Sky's dominance of the pay TV market is a problem.

I think he's spot on! Good article. It's a shame comments like this get overlooked by the fools that run this great game.

He really has a point i can only think that he mat be talking about young rovers players earning that and its a disgrace. we are not in victorian times where workhouses and young lads down mines was the norm. Thankfully William wilberforce took care of that but my point being is asking young to place their bodies on line for pittance pay is disgusting. The rfl does need independent evaluation as it seem above that.

I know the brother of a current SL player who moved clubs two years ago, his club wanted to keep him but offered only £7,500 per season. He moved to his current club for a living wage and is now coming on strong without having to find alternative income to back the RL wage up.

Thousands of players throughout the country put thier bodies on the line for nothing & even pay match day subs, they do it because they enjoy it, any cash they get is a bonous. If young kids wont play for a small wage with the chance of progressing then they wont be motivated anyway & we dont need them.

Some amateurs get paid good money from good careers, which means they cannot go full time pro, if we want a lad to go full time then we should pay at least the national minumum wage. If the sum of 5K is true, then surely that is illegal.

Depends on what you mean by young kids. If your talking about 15/16 year olds then maybe, but if you mean 18/19 year olds then no. People have bills to pay at the end of the day, not everyone have parents who are able to support them financially until they progress.

So Wigan should have given you Charnley





Does Newton do the Allams publicity in his spare time

Guess even his former fans in OZ reckon he is a gob3...!!!!

I wish this was true but unfortunately no one else wants RL. Its a similar arguement that the media have with skys dominance of football and cricket. If sky dropped football the BBC still wouldn't show much of it. As RL is way down the pecking order it would disappear without sky.

I don't think that is a like for like comparison. An undergraduate medical student isn't going to be asked to do a real shift in A&E. I'm not saying trainee RL players should get £15k - but once they are training full-time and have a squad number and are, even occasionally, being selected to play SL, I don't think it is unreasonable.









You're assuming that if Sky disappeared, or at least had to compete, others wouldn't fill the vacuum. I doubt this is the case. As both the dominant platform and with exclusive rights to so many sports, Sky essentially operates as a monopoly. It would make sense to break it up - economically. Because it is a powerful media monopoly, with major shareholders that also own powerful newspapers, it is difficult to do politically - even after hackgate.

I'm not quite sure how the wage and duties of, let's say, an admin support worker at the RFL (who may not be pulling their weight and should therefore be "out the door"icon_wink.gif reads across to a "72-10" scoreline. Did Nigel Wood miss a tackle and give away a penalty?







Otherwise, some good points. Why didn't he mention them earlier?