Raiders Miss the Limelight Again

IMHO…Its all about population in rating areas………its got nothing to do how well your team is doing.

I’m a Sea Eagles fan and there was about a 4 year period where we never got any FTA televised games. That all changed a couple of years ago when we started looking like a top 4 team. Raiders had a bloody good season this year and I think 2009 looks promising as well, too bad Channel 9 have snubbed them once again.

> Hopefully the lack of Raiders games on free to air teev gets inspires more folks to head
> over to Bruce to see the games LIVE.
>
> I don’t think there was a more entertaining team than the Raiders in 2008 and yet the
> douche bags in Channel Nine’s programming department have made yet another blunder.

They were quite entertaining…they played some good footy (hard for me to say about a mungo team as a Rugby purest). That in itself should see some more bums on seats at home games I reckon.

I could be wrong, but my understanding is that the Raiders are being passed over for only the first 5 rounds (at this stage at least). The “15” being quoted refers to the number of games on Channel Nine. Three games per weekend x 5 rounds = 15 raiderless games.

But I do agree with the above comments about the quality of channel nine’s commentary. Ray Warren, Phil Gould? Please! Pack of knobs. Laurie’s the only one worth broadcasting, the rest of it’s rubbish and is only outdone by the Fatty Vautin Idiot Hour (and the day that show gets canned will be declared a national holiday for NRL fans everywhere).

My clan and I will be at all the games in Bruce Stadium this year. I’m excited already!

is that lime green?

Hopefully the lack of Raiders games on free to air teev gets inspires more folks to head over to Bruce to see the games LIVE.

I don’t think there was a more entertaining team than the Raiders in 2008 and yet the douche bags in Channel Nine’s programming department have made yet another blunder.

Like Thumper, I listen to most games on the radio (if I’m not at Bruce) and the ABC coverage far exceeds most of the reconstituted crap served up by Channel 9.

I’d much rather watch Fox than the crap Nine serve up – where do they dredge their sporting commentators up from? However, that said, it would benefit the Raiders in seeking sponsors to have more commercial TV exposure.

Best news I have heard all year – I have no reason to watch any game that the Channel Nein tossers will commentate on until Round 15!

The Fox Coverage is 100 times better than anything a channel with Gould, Warren and Ikin could ever generate.

i have no time at all for this game, less for the raiders, but this seems to highlight the sort of ineptitude and inequity that hallmarks the rugby league – this is so unprofessional, no wonder the nrl has issues…

st george are the only team worth watching anyway…….and it’s probably got something to do with wanker bennett taking over as coach i’d say……

The Raiders averaged just shy of 12,000 people at home games last year, which is on par with plenty of other clubs.

Besides, I think crowd figures at Bruce is the last thing considered by Channel 9 when determining which games get TV time and which don’t.

Maybe if Canberra got behind them a bit more they would have better luck with TV… It just looks embarrassing showing Raiders games on TV when there’s only 9,000 people there..