[CJ91 Posts: 878Captain☆☆☆☆☆☆☆]

So there has been some suggestion that part of the way to ‘save’ the game is to have PPV matches when the time comes.

If the game is behind closed doors, I get it, but would it really be a success when people already have paid for season tickets and, in many cases, Sky?

I’m not sure about it…

[Spike Island 90 Posts: 418First Teamer☆☆☆☆☆☆]

CJ91 wrote:

So there has been some suggestion that part of the way to ‘save’ the game is to have PPV matches when the time comes. If the game is behind closed doors, I get it, but would it really be a success when people already have paid for season tickets and, in many cases, Sky? I’m not sure about it…

 

The most rational way to save the game is to get back to basics, no expansion teams, create a league in the image of British Rugby League. Community spirit, a community game played in the 62 Corridor.

How can we expand the game when the game is no longer strong in former hot spots?

[PaulieWalnuts Posts: 165North Stander☆☆☆☆☆]

If TW really are £10mill in debt due to this lockdown, then I think it’s safe to say they’ll be gone pretty soon.

What if the RFL re-start the CC (behind closed doors) and Catalans can’t travel. Would we get a ‘walkover’/bye into the next round?

There are more questions than answers.

Paulie xx

"WHY IS IT OH, SO DIFFICULT, TO UPLOAD A PROFILE PICTURE ON THIS MESSAGEBOARD?"

[Torn Sock 1 Posts: 118North Stander☆☆☆☆☆]

If a sport that is all about physical contact can be played, then fans will be allowed in.
They also won’t potentially take up ambulances time either until all is well.

No sport will be played until this is all well on the back burner, so there is no need for people (In all sports) to chuck round theory after theory.

[Farnworth Viking Posts: 374First Teamer☆☆☆☆☆☆]

They could start playing behind closed doors a lot sooner than playing in front of a crowd, because if the virus infection has slowed down, but is still around, there’s a lot bigger chance of people getting it if they’re all sat together among thousands of others.

[Mick George Posts: 320First Teamer☆☆☆☆☆☆]

Farnworth Viking wrote:

They could start playing behind closed doors a lot sooner than playing in front of a crowd, because if the virus infection has slowed down, but is still around, there’s a lot bigger chance of people getting it if they’re all sat together among thousands of others.

Are you not concerned about the players welfare ?. If a player caught the virus on field then the Sport would go bust. Like stated above no medics no games.

[Farnworth Viking Posts: 374First Teamer☆☆☆☆☆☆]

Obviously there will have to be medics at the matches and I imagine that they would have to test all the players before they play to make sure they haven’t got the virus.

[Ceejay1 Posts: 182North Stander☆☆☆☆☆]

Do you mean the tests that take five days to be proved one way or the other?

 

[Farnworth Viking Posts: 374First Teamer☆☆☆☆☆☆]

I’m not a medical expert so I don’t know, but Australia don’t seem to think this will be a problem, with them due to start playing again in a months time.

[CJ91 Posts: 878Captain☆☆☆☆☆☆☆]

Big push for this PPV stuff in the Mirror today with Tony Smith and Kevin Sinfield.

Along the lines of saving Rugby League…..

Not sure I would pay for Salford v Hull KR (in addition to SKY) just because it would ‘save’ Super League….

[Farnworth Viking Posts: 374First Teamer☆☆☆☆☆☆]

Why would you have to pay again if you already have a sky sports subscription?

[CJ91 Posts: 878Captain☆☆☆☆☆☆☆]

Farnworth Viking wrote:

Why would you have to pay again if you already have a sky sports subscription?

Basically the 2 Sky Games would stay and the other 4 weekend games would be PPV. So to make money, they need you to pay extra for the non-Sky games.

[Author]

Posts