Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Other Stuff
Archived
Rugby World Cup 2007
News Boycott to the RWC?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="scuubasteve" data-source="post: 142137"><p>Its a bit hard to get the full story from most of the internet articles on this topic, as ironically they're from the media sources the whole issue is centred around.</p><p></p><p>As I understand it, both parties agreed some time ago what the agreement will be. And now issues have been revolving around the specific interpretation of what they agreed on.</p><p></p><p>The amount of info that the IRB has allowed the media to use seems pretty reasonable. But I think the media will see this as the thin edge of the wedge, so to speak. Similar attempts at Media content control were tried by FIFA for the worldcup last year. And the media had a cry about that and got away with it. But, as usual, the IRB are taking the non-compromising "we're right, you're wrong" mentality. But I think the media companies have probably realised that if they let this slide now then the example will have been made and that media exlcusivity rights will become the norm, meaning they'll have to pay more to cover events.</p><p></p><p>Doesn't this just echo the Edinburgh/Curruthers vs. SRU/McKie problems of last month. Where a contract was signed, only for both sides to have differing interpretations of what they signed.</p><p></p><p>Essentially its lose/lose. IRB loses exposure of its showpiece tournament. Media lose content to attract customers.</p><p></p><p>How does Rugby get itself into these situations?!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="scuubasteve, post: 142137"] Its a bit hard to get the full story from most of the internet articles on this topic, as ironically they're from the media sources the whole issue is centred around. As I understand it, both parties agreed some time ago what the agreement will be. And now issues have been revolving around the specific interpretation of what they agreed on. The amount of info that the IRB has allowed the media to use seems pretty reasonable. But I think the media will see this as the thin edge of the wedge, so to speak. Similar attempts at Media content control were tried by FIFA for the worldcup last year. And the media had a cry about that and got away with it. But, as usual, the IRB are taking the non-compromising "we're right, you're wrong" mentality. But I think the media companies have probably realised that if they let this slide now then the example will have been made and that media exlcusivity rights will become the norm, meaning they'll have to pay more to cover events. Doesn't this just echo the Edinburgh/Curruthers vs. SRU/McKie problems of last month. Where a contract was signed, only for both sides to have differing interpretations of what they signed. Essentially its lose/lose. IRB loses exposure of its showpiece tournament. Media lose content to attract customers. How does Rugby get itself into these situations?! [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
Archived
Rugby World Cup 2007
News Boycott to the RWC?
Top