Talking Footy

NRLCrap1 wrote:

Fyiar that proves NOTHING!

of course it doesn't. anything that supports RL is irrelevant, but if the same statistic or fact is relevant for AFL then it is suddenly AFL AFL AFL AFL AFL AFL WE ARE THE BEST!!!!

like claims made by AFL supporters (dunno if it was you) about how many places AFL is broadcast around the world. also i was wrong about the 3 times replay, they're STILL replaying the 1st quarter final, so it'd probably be more like 5-8 times or something per game.

you can bet if AFL IC was broadcast....errr anywhere, you'd be tooting your own horn like there's no tomorrow.

pHyR3 wrote:

AFLcrap1 wrote:

pHyR3 wrote:

I obviously meant 'use the countless alternatives' I'm typing on my phone these days as I'm in India. Still getting every game live on TV though haha

India?.
Is Derpball taking over there?.
Are all the Indian kiddies running around in a Collington singlet?
Are the streets clogged with people kicking a Sharon to each other?

:_<> :_<>

lol

RLWC is repeated around THREE TIMES over here on cable (no one really has FTA kinda like america), after being played live of course.

for bumblers who demand a source, here is the schedule and it will have last nights NZ vs Scotland game on repeat at 2pm local time (so in a couple of minutes which i can watch) and again at 4 or 430 ahead of the live coverage of USA vs Australia at 6:30.

http://www.tensports.com/schedule/sports
http://www.tensports.com/schedule/action

if you're reading this comment in a couple of days or weeks it will obviously have changed and wont be relevant. i could screenshot it i guess, but cant be bothered. counting the RLWC games from both channels there are EIGHT games being played or replayed in a ~24 hour window from 12:30 am to 11pm or so.

Look Phy I suppose if your going to promote RL via the Tomahawks that would make sense - but what was the publicity in the USA after their thrashing??? Did it rate a mention?

pHyR3 wrote:

NRLCrap1 wrote:

Fyiar that proves NOTHING!

of course it doesn't. anything that supports RL is irrelevant, but if the same statistic or fact is relevant for AFL then it is suddenly AFL AFL AFL AFL AFL AFL WE ARE THE BEST!!!!

like claims made by AFL supporters (dunno if it was you) about how many places AFL is broadcast around the world. also i was wrong about the 3 times replay, they're STILL replaying the 1st quarter final, so it'd probably be more like 5-8 times or something per game.

you can bet if AFL IC was broadcast....errr anywhere, you'd be tooting your own horn like there's no tomorrow.

That indicates that TenSports is a makeshift channel, like 7mate here. Like I said, proves NOTHING! Why isn't it on a main channel, huh? It's been going since 1954 (which is the big difference between it and the IC - 2002 only) so what's the excuse?

You can bet in a comparitive time frame the IC will get TV coverage.

what defines a main channel? cricket isn't on FTA to my knowledge. might be but it is pretty irrelevant since cricket is like union in NZ except even more all consuming.

keep in mind you are asking why rugby league isn't on a main channel in INDIA. INDIA. the stupidity....god. is AFL even on tv at all? probably 1 or 2 games a week for indians to have a laugh at your unco sport. compare that to CONTINUAL repeats of the RLWC 2013. live and then 3-4 repeats per group game. all bloody day.

lol IC has been going more than 10 years and it's still a shit show? love to have seen the 2002 crowd. 10 people. in 2011 (or whenever) it was 500!!! SO MUCH GROWTH. hahaha pathetic.

There have only been four tournaments, you goose! It's still developing in the countries that are playing! It's not a shit show. They have a crack, which is more than I can say for the 19 countries that DON'T play rugby league but DO play AFL!!

You have already shown you won't have a crack, because you don't want to. The game scares the shit out of you and you won't admit it. If there's an unco sport on the planet, it's rugby league.

A main channel is a core channel, like our Seven, Nine, Ten and the ABC. And the only reason cricket might not be on TV live in India is because they GO TO THE GAMES!! But it will be when they tour elsewhere. Guaranteed.

"A main channel is a core channel, like our Seven, Nine, Ten and the ABC. And the only reason cricket might not be on TV live in India is because they GO TO THE GAMES!! But it will be when they tour elsewhere. Guaranteed."

so you haven't considered that maybe other countries have a different system of TV broadcasting? here everyone seems to have cable unlike Australia. I don't even know what the 'main' FTA channels are. They go to the games? what all 1 billion of them??? didn't realise the stadiums were so big. you're a legitimate derelict. there are probably 20 cities bigger than sydney by a long shot and the game will only be played in 1 of them. What happens to the rest? they all just watch it on cable.

If a venue held one billion at the cricket, you fricking bet they would all go!! And if they are watching it on cable that means it's not being shown on FTA there. That makes sense because the providers would be making a lot of money out of it.

EVERY country has main FTA channels. It's how TV fricking started, you goose! EVERYWHERE!!

NRLCrap1 wrote:

If a venue held one billion at the cricket, you fricking bet they would all go!! And if they are watching it on cable that means it's not being shown on FTA there. That makes sense because the providers would be making a lot of money out of it.

EVERY country has main FTA channels. It's how TV fricking started, you goose! EVERYWHERE!!

exactly. BUT THERE ARENT YOU DUMBFUCK. so shouldn't EVERYONE be demanding cricket on FTA??? but i dont think many games, if any, ARE on FTA. They are on payTV. i.e. a NON MAIN CHANNEL. and this is you comparing cricket to RL in INDIA you imbecile.

i never said india doesnt HAVE FTA you ******. I said they aren't important and are shithouse.

Oh now you shift the goal posts on the fricking argument! Of course they would want cricket on FTA there, but the cable providers hog it because they know they'll make a packet out of it! India doesn't have the anti-siphoning laws that we have! They would make so much it doesn't matter what they show when there isn't any cricket on, and ratings no longer matter!

So dump the comparison before it embarrasses you any more!

actually YOURE the one shifting the goal posts.

you asked why isnt RLWC on a major channel. I retorted with the fact that cricket (to my knowledge) is not on a major channel (which you defined as FTA). THEN YOU came along with these antisiphoning laws not being present in India as the reason they arent on FTA.

my point is that RLWC games get 5-8 replays after being played live. That is amazing and far better than anything club AFL could hope to achieve, let alone international AFL. Thus, International RL > int. AFL.

No it proves no such thing because by HIDING it on cable where no one will watch it because they pay for cricket ONLY it shows that they are NOT FRICKING INTERESTED!!

You garner interest in the first instance by putting it on FTA!!!! And they didn't do it!!!!

So again, don't make the comparison!

but no sport is on FTA in india regularly?? you cant actually be this stupid right....

IS AFL REPLAYED 5 TIMES IN INDIA? nope. if no one cares about RL in india guess where that leaves AFL.... lol.

int. RL >>>>>>> dog barking next door >>>>>> int. AFL.

You're wrong, you don't understand Indian culture, and I'm leaving that there.

strong comeback mate.

what WOULD prove something? and obviously you will retort with some ****** thing that is almost impossible to find like TV ratings for RL in india or participation which is easily skewed.

Excuses, excuses.