Comments on: Commercial TV pushes for sports on digital channels

By: paul

paul — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 06:58:32 +0000

There is already far too much sport on t.v. Get rid of it

By: Steven

Steven — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 01:28:35 +0000

“Last month viewers in Melbourne were furious when the Nine Network denied them the chance to watch the NRL Grand Final Presentation after Melbourne Storm won the premiership trophy.” That’s because Nine does not hold Australia-wide copyright to show certain sections of the match live; i.e., they only have the rights to show the entire NRL match telecasts live to viewers in NSW, ACT, NT, Queensland, and those areas of Victoria, Tasmania and SA served by Imparja, but not in Melbourne or the rest of Australia (that’s my understand of it, believe me, as a Storm fan I’m pretty disgusted by this restriction too). I hope Nine does get to negotiate national live NRL telecast rights for the entire Australia.

By: Craig(Buzz)

Craig(Buzz) — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 14:38:41 +0000

I doubt channel Seven Ten and Nine will stick with it in the long term playing sports on there digital channels,there main priority is there main channels,they don’t have the money for starters.FTA has no right to grab sports that they won’t show,this is where Foxtel can take up the slack.Do the FTA want to take on the local basketball or Soccer leagues,well if they did both sports would’nt survive to long.Those adds FTA has been running have been laughable Foxtel rules.I’m a AFL watcher and don’t watch the basketball or soccer

By: Stephen

Stephen — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 13:22:11 +0000

The English Premiere League became the best, most entertaining league in the world once it was taken off the list and exposed to true market forces. With all the talk of the NRL clubs being short of cash I’d see it as the only way for most Australian sports to survive – just see the progress of Football since the deal with Fox Sports in the last 5 years.

I see no reason in their past behavior to screening sport as to why the FTA’s should get another free kick with sports rights. Only a few years back they set up this scheme to protect themselves from multi-channeling, now they are arguing the opposite but only for themselves.

By: GuanoLad

GuanoLad — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 13:21:46 +0000

I am somewhat confused by nomenclature. “Digital” is being used slightly misleadingly. Let me see if I have this right.

There is free-to-air, and there is PayTV.

There is analogue/digital, there is digital-only, and there is cable/digital.

PayTV (cable/digital) wants to have all sports, live, HD, 3D, 6.1 surround, for itself.

Free-to-air (analogue/digital) wants the status quo.

Is that right?

As a non-sports fan, all I want is for televised sporting events to stop pre-empting scheduled programming. So I say let each Network have their own digital sports-only channel (SD, HD, don’t care which), a-la OneHD, and leave the default free-to-air channels without sports entirely.

I think this arrangement is inevitable, and will happen within 10 years.

By: Russell

Russell — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 13:17:35 +0000

@ William Walker. Just once I would love to see a post of yours that is not about “poor Darwin”!

If you have a problem with missing out on things, I suggest you move to a larger city. Do you also complain that Darwin misses out on world class opera. European designer stores and concert tours from U2, Kylie and Madonna? These are things that exist when a market is large enough. The same as TV stations. Darwin is a small TV market. TV stations are businesses, not government services.

And we are talking about a niche sports network here. Not a national broadcaster. It’s not the networks responsibility to beam their signal to Darwin, but the local affiliate. And when they feel they can make a profit doing so, they will.

By: Chris

Chris — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 12:59:46 +0000

personally the way some FTA channels show sport i wish they would loose it.

By: David Knox

David Knox — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 12:02:34 +0000

Rob I was invited to do that radio spot but I declined when they asked if I wouldn’t mind arguing on behalf of FTA! Not really my style… I referred them to Free TV Aus.

By: Stevie

Stevie — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 10:44:36 +0000

I also agree with Barrett. When did Australians have the right to watch for free. I say get rid of the list as well. We are very lucky in this country at the amount of sport that is on free to air as it is. In the US you have to sometimes pay to watch your team in some of the sports over their. And the UK you have to pay to watch their domestic tests and one dayers. Same goes for the premier league. Yes get rid of it.

By: Rob

Rob — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 08:44:50 +0000

Listened to Wayne and a paytv bloke on ABC radio this week and apart from the typical cheapshots Wayne still had the politicians touch; i.e. avoid the question and talk about another topic when the question was too hard to give a genuine non self serving answer. BTW, pay tv people please stop using “old television” to describe FTA because believe it or not people aren’t dumb or looking for smart arses to listen to.

And Wayne, cut the bogus line that people will lose sports if Paytv get them when FTA warehouses them or shows a Friday night AFL, NRL or whatever sport game near midnight and use the varying timezones as an excuse. If as you say it’s hard to manage then do the Institute of Management / CD courses or p**s off and let us doers do it instead of you collecting money as the mercenary you are.

By: William Walker

William Walker — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 07:08:26 +0000

What if ONE HD never makes to Darwin? I have a feeling inside ONE HD may never come to Darwin, I hope i am wrong, but what if I am right? All the media organisations and TV networks are too city centred, and they are calling for all such things just to satisfty the southern population while people north and west of the divide and outside the metro areas will always miss out. The Australian government must listen to All Australians not just the southern population. I rest my case to make sure the people north and west of the great dividing range and outside the metro areas are heard and represented at last.

By: damo

damo — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 06:42:34 +0000

well if they want to keep soo bad. they better start covering sports a hell of alot better than what they are doing now. the government will scrap it i reckon

By: mac

mac — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 06:23:00 +0000

i would love to see a spoof of the anti siphoning ads by the people who spoofed the freview ads.

By: Matt

Matt — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 06:14:04 +0000

“So Wayne Goss believes that the FTA’s allow ‘all Australians…… to watch major sporting events on TV for free’. So long as its 1am and three days late right Wayne. The holier than thou attitute of the fta’s is breathtaking.”

Perhaps if they were able to show them on multichannels when they clearly don’t rate on the main station you wouldn’t need to wait until 1am.

By: mac

mac — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 04:36:25 +0000

although i can understand the logic behind foxtel (although it should be use it or loose it) sports should be able to be shown on digital multichannels, their logic is that people without digital will miss out, but the fact is the networks aren’t going to move a high rating event from their main channel to their 2nd digital channel , all they want to do is be able to show sports that would not rate high enough to air on the main channel, so that those who do want to watch it can (such as nrl in Melbourne) what wrong with that/ beside aren’t they trying to get more people on digital. anti siphoning is meant to protect the viewer but it is the viewers who suffers

By: stud muffin

stud muffin — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 03:23:50 +0000

Forget Foxtel, think they need to re- think there pricing for watching paid TV , it’s getting more expensive all the time.
Keep Sport free to air TV like the digital TV channels.