BACK IN 2005, the fourth Test of cricket’s Ashes series between England and Australia recorded a huge peak audience of 8.4 million on the free-to-air Channel 4.
Essentially, at one stage during that series, 50% of people watching TV in England at the time were tuned into the Ashes.
But even as that titanic series was concluding with a stirring English victory, the England Cricket Board [ECB] had already signed a lucrative deal with Sky Sports that would take cricket behind a TV paywall right through to this day.
The viewing figures for the Ashes series, and England’s Test cricket, dropped off a cliff thereafter.
As Sean Ingle pointed out in the Guardian in 2015, one of that year’s Ashes Tests barely managed to draw a bigger audience than a 1974 episode of Columbo shown on ITV3 at the same time.
Cricket’s popularity in England declined without free-to-air coverage of the national team and the effects are still being felt. While Sky has pumped money into the sport, the ECB has regularly faced criticism for not growing the game, with participation numbers regressing notably along with the TV audiences.
Tellingly, last year saw Sky Sports agree for Channel 4 to show England’s World Cup final against New Zealand. This was the first time since 2005 that free-to-air TV viewers were able to watch England’s cricketers live.
Channel 4 recorded a peak audience of 5.2 million, as fans thrilled in England’s victory over the Kiwis. It was a glimpse of what many of them are missing, with cricket still otherwise behind its paywall with Sky.
In all of this is a lesson for the Six Nations as the prospect of fans losing free-to-air access to rugby’s self-professed ‘greatest championship’ looms.
The Six Nations may well still be great in the future, but the reality is that vastly more people will watch a sport, engage with it, perhaps even fall for it and start playing or paying to go to games, if it’s free to watch on TV.
The Six Nations is a special beast because it transforms an otherwise somewhat niche sport into one that becomes headline news within its participating nations.
People who are otherwise disinterested in rugby – barring the quadrennial World Cup – genuinely focus on the oval-ball sport during the Six Nations.
Some of them become genuine rugby supporters. We all have examples of this kind of convert in our lives. Exposure to games has been key.
The danger for the Six Nations is losing access to this wider audience by going behind a paywall, whether that’s with Sky Sports, BT Sport, or perhaps even an outsider like Amazon.
We’ve been here before in Irish rugby, albeit on a smaller scale. The Heineken Cup used to be shown live on RTÉ but Sky Sports won the exclusive Irish rights and brought it behind the paywall at the start of the 2006/07 season.
As Paul Rouse outlines in an excellent 2012 paper on ‘The Impact of Pay-TV on Sport,’ a direct comparison between Leinster’s Heineken Cup quarter-final away to Wasps in 2006 and their quarter-final away to Toulouse in 2007 highlights what happened next.
255,000 people watched the 2006 match on RTÉ, but just 47,000 watched Leinster’s quarter-final on Sky in 2007.
Again, the point here is clear – the viewing figures will drastically drop by taking the Six Nations away from free-to-air stations.
Some would argue that interest levels in the Heineken Cup have declined as it has morphed into the Champions Cup in more recent years and it has been interesting to see EPCR successfully push to bring back some free-to-air coverage.
The idea here is to provide exposure to a wider audience but also to lure some viewers into realising they need to pay for a subscription channel to watch this competition, but the measure hasn’t been an unqualified success.
Virgin Media did get to screen two Leinster pool games – and one of Ulster’s – live this season but they also had the two Saracens v Ospreys fixtures, which were obviously not going to draw a big audience on these shores.
Virgin [and Channel 4 in the UK] will also show Ulster’s quarter-final clash away to Toulouse but there is little doubt the Irish broadcaster would love to have screened Leinster’s Saturday evening clash with Saracens too.
Of course, tournament organisers EPCR received more money from Sky back in the day and get crucial sums from sole tournament broadcaster BT now – and that’s a hugely important consideration in all of this.
It’s a major factor that shouldn’t simply be dismissed.
At present, rugby is relatively cash-strapped. It is not the mega-rich world other global and American sports have become, and the unions who make up the Six Nations could certainly benefit from having more money, which they could in turn sink into growing the game in other ways than having a huge audience watching their national teams.
Going with a subscription-based broadcaster like Sky or BT will certainly provide far, far more money than their free-to-air rivals can.
The likes of RTÉ and Virgin Media here in Ireland, as well as the BBC in the UK, simply cannot compete with broadcasters like Sky and BT when it comes to cold, hard cash.
So what of the possibility of the Six Nations rights potentially being split between a paywalled subscription broadcaster and free-to-air channels?
There is some chance of this, with the UK Times’ Owen Slot reporting that the Six Nations fixtures – 15 of them each year – may well be split into three tranches of five games each, with the top tranche composed of the most mouthwatering fixtures and the bottom tranche of the least attractive games.
That makes sense on one level, but would Virgin Media or RTÉ here in Ireland really want to be stuck with four fixtures like Scotland v Italy as well as possibly just one of their home nations’ games? It doesn’t sound like the most attractive package.
And the frustration for broadcasters like Sky, who have previously made huge investments in rugby before dipping out of it in more recent times, has been the bitty nature of purchasing rights to the various competitions.
We’ve actually seen the Six Nations recognise this by announcing that its six member unions have agreed to unify their media rights for all November Tests, the men’s Six Nations, women’s Six Nations, and the U20 Six Nations.
This is the strategy that has been dubbed ‘Project Light’ and it will certainly have been welcomed by the broadcasters, who will no longer have to negotiate all of these deals separately.
Again, this doesn’t necessarily mean that one broadcaster will take onboard all November Tests, men’s Six Nations, women’s Six Nations, and U20 Six Nations rights in one fell swoop, but there is certainly more appeal to do so now.
But if all of this rugby is to go behind a paywall, supporters would certainly welcome being able to pay just one subscription fee for access to a genuine ‘home of rugby’ that covers most bases.
Which brings us to the part private equity firm CVC has to play in all of this, which simmers beneath everything we have touched on so far.
CVC – which is set to buy a 15% share in the Six Nations for around £300 million – is in the money-making business and it’s clear and obvious that they will prioritise that within any decision-making.
Having already bought a 27% stake in the English Premiership, the private equity firm is also widely believed to have agreed in principle to take over 27% of the Pro14.
So CVC is evidently going to have a big say in the future of the sport on a number of levels. The firm’s previous work includes turning a gigantic profit by investing in Formula One and putting it behind a TV paywall.
Crucially, though, it’s understood CVC’s stake in the Six Nations will essentially make them something akin to the seventh member union when it comes to making media and TV rights decisions.
The firm has proven expertise in making a lot of money so it’s obvious the six existing unions will listen when advice is being given.
But, if it is the case that CVC is not making the final decision, the Six Nations needs to consider that fine balance between making more money and keeping the championship available to the big audience that free-to-air broadcasters provide.
While there is well-deserved nostalgia for Sky’s rugby coverage and no doubting that BT are doing a superb job of giving us polished, insightful broadcasts right now, many of us will have genuinely fallen in love with the game through watching the Six Nations or seeing some of those early Heineken Cup days on free-to-air TV.
Many of the key decision-makers in the member unions of the Six Nations appreciate that keenly and it’s vital that they remember it as this decision-making process unfolds.
And, of course, things have changed since those days. Streaming is an increasingly important part of the picture and will come into play in whatever ‘TV’ rights deal is agreed. The modern rugby supporters wants digital ease of access.
One final last point is the potential role of governments in this. As things stand in Ireland [and the UK], the Six Nations is not on the protected list of sporting events that is required to be screened live on free-to-air stations.
Ireland’s games at World Cups are protected here, but the Six Nations being absent from the list – when home and away qualifying and tournament ties in football’s European Championship and World Cup are on it – is to the bemusement of many supporters.
With the IRFU in receipt of government funding, many would argue that the Six Nations should be protected.
So clearly there are many, many strands to this. It’s also clear that there is road ahead in this process, with submissions from broadcasters for the so-called ‘tender package’ be submitted before March 14, with the new deal set to kick in from the 2022 Six Nations onwards.
A huge, wide-reaching decision in the future of the sport lies ahead.
Watching Jose and pogba, will be more entertaining than the football .
@Liam Neeson: it’s all going to plan for Jose.
C’mon you irons#.
Ahahahahahahahahahaha pmsl
@Tuot tuot: why are you laughing at a british club? Another case of my british club is better than your british club
@Paul: nearly as bad as you commenting on a British club thread.
@John: or commenting on somebody commenting …eh John
@Paul: and there is you speaking the queens english and probably watch English TV and use things made in Britain too.
Give over you pleb
@Colin Ahern: I guess he also only supports irish home grown music and none of that foreign stuff too.
@Paul: Oh give over.it has always been this way and always will be.
Pogba is at a stage where he doesn’t really care. He is on crazy money and his reputation after winning the world cup is an all time high. Maybe not witj fans but for Barcelona, real Madrid and psg boards he’s still worth 100 million. He could feasibly play poorly for years and swap between top clubs and earn the same money.
@Murf T Will: I was with you right up until the playing poorly for years bit. No one’s reputation is bullet proof! Just look at the likes of Torres, Rooney etc.
@Murf T Will: Rooney played poorly for years with United. He definitely milked it. They only shipped him out because he couldn’t run anymore.
@Murf T Will: Yeah – with United. Then he moved to Everton didn’t he? It’s not like he’s been bouncing around the top clubs whilst playing poorly on the strength of his good reputation as you claim Pogba might.
@Murf T Will: It was his reputation and nationality that kept him at United.
@I’m not wavy gravy: Yea Torres bounced from Liverpool to Chelsea to Atletico. Not really a dip in standard.
@Hugh Jass: I see your point but Chelsea to Athletico was a huge drop in standard for Torres! Do you not remember how good he was at Liverpool? He’s lucky there was so much love for him at AM or he’d have been thrown into mid-table obscurity.
@Murf T Will: And as soon as it was time to move clubs where did he go? Everton then Galaxy. Your original claim was that Pogba can play poorly for years and still secure high profile moves to the likes of Barca and Real Madrid. That’s clearly not the case.
@Murf T Will: Yeah. Obviously with age you will move to lesser clubs with physical ability weakening. Up until 30 to 32 pogba will circulate the top clubs.
@Murf T Will: And if he transfers to a club like spurs within that time I’ll personally go into your bank and pay off your mortgage.
@Murf T Will: Haha alright, deal. I’ll meet you back here in ten years and we’ll see who’s right.
Hope Rice has good game!
@Magnum: Hes had a cracking game Magnum
But but but but
Not good enough. I thought Jose would have till January to turn it around but I’m not so sure now
I”m getting sick of this, nobody fears man Utd anymore and by the looks of it, with good reason. Bottom of table clubs will be looking to take a point as a minimum and hope to take 3. Tough season ahead, top 4 looking dodgy for sure.
Hammers well worth their 2-0 lead. So much negativity surrounding the club ,players and manager. Score line doesn’t surprise me.In saying that I think it’s Woodward that needs to take a step back and let someone else take the reigns. He is a very astute businessman but not a Chief Executive.
@Johnny Bravo: so it’s Woodwards fault United are 2 nil down to a team that have only own a single league game this season?
@Gareth Keenan: He has been more or less head of the decision making in the last few years , so if you like yea he should shoulder some of the blame for today’s game and more. Does that explain it for you
@Johnny Bravo: no it doesn’t actually. Manager and players are responsible for what happens on the pitch.
@Gareth Keenan’: who’s responsible for putting them there in the first place I ask you !
haha such a crap performance again today from.the once mighty now shitey man United.Total laughing stock of a club from the manager down to the very poor egotistical players they have.Mourinho to stay on hopefully .They deserve each other .
@Michael cunnane: Micheal comeback when you’ve actually won something. Good lad
@Michael cunnane: Nearly as bad as Spurs performance at home to Liverpool! Scoreline flattered Spurs, should have been 5!
@Michael cunnane: whereas Spuds have been shitey since the days of Ricky Villa and Ardiles
@Michael cunnane: sorry you probably don’t know who they are
@David Carino: Hahahahahahahaha 3-0 we outclassed ye at old crappord.Have that .Spurs light years ahead of United.Wakey wakey
@Michael cunnane: yes so far ahead I can’t see because of the shine coming out of your Trophy drawer .
So 2-0. Everything going to plan with Paul and Jose
Give Smalling and Shaw a pay rise! 4 million a year is nowhere near enough for this level of mediocre, overhyped talent. This is what I spend my hard earned barstooler euro on, so you better sort it Woodward!… Sure, it’s the best league in the world!