
has flogball got any " new " frontiers in any foreign lands ?

oh what am I saying

it has got any ... In Australia let alone anywhere else