Corona impact on NRL...?

[happy_tiger]

At this time last year (or the year before or the year before that or any year)
would players be getting stood down for not getting a flu jab?

So why are they now?


Apparently, if you get the flu, your immune system is reduced and the there's a higher risk to catch Covid-19.
And if one player gets Coronavirus, it's more likely to spread among the players.
So caution is required.

And yet the flu injection is only around 45% effective.
So 55% of players will get the flu regardless, therefore potentially be more at risk of getting covid19 (apparently)
So if any player gets the flu will they be stood down too?

I would have thought staying away from people with Covid19 is probably a good way to not get it.
I think it's disgraceful that they're forcing people to get the flu jab.

Even if it is only 45 percent effective the argument is that it reduces risk by that amount.

The issue is that this was part of an agreement in The NRL’s submission to government to allow a May 28 restart. The document submitted to government stated that all players would have the flu vac. The players union and players themselves agreed to this. Now the government is saying we’re letting you play but only on the conditions we agreed to.

I also feel bad for Cartwright to a degree given he’s stuck between his partner’s strong views and the requirements of his occupation. His partner is using this opportunity as a platform to promote her views on child vaccinations, which in my opinion (and that of rigorous scientific research) is risking the health of our society.

Bet half the Titans squad is egging him on ..stay strong Bryce ....we will miss you in 2020 lol

 

[JD Tiger]

At this time last year (or the year before or the year before that or any year)
would players be getting stood down for not getting a flu jab?

So why are they now?


Apparently, if you get the flu, your immune system is reduced and the there's a higher risk to catch Covid-19.
And if one player gets Coronavirus, it's more likely to spread among the players.
So caution is required.

And yet the flu injection is only around 45% effective.
So 55% of players will get the flu regardless, therefore potentially be more at risk of getting covid19 (apparently)
So if any player gets the flu will they be stood down too?

I would have thought staying away from people with Covid19 is probably a good way to not get it.
I think it's disgraceful that they're forcing people to get the flu jab.

Even if it is only 45 percent effective the argument is that it reduces risk by that amount.

The issue is that this was part of an agreement in The NRL’s submission to government to allow a May 28 restart. The document submitted to government stated that all players would have the flu vac. The players union and players themselves agreed to this. Now the government is saying we’re letting you play but only on the conditions we agreed to.

I also feel bad for Cartwright to a degree given he’s stuck between his partner’s strong views and the requirements of his occupation. His partner is using this opportunity as a platform to promote her views on child vaccinations, which in my opinion (and that of rigorous scientific research) is risking the health of our society.

Bet half the Titans squad is egging him on ..stay strong Bryce ....we will miss you in 2020 lol

I first read your comment as "But" half the Titans instead of "bet". It changed the whole meaning of the sentence. I had a comment ready to go and everything. Good thing I reread it.

 

[mike]

At this time last year (or the year before or the year before that or any year)
would players be getting stood down for not getting a flu jab?

So why are they now?

Because it was part of the deal with the Government(s) on the restart of the NRL that all players and staff be vaccinated. This was one of the conditions of allowing the restart of the NRL. Had it not been included none of the State Governments would have agreed to the proposal.

 

[Red88_Tiger]

I wonder if any of these players have a problem with pain killing injections footballers have or is that different

 

[mike]

I wonder if any of these players have a problem with pain killing injections footballers have or is that different

That’s a very good question.

 

[Go_You_Good_Things]

I wonder if any of these players have a problem with pain killing injections footballers have or is that different

I don't think the mummy bloggers/anti-vaxers/influencers have a problem with painkilling injections.
The ramifications of this type of injection are far beyond their grasp.
The irony is thick.

 

[TheDaBoss]

I wonder if any of these players have a problem with pain killing injections footballers have or is that different

Excellent question


The same can be said if they have to have surgery and have anesthesia

As well as any type of injection

:::

Spoiler Text

:::

 

[pawsandclaws1]

It is a non issue. If it is a condition imposed on the NRL for the competition to commence, those players who are vaccinated play. Those who haven't had the vaccination don't. The choice is up to the players and my only view is those who chose not to be vaccinated have the courage to live by your choice and stop the complaining.

 

[gallagher]

It is a non issue. If it is a condition imposed on the NRL for the competition to commence, those players who are vaccinated play. Those who haven't had the vaccination don't. The choice is up to the players and my only view is those who chose not to be vaccinated have the courage to live by your choice and stop the complaining.

Yeah, I don't see the fuss. It's a clear cut decision.

 

[gallagher]

NRL set for massive payday in historic Foxtel, Nine broadcast deal

The NRL is on the verge of being saved from the financial scrapheap. The Sunday Telegraph can reveal Peter V’Landys is just days away from inking one of the richest deals in Australian sporting history with broadcasters Foxtel and Channel 9.

The cash-strapped NRL is just days away from securing a stunning new TV broadcast deal worth up to $2.3 billion, the richest in Australia’s sporting history.

The Sunday Telegraph can reveal Channel 9 and Fox Sports are on the verge of agreeing to a lucrative seven-year contract that will lift rugby league from a financial scrapheap, safeguard the game’s long-term viability and guarantee the survival of all 16 clubs.

Independent commission chairman Peter V’landys is hoping to reach an agreement in principal by Friday for the remaining three years of the current contract plus a four-season extension until 2027.

It would be the most lucrative broadcast deal in the history of Australian sport, averaging out at almost $330 million a season – a remarkable outcome given the long-term global financial uncertainty over the COVID-19 crisis.

The contract will be heavily discounted for this season because of the reduction to 20 rounds although the NRL is expecting ratings to increase because fans cannot attend the venues.

After weeks of uncertainty over Channel 9’s position with their free-to-air, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the network has been forced back into negotiations with an improved offer because of a fierce public backlash over their threats to abandon the game.

It is a spectacular backflip after expressing a willingness to walk away from the sport last week.

“It’s not a given that NRL has to be part of our future,” Marks said.

The finer details of the match scheduling for both networks is still being thrashed out.

There would be scope in the new contract to adjust the figures if future expansion into Brisbane and other areas delivers more content.

V’landys was reluctant to comment yesterday because of confidentiality agreements with both Fox Sports boss Patrick Delany and Channel 9 chief executive Hugh Marks.

“Both partners have acted in great faith and I believe we’re very close,” V’landys said.

“Hopefully we’ll have it finalised by next Friday. That’s my aim.

“The loyalty factor has been important because you want to look after your partners who have been with the game for a long time.”

The digital component of the deal and the future of the NRL website is still to be sorted.

Global Media and Sports boss Colin Smith has a long history in local and international broadcast deals. He says this is a great outcome for all parties.

“Peter V’landys has been the saviour of the NRL, no doubt for me,” Smith said.

“In this climate, if you ask what represents a good broadcast deal, I would say anything from $300 million to $350m a year is an excellent result.

“V’landys is a master negotiator, he is a street fighter and he is not afraid to take the bull by the horns. He looks at the outcome and he actually delivers on it.

“Seriously, if Peter can achieve in excess of $300 million, that is fantastic.”

The new TV contract will allow the NRL to establish a seven-year strategic plan, including grassroots development, long-term investments, possible expansion and a stadium policy for Sydney’s nine clubs.

V’landys has vowed to slash $50 million in costs from NRL headquarters and put spending restrictions in place for coaching, sports science and general football expenditure at the clubs.

This will allow the game rebuild from its ‘catastrophic’ financial crisis and ensure money is available from the new television deal to invest $500 million from the new deal over the next seven years.

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/s...l/news-story/df84265d3d1c900850f0903b485a298d

 

[JC99]

How about the misleading headline of ‘richest deal in sports’. It’s actually worth less per season compared to the current deal which still has two years left on it. Exactly what the broadcasters wanted - not a win for the NRL. They should stay to their current deal and if Nine don’t like it they can be given the boot.

 

[gallagher]

How about the misleading headline of ‘richest deal in sports’. It’s actually worth less per season compared to the current deal which still has two years left on it. Exactly what the broadcasters wanted - not a win for the NRL. They should stay to their current deal and if Nine don’t like it they can be given the boot.

What's the current deal worth?

 

[JC99]

How about the misleading headline of ‘richest deal in sports’. It’s actually worth less per season compared to the current deal which still has two years left on it. Exactly what the broadcasters wanted - not a win for the NRL. They should stay to their current deal and if Nine don’t like it they can be given the boot.

What's the current deal worth?

About $360m a year. This one seems about $325m a year

 

[happy_tiger]

It is a non issue. If it is a condition imposed on the NRL for the competition to commence, those players who are vaccinated play. Those who haven't had the vaccination don't. The choice is up to the players and my only view is those who chose not to be vaccinated have the courage to live by your choice and stop the complaining.

Yep spot on , you make calls in life , you live by them

Vlandy's shouldn't waste his time with that fight

 

[JD Tiger]

7 year deal? That is certainly not in the NRL's best interests. If V'landys makes a 7 year deal, then he has failed.

 

[JC99]

7 year deal? That is certainly not in the NRL's best interests. If V'landys makes a 7 year deal, then he has failed.

It’s 5 year including this year I believe

 

[JD Tiger]

7 year deal? That is certainly not in the NRL's best interests. If V'landys makes a 7 year deal, then he has failed.

It’s 5 year including this year I believe

Even 5 would be too long. Why should NRL renegotiate the current deal, and make a deal for years after that, all in the middle of a pandemic? Channel 9 and Fox want it, and we know where their priorities lie.

Making a 7 year deal, or even 5 year deal right now is incredibly bad for the NRL. It would only serve V'landys as a short-term win whilst limiting the NRL into the future. Typical politician operating methods, I hope the report is wrong.

 

[cochise]

7 year deal? That is certainly not in the NRL's best interests. If V'landys makes a 7 year deal, then he has failed.

It’s 5 year including this year I believe

Even 5 would be too long. Why should NRL renegotiate the current deal, and make a deal for years after that, all in the middle of a pandemic? Channel 9 and Fox want it, and we know where their priorities lie.

Making a 7 year deal, or even 5 year deal right now is incredibly bad for the NRL. It would only serve V'landys as a short-term win whilst limiting the NRL into the future. Typical politician operating methods, I hope the report is wrong.

It is a 5 year extension on the current deal, so 7 years including this year. I can live with $330m a year as long as they haven't given up the NRL digital arm, the digital arm is crucial and if that is gone then this deal is terrible.

What is interesting is that they haven't decided the digital rights yet, which would have a big impact on Kayo if Fox doesn't at least get some rights to stream.

 

[gallagher]

How about the misleading headline of ‘richest deal in sports’. It’s actually worth less per season compared to the current deal which still has two years left on it. Exactly what the broadcasters wanted - not a win for the NRL. They should stay to their current deal and if Nine don’t like it they can be given the boot.

What's the current deal worth?

About $360m a year. This one seems about $325m a year

Cheers. Even before the virus, sports were looking at reduced broadcast money. Rugby and A league are under the squeeze. A longer deal may be the the smart move.

 

[cochise]

How about the misleading headline of ‘richest deal in sports’. It’s actually worth less per season compared to the current deal which still has two years left on it. Exactly what the broadcasters wanted - not a win for the NRL. They should stay to their current deal and if Nine don’t like it they can be given the boot.

What's the current deal worth?

About $360m a year. This one seems about $325m a year

Cheers. Even before the virus, sports were looking at reduced broadcast money. Rugby and A league are under the squeeze. A longer deal may be the the smart move.

As long as we have kept the NRL digital arm, that is key to this deal in my opinion.