Rugby? Lacrosse? On Network TV!

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Yes, it is against the US Open, but I thought it was cool that right now there is both US Major League Rugby and US Premier League Lacrosse on CBS and NBC right now. I did not even know we had a rugby league in this country.
 
Last edited:

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,453
MLR debuted last year, Boston is getting an expansion team starting next season.
 

smokin joe wood

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
868
And I realized later yesterday that this isn't the same Lacrosse league as the Boston entry. We have two Lacrosse leagues?
Yes. Paul Rabil (formerly best player in the world and current player in the Premier Lacrosse League) has co-founded a new league. They also have a pretty strong deal with NBC to air the games. In the process he took about 90% of the best players in the world with him from the MLL (the league where the Boston Cannons play) with him to the PLL. Changed wage structure and gave the players some equity in the league. The on-field product through three weeks has been remarkably good.
 

Spacemans Bong

chapeau rose
SoSH Member
I've mentioned this now and then, but remarkably the best covered Rugby World Cup in US history was 1995 - Sportschannel (through Prime) showed most games live from South Africa. So most people with cable could get the World Cup. I have vague fleeting memories of it.

Remarkable given how much bigger rugby is today, and remarkable as it's the only World Cup in history the US failed to qualify for. South Africa's return from exile and Canada's surprise quarterfinal in 1991 (meaning they automatically qualified) meant the Americas only got one place and even in 1995, beating Argentina in Buenos Aires was too much to ask for.
 

rbeaud

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
352
Orange, CT
I've mentioned this now and then, but remarkably the best covered Rugby World Cup in US history was 1995 - Sportschannel (through Prime) showed most games live from South Africa. So most people with cable could get the World Cup. I have vague fleeting memories of it.

The time difference meant that many matches were available during the day. It was great to grab a long lunch and watch pool play.
 

HoyaSoxa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2003
1,252
Needham, Mass
So I just saw the NBC Sports Gold is asking $200 for their RWC package (or $220 for the full year to include Six Nations), which is a whole lot to spend for games that will be played in the middle of the night, and so many non competitive pool games. What I can't find is any indication of what they plan to show on cable or other outlets - typically most Six Nations matches end up shown on NBC Sports Network tape delayed later the same day, so hoping that continues with the RWC.
 

The Gray Eagle

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
17,267
So I went to a bar with some friends yesterday to watch the Free Jacks play San Diego. The bar put the game on a couple TVs for us with the sound off. New England blew a late lead, allowing 2 tries in the last couple minutes. SD missed the final (apparently meaningless) 2-point conversion at the end. The final score on the TV was San Diego 25, New England 24. Gut-wrenching loss. The TV coverage cut away to a commercial, so since the game was over, the bar switched the TVs to the NBA playoffs.

Hours later we find out that actually, New England won the match 24-23.
https://freejacks.com/news/free-jacks-outlast-late-match-comeback-by-san-diego-for-24-23-win/

The TV coverage had mistakenly added 2 points to San Diego's score for an earlier conversion that they actually had missed. No one on the broadcast realized that New England had actually won the game until after it was over. Apparently after they came back from the commercials, they announced that whoops, actually the final score was New England 24, San Diego 23. Free Jacks win, San Diego loses. Too late for our group to realize it though.

That was bizarre. I can't imagine this happening in the TV coverage of any other sport.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I wonder if the broadcasters were on site or not? If they were and never glanced at the scoreboard, that would be bizarre. If they were offsite and using a local feed without their own personnel there, this makes more sense. Still a remarkable error, that no one noticed, but slightly more understandable.
 

The Gray Eagle

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
17,267
I'm pretty sure they were on site. I rewatched the end today and they had a guy doing postgame interviews with players, so at least that guy was in the stadium, and I think the others were too. Maybe the scoreboard at the stadium had it wrong too?
It was so weird, never experienced something like that before.
I'm trying to imagine the reaction of someone who had made a huge bet on this match. And also what it would be like if this happened during a telecast of a sport that's much bigger in the US, like the NFL.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I'm pretty sure they were on site. I rewatched the end today and they had a guy doing postgame interviews with players, so at least that guy was in the stadium, and I think the others were too. Maybe the scoreboard at the stadium had it wrong too?
It was so weird, never experienced something like that before.
I'm trying to imagine the reaction of someone who had made a huge bet on this match. And also what it would be like if this happened during a telecast of a sport that's much bigger in the US, like the NFL.
Wow. That last comment is an interesting one. It's why you never throw away your slips at the track when you just miss cashing in.

We watched a ton of Rugby when we were in New Zealand last fall. It was during the World Cup and all. Quite easy to find on the TV there!