Removing interstate clubs from FTA broadcast

[Altum Volantes]

That’s due to them being on the bottom of the ladder and the nature of being rewarded for finishing higher. It’s not a measure specifically targeting North. If they were in the top 4, they would be getting FTA.

This new proposed agreement is on the basis of the ongoing complete removal of FTA games in two footy crazy states for those home teams.

Imagine if the powers to be simply decided no Vic games would be available on FTA in Vic, it would simply never happen.

North don’t get games on FTA because they don’t have enough supporters. Same reason you don’t see GWS and Gold Coast that often either. Channel 7 would prefer to broadcast the highest profile and well supported clubs because that is what people want to watch.

No lecture from misty eyed North supporters about inventing Friday Night Football before the Carey Curse required.

 

[faible]

Imagine if the powers to be simply decided no Vic games would be available on FTA in Vic, it would simply never happen.

Sure it would. Plenty of Victorians have to pay for Kayo to watch all their team's games, so it wouldn't change much - if anything - for Victorian supporters.

This isn't a #ViccoBias argument that people want to think it is.

 

[ibd77]

Pros and cons either way. Might encourage more fans to attend but on the provision the games are scheduled at suitable time for country folks to attend.

 

[hawkman]

Sure it would. Plenty of Victorians have to pay for Kayo to watch all their team's games, so it wouldn't change much - if anything - for Victorian supporters.

This isn't a #ViccoBias argument that people want to think it is.

We have the Vic bias complaints when Melbourne clubs get more Friday nights than non Victorian clubs. Play 2 non Victorian clubs on a Friday and that means a maximum of 4 Vic clubs have their game on FTA that week while the other states still get their games on FTA

 

[footyfan1978]

It just means they're in the same FTA pool as the other clubs. It doesn't mean they're not going to be seen on FTA again, it just suggests there's a chance they will lose out on having every single game aired on FTA.

No Victorian club gets a deal that good.

Correct.
It all changes.
At first when South Melbourne relocated to Sydney all Swans games at Sydney were telecast back into Victoria live for the South fans.
That was actually the only live matches apart from the grand final and pre-season/night series matches.

Then when it expanded to Bears and Eagles all those matches in WA or Queensland were telecast back into Victoria.
It actually one of reasons Eagles sponsorship became so good because they had 11 live matches into the Victorian market.
If you were a local club you would be lucky to have 2 or 3 interstate matches live back into Victoria.
That was the league policy then, that because your team was interstate and most could not attend least you could watch it live on tv as some compensation of reduced number of 22 games here to 19 for example.

But as the 90's went on and further expansion it became harder to cover all those matches live so strategies changed of what got telecast.
At some point it flipped in more recent decades where most of your interstate away matches were no longer televised live locally on FTA and more of local Friday and Saturday matches were. So at that point you might have one team locally with match in your city live on Saturday night on FTA but the other Saturday night match interstate with your own team you had to either watch at pub or get Foxtel or goto some friends house with Foxtel.
Did not like it but you just learned that is how it was now.

In other markets it seemed like you could watch more of your own team matches live. So if in Queensland they probably have 10 or more Suns or Lions matches live on 7mate or 7. In Sydney the same for Swans etc and in Perth I assume a lot of live coverage of Eagles or Freo matches and same in Adelaide for Crows or Port. So it kind of been spoilt in a way, a bit like in early 80's when Swans had 11 live matches into Victoria for their fans here.

I guess it just changing. I not even checked how many FTA games of my own team I can watch. I assume it only 4 to 7 a season now. I think FTA on channel 7 has three matches a round so with 18 clubs you only have a one in three chance of being on FTA so maybe 6 on average a year now.

It should also be noted in cricket, one day international matches are only on pay tv and streaming services now.
The world is constantly changing. It is just reality of the times.

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

Sure it would. Plenty of Victorians have to pay for Kayo to watch all their team's games, so it wouldn't change much - if anything - for Victorian supporters.

This isn't a #ViccoBias argument that people want to think it is.

There is a big difference however between wanting to watch all your teams games (which yes then of course you will need to pay to watch) and just wanting to watch your team play on FTA once every couple weeks.

The proposed agreement is suggesting that if you want to watch your team any time as an SA or WA fan, you have to pay.

Whereas for other clubs, you will at least get couple FTA here and there during the year you can watch without paying.

 

[faible]

There is a big difference however between wanting to watch all your teams games (which yes then of course you will need to pay to watch) and just wanting to watch your team play on FTA once every couple weeks.

The proposed agreement is suggesting that if you want to watch your team any time as an SA or WA fan, you have to pay.

Whereas for other clubs, you will at least get couple FTA here and there during the year you can watch without paying.

Except that isn't the arrangement. Sounds like it'll be the same as all the Vic sides, where only some timeslots get broadcast on FTA and it's a crapshoot instead of having every game on FTA.

Even your original post says 'might' only be available on pay TV.

Under the proposal, according to The Australian, matches involving the Power, Adelaide, West Coast and Fremantle might only be available on pay TV, instead of the current arrangement which sees games broadcast on Channel 7 in those states.”

 

[windyhill]

Thread needs more Papa G

 

[radiojake]

As a Melbourne based Crow fan this doesn't affect me at all as Crows rarely on FTA in Melbourne which is fair enough -

On the odd occasion they are on FTA I am reminded how bad ch7 is and adverts absolutely ruin it for me -

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

Except that isn't the arrangement. Sounds like it'll be the same as all the Vic sides, where only some timeslots get broadcast on FTA and it's a crapshoot instead of having every game on FTA.

Even your original post says 'might' only be available on pay TV.

It says “might only be available on pay tv” as it’s only a proposal and we are still under the current TV rights agreement. The article makes no reference to that only applying to certain timeslots and simply references a blanket restriction on FTA for the 4 SA and WA clubs.

It’s the fact that this suggestion has even been raised as a possibility which is concerning. Obviously someone somewhere has raised the suggestion that hey, maybe we just remove all FTA involving those 4 clubs and make only those fans pay for any games while others keep getting their FTA slots (even if it’s only 1 every few weeks).

 

[faible]

It says “might only be available on pay tv” as it’s only a proposal and we are still under the current TV rights agreement. The article makes no reference to that only applying to certain timeslots and simply references a blanket restriction on FTA for the 4 SA and WA clubs.

It’s the fact that this suggestion has even been raised as a possibility which is concerning. Obviously someone somewhere has raised the suggestion that hey, maybe we just remove all FTA involving those 4 clubs and make only those fans pay for any games while others keep getting their FTA slots (even if it’s only 1 every few weeks).

So you have no context whatsoever and are making up that all SA / WA teams games will be specifically limited to pay TV only, despite NSW, VIC, QLD all being not that way, and even the article not actually saying that?

 

[Billy ray]

They might only be live on pay tv. But delayed on fta.

Like last sundays eagles v hawks game. That was delayed into perth, one of i think 3 games this year like that. What they want is more of these. So still on fta in perth. Just not live.

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

So you have no context whatsoever and are making up that all SA / WA teams games will be specifically limited to pay TV only, despite NSW, VIC, QLD all being not that way, and even the article not actually saying that?

When an article references “matches involving the Power, Adelaide, West Coast and Fremantle might only be available on pay TV,” it’s fairly reasonable to assume they are alluding to the fact that games might only be available on pay tv just as it says.

Now I’m not involved in the inner workings of the next deal so can’t apply any further context however for that to even be raised means it’s likely been suggested somewhere.

 

[Papa G]

Thread needs more Papa G

The Dan Andrews Government and Jam Media are to start their own TV Station where only Victorian matchups are shown, all will be referred to as "Blockbusters" shown on repeat several times a day, they will fill space by showing Victorian AFLW matches, VFL matches and TAC Cup games. Ads will only consist of Tourism pieces featuring the God Awful Get Set by Taxiride. Only Eddie's immediate family and members of the Victorian Branch of the CMFEU are allowed to commentate, and anybody caught saying words with A and E parts pronounced correctly will have a 1 month "spall". Gillon ofcourse given an exemption. Any reference to Interstaters is widely discouraged.

 

[faible]

When an article references “matches involving the Power, Adelaide, West Coast and Fremantle might only be available on pay TV,” it’s fairly reasonable to assume they are alluding to the fact that games might only be available on pay tv just as it says.

Now I’m not involved in the inner workings of the next deal so can’t apply any further context however for that to even be raised means it’s likely been suggested somewhere.

Key word you're missing is might, you've managed to bold a word directly next to it so presumably you're aware of it's existence.

As in, would be treated the same as every other team in the AFL where some games will be on FTA, and others won't. Instead of a guaranteed FTA slot.

Welcome to supporting an AFL team in the AFL competition, you know, how us vicco supporters have spent years now.

 

[maskmcgee]

The two teams with the highest number of FTA games this year so far are Sydney and GWS - 18/19 games on FTA. Doesn't take a genius to figure out what's going on there.

Yea, what's going on there is you left that page on its default setting of "Region: ACT - Canberra" and are reaping the benefits of the current deal of having every game from home state sides, excluding Victoria, broadcast into that state.

The only metric anyone talks about when discussing the prevelance of "free to air" games is who gets the games broadcast into Melbourne, as this is what the article is proposing - 7 broadcasts their 3/4 games a week nationally. Currently, 7 broadcast those games nationally but will not broadcast them into states which have a game involving their home state team on at the same time.

It says “might only be available on pay tv” as it’s only a proposal and we are still under the current TV rights agreement. The article makes no reference to that only applying to certain timeslots and simply references a blanket restriction on FTA for the 4 SA and WA clubs.

No it dosen't reference a blanket ban on FTA for any clubs.
Let me re-write the paragraph so you can hopefully understand it.

"Under the proposal, according to The Australian, matches involving the Power, Adelaide, West Coast and Fremantle might only be available on pay TV IF they do not fall on a Friday Night, Saturday 7:25pm, or Sunday 3:20PM AEST timeslot, instead of the current arrangement which sees All games no matter what timeslot they fall in broadcast on Channel 7 in those states.”

It’s the fact that this suggestion has even been raised as a possibility which is concerning.

Concerning for the reading comprehension of the general public maybe, not for anything else.

 

[Dutchy5150]

Ask North fans how many games they have on FTA this year.

How many of them even go to the games???

 

[Outtatym]

What's free to air ?

 

[Outtatym]

How many of them even go to the games???

Can't afford it. Gotta pay for foxtel

 

[Altum Volantes]

They might only be live on pay tv. But delayed on fta.

Like last sundays eagles v hawks game. That was delayed into perth, one of i think 3 games this year like that. What they want is more of these. So still on fta in perth. Just not live.

The whole ‘IT MUST BE LIIIIIVE!’ thing that entitled FTA watchers bleat about is a newish thing anyway - when I was a kid in the early 90s, Eagles home games were never live on Channel 7, the argument was that it would discourage people from attending the games.

When we weren’t going to the game, I would drive my old man up the wall by ‘secretly’ listening to the result on my clock radio and then either happily watch the broadcast with the comforting knowledge that the Eagles win….or if they lost…I’d sulk and ‘decide’ not to watch the game….thus ruining the outcome for my poor old dad who would be avoiding the scores until the game aired.

 

[Rabish Binney]

Since when has the AFL given a f**** about the fans?

It's all about the cash....

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

Key word you're missing is might, you've managed to bold a word directly next to it so presumably you're aware of it's existence.

As in, would be treated the same as every other team in the AFL where some games will be on FTA, and others won't. Instead of a guaranteed FTA slot.

Welcome to supporting an AFL team in the AFL competition, you know, how us vicco supporters have spent years now.

It says might because it’s only a potential proposal at this stage which May have been thrown up.

If it instead said ‘might reduce the number of FTA games for those clubs’, fair enough towards your point. However the word ‘only’ completely changes the context of the proposal and is the key.

Now it could be a poorly articulated article and we could spend all day going back and forth adding assumptions and additional info which is not stated in the article.

Looking purely on what’s been stated by a club Chairman in the article though, the wording of “only available on pay tv” is the critical details and might alludes to fact it’s a possibility or this proposal could have been raised in the background for the future agreement but hasn’t actually been agreed to.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Here’s some “news” regarding the broadcast deal from Koch-head on Channel 7 and a NewsCorp paper.

I’m sure it’s totally fair, balanced and free of any agenda.

 

[Gavin Excell]

I don’t have a problem with home games being on delayed telecast to incentivise people to attend, however they still need to be available on FTA.

Majority of the fans depending on a whole range of reasons wont be in a position to attend games however that shouldn’t prevent them from being able to still watch them on FTA.

Any deal like the proposed would lose more fans than any added funds from streaming services will gain and result in a net loss.

Delayed telecasts thankfully are a thing of the past
It's live sport or nothing

 

[maskmcgee]

It says might because it’s only a potential proposal

No.

"Under the proposal, according to The Australian, matches involving the Power, Adelaide, West Coast and Fremantle might only be available on pay TV IF they do not fall on a Friday Night, Saturday 7:25pm, or Sunday 3:20PM AEST timeslot, instead of the current arrangement which sees All games no matter what timeslot they fall in broadcast on Channel 7 in those states.”