Channel Nine's Expensive Football Coverage
Happy Christmas, Australian football fans. The AFL has accepted Kerry Packer’s offer of $780 million for Channel Nine and Foxtel to broadcast AFL games across Australia, and unless the oppposition can come up with the chips they look as if the whole pot is going to go Packer’s way. Is it a call to crack open the celebratory champagne or get stuck into the sad-sack’s sweet sherry?
Seven/Ten, which holds the first-and-last offer rights, has 14 days to respond to what is clearly the richest TV offer to any football code in Australian history.
Thank goodness for that. Meanwhile, AFL chief Andrew Demetriou once again demonstrates a total lack of common sense or any imagination that there is an Australia outside the 3000 central Melbourne postcode:
“We will have better coverage than we’ve ever had before but while the final details of the coverage will only be known when we’ve received our response from Channels Seven and Ten, we do know that nationally coverage will be better than we have currently, especially in our key growth markets.”
Wrong, wrong, wrong in almost every way. The Channel Nine coverage of 2005 aussie rules was beyond appalling. In NSW and QLD the most match-ups in each round consistently gave way to dud rugby league games, to satisfy the network’s scrum addiction. The Sydney market for AFL is growing despite the best efforts of the AFL and Channel Nine.
Add to Nine’s bloody mindedness, an insufficient number of camera operators who’d be hard pressed to focus on the wicket during the morning tea break at the Gabba, let alone train their gear on a flying yellow night ball or follow inevitable behind-play stoushes. Add to that well-trained rugby league commentators pressed into service for a code they don’t like and don’t know very much about, because Nine wouldn’t stump up to recruit experienced AFL commentators. Add to that a total lack of commitment in promoting the code, perhaps evidence that—shock, horror—Nine bought the AFL rights in Sydney and Queensland to keep rugby league audiences safe from competition.
C’mon 7/10 consortium, you’ve got eight hundred mil lying around somewhere. Cut Rove’s meat pie allowance or the Neighbours caucasian makeup fund if you have to. Save the day for the oppressed non-Victorian AFL fans of Australia. We don’t want to have to start talking about nationalising the footy coverage and sending it to… SBS.

Alex (not verified) wrote:
Hopefully 7/10 will turn thier back on this scary Melbournian freak of a sport, make a winning bid for league, dump union, and also broad cast A-League matches free to air.
tony (not verified) wrote:
Hopefully, Seven and 10 will come up with some extra cash and the AFL will take the view that they are better for the game as a whole.
Nine has no interest in promoting the code in NSW and Qld.
Alex, they do have the ARL rights. And why would you want Nine to have the A League when SBS does it so well?
Liam wrote:
What Tony said, especially about the A-League. Soccer football coverage is fantastic in Australia and it’s only going to get better when a certain competition in Germany starts next year.
On the AFL, channel Nine in NSW and QLD have in fact an interest in consigning the sport to the depths of 2am replays.
Guido (not verified) wrote:
Alas, regarding the A-League Foxtel has the rights for the next five years (I think):(
Also I do wonder whether pay TV has had anything to do with the decision. Like soccer, which is seen by TV executives as a ‘niche sport’ Aussie Rules may be seen as such in NSW and Queensland, and whoever really wants there it has to fork out a subscription.
B.S. Fairman (not verified) wrote:
The A-league being on Foxtel is the dumbest move soccer Australia went for.
However, it must have been a bit too much money for Kerry….
Liam wrote:
The soccer on Foxtel isn’t too bad. When you go to a pub in Sydney to watch it they’re actually likely to have it on, which was the idea. Every game does get shown at a reasonable hour. The same can’t be said for AFL, which even if it is on earlier than 3am tends to get bumped by bigoted publicans for true niche sports like golf and lawn bowls.
…
I feel a bit bad having bollocksed PBL just before this weekend, considering the news. If there’s to be a stoush.net curse perhaps I should post next on, say, Kim Jong Il, Osama bin Laden or the President of Iran. Any other suggestions?
B.S. Fairman (not verified) wrote:
Of course, if you want to see a sport covered extremely badly one has only to look at Rubgy League in Victoria. Most Victorians could not name a single Storm player. I view this as a good thing.
Pity the curse doesn’t work on Aussie Pollies, otherwise most of the federal front bench would have been wiped out by now.
dibo wrote:
ooh, sports and media! the stoush i’ve been waiting for!
nine obviously has the deal stitched now, signed off by the big foul-mouthed bugger before he croaked, and i concur with liam’s gripes. friday and sunday aussie rules coverage is bloody awful. you can’t get pumped up for a cracking game between brisbane (at home, and perhaps in better form than most of the 2005 season) and the weagles that influences the shape of the 8 when it’s on at 1.10am, after david letterman…
but onto my favourite football - all i can say is that it’s a little harder to be a mariners fan living in the harbour city - when the mariners are playing new zealand away it’s fair to say that the looks you get are of bemusement over all else when you ask for a telly to be switched to it!
great comp though, it’s the one thing that could convince me to get fox (which i would, if my building could get it… stupid short-sighted body corporate!). shame there’s no EPL on FTA (like the TLA’s?).
B. S. Fairman (not verified) wrote:
Judging by the reports in the Age, it looks like Stokes has found some more spare change behind the couch and Seven and Ten might just trump Packer after all. What is funny is the way the News Corp papers are really happy about the Nine offer as they know that Rupert is going to be owning Nine soon enough.
Liam wrote:
What are you talking about dibo? Please translate.
dibo wrote:
English Premier League (where i would be able to watch liverpool grinding down the gap to chelsea to take a most unlikely champions’ league/premier league double) is not on Free To Air tv.
sorry about the Three Letter Acronyms
B. S. Fairman (not verified) wrote:
I was doing so more thinking on this (I might have been on the can at the time) and it occurred to that deal is over a $1 million per game on free to air. There is about 210 games a year (176 per season plus finals and pre-season matches) and it is over six years, so about 1260 games all up. And Nine is only going to show a bit over half on FTA, so it works out to be somewhere in the million dollars a match range.
That is more than the gate would take for almost every match. So it will be worth more to the AFL to have everyone stay home and watch TV than go to the games.
anonymous (not verified) wrote:
I believe that the NRL should be telecasted alot more often in QLD. We always get 2 matches a week (3 if lucky) and the AFL gets telecasted almost all the matches. The NRL coverage is appalling.
Myth wrote:
There should also be at least two more NRL teams in QLD. It is atrocious what has been dne to QLD rugby.
Post new comment