More disgraceful coverage by the AFL

Talk on the national game

Re: More disgraceful coverage by the AFL

Postby Dutchy » Sun Jun 07, 2009 8:59 am

hondo71 wrote:For South Aust, if Fox have the Port game live they aren't going to let that go or show another game on another of their channels to compete. SA is their worst market I heard so they want Crows and Power fans to tune in.

Ch10 are forced to show it in delay, but are happy too (Fox wouldn't be) because Port will rate higher than the other game.

It's all because of the deal the AFL did re promising to always show Crows & Power games on free to air.

I reckon in the next TV deal Fox might finally get the exclusivity in SA they want, which would "free up" Ch10 to show the other game on Sat nights.


But under the last footy deal all the above wasnt true and we could see the other game on FOX Footy
User avatar
Dutchy
Site Admin
 
 
Posts: 46254
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 8:24 am
Location: Location, Location
Has liked: 2648 times
Been liked: 4316 times

Re: More disgraceful coverage by the AFL

Postby Psyber » Sun Jun 07, 2009 9:57 am

hondo71 wrote:For South Aust, if Fox have the Port game live they aren't going to let that go or show another game on another of their channels to compete. SA is their worst market I heard so they want Crows and Power fans to tune in.
Ch10 are forced to show it in delay, but are happy too (Fox wouldn't be) because Port will rate higher than the other game.
It's all because of the deal the AFL did re promising to always show Crows & Power games on free to air.
I reckon in the next TV deal Fox might finally get the exclusivity in SA they want, which would "free up" Ch10 to show the other game on Sat nights.

And free me up from watching weekend TV at all, because I flatly refuse to subscribe to pay TV.
EPIGENETICS - Lamarck was right!
User avatar
Psyber
Coach
 
 
Posts: 12247
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:43 pm
Location: Now back in the Adelaide Hills.
Has liked: 104 times
Been liked: 405 times
Grassroots Team: Hahndorf

Re: More disgraceful coverage by the AFL

Postby Adelaide Hawk » Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:54 am

Psyber wrote:
hondo71 wrote:For South Aust, if Fox have the Port game live they aren't going to let that go or show another game on another of their channels to compete. SA is their worst market I heard so they want Crows and Power fans to tune in.
Ch10 are forced to show it in delay, but are happy too (Fox wouldn't be) because Port will rate higher than the other game.
It's all because of the deal the AFL did re promising to always show Crows & Power games on free to air.
I reckon in the next TV deal Fox might finally get the exclusivity in SA they want, which would "free up" Ch10 to show the other game on Sat nights.

And free me up from watching weekend TV at all, because I flatly refuse to subscribe to pay TV.


Same here. I'm not paying for pay tv just to watch 1 game of footy on a weekend.
User avatar
Adelaide Hawk
Coach
 
 
Posts: 7339
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:52 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Re: More disgraceful coverage by the AFL

Postby Voice » Sun Jun 07, 2009 11:47 am

I was thinking the same for a while but realised that going to the pub to watch Carlton or Freo games that weren't on free to air was costing me a hell of a lot more than $65 a month. Once you add the food and the amber fluid into it I was spending $100 per visit (at least twice a month) making it much more cost effective for me to have Fox.
An even bigger drama than the scheduling of footy games is the fact I now have to watch Gilmore Girls regularly :evil: :roll: :lol:
User avatar
Voice
League - Best 21
 
 
Posts: 1521
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 1:24 am
Location: :noitacoL
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time
Grassroots Team: Kenilworth

Re: More disgraceful coverage by the AFL

Postby Psyber » Sun Jun 07, 2009 5:10 pm

Voice wrote:I was thinking the same for a while but realised that going to the pub to watch Carlton or Freo games that weren't on free to air was costing me a hell of a lot more than $65 a month. Once you add the food and the amber fluid into it I was spending $100 per visit (at least twice a month) making it much more cost effective for me to have Fox.
An even bigger drama than the scheduling of footy games is the fact I now have to watch Gilmore Girls regularly :evil: :roll: :lol:

I'd save money by sticking to the radio or the Internet.. Or just give it a miss, rather than subscribe to Foxtel
EPIGENETICS - Lamarck was right!
User avatar
Psyber
Coach
 
 
Posts: 12247
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:43 pm
Location: Now back in the Adelaide Hills.
Has liked: 104 times
Been liked: 405 times
Grassroots Team: Hahndorf

Re: More disgraceful coverage by the AFL

Postby Dutchy » Sun Jun 07, 2009 9:07 pm

Psyber wrote:
Voice wrote:I was thinking the same for a while but realised that going to the pub to watch Carlton or Freo games that weren't on free to air was costing me a hell of a lot more than $65 a month. Once you add the food and the amber fluid into it I was spending $100 per visit (at least twice a month) making it much more cost effective for me to have Fox.
An even bigger drama than the scheduling of footy games is the fact I now have to watch Gilmore Girls regularly :evil: :roll: :lol:

I'd save money by sticking to the radio or the Internet.. Or just give it a miss, rather than subscribe to Foxtel


thast the beauty of choices in life....something that would have been nice to have had last night
User avatar
Dutchy
Site Admin
 
 
Posts: 46254
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 8:24 am
Location: Location, Location
Has liked: 2648 times
Been liked: 4316 times

Re: More disgraceful coverage by the AFL

Postby rod_rooster » Sun Jun 07, 2009 9:47 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Psyber wrote:
Voice wrote:I was thinking the same for a while but realised that going to the pub to watch Carlton or Freo games that weren't on free to air was costing me a hell of a lot more than $65 a month. Once you add the food and the amber fluid into it I was spending $100 per visit (at least twice a month) making it much more cost effective for me to have Fox.
An even bigger drama than the scheduling of footy games is the fact I now have to watch Gilmore Girls regularly :evil: :roll: :lol:

I'd save money by sticking to the radio or the Internet.. Or just give it a miss, rather than subscribe to Foxtel


thast the beauty of choices in life....something that would have been nice to have had last night


Exactly right Dutchy. Each to their own but i am not sure why people are so opposed to pay TV. I am just not sure why people feel it is their right to get things for free.
rod_rooster
Coach
 
Posts: 6595
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 11:56 pm
Has liked: 9 times
Been liked: 24 times

Re: More disgraceful coverage by the AFL

Postby Mad Mat » Sun Jun 07, 2009 9:59 pm

rod_rooster wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Psyber wrote:
Voice wrote:I was thinking the same for a while but realised that going to the pub to watch Carlton or Freo games that weren't on free to air was costing me a hell of a lot more than $65 a month. Once you add the food and the amber fluid into it I was spending $100 per visit (at least twice a month) making it much more cost effective for me to have Fox.
An even bigger drama than the scheduling of footy games is the fact I now have to watch Gilmore Girls regularly :evil: :roll: :lol:

I'd save money by sticking to the radio or the Internet.. Or just give it a miss, rather than subscribe to Foxtel


thast the beauty of choices in life....something that would have been nice to have had last night


Exactly right Dutchy. Each to their own but i am not sure why people are so opposed to pay TV. I am just not sure why people feel it is their right to get things for free.


Couldn't agree more. I've lived in NRL states for 15 out of the last 20 years and would've necked myself if it wasn't for Foxtel/Austar.
User avatar
Mad Mat
Under 16s
 
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:29 am
Location: SA - this year
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time
Grassroots Team: Reynella

Re: More disgraceful coverage by the AFL

Postby cennals05 » Sun Jun 07, 2009 11:34 pm

Dutchy wrote:yet you flick over to CH518 on FOX and the Brisbane/Carlton game is being broadcast on Mainevent - to NSW residents only!!! why cant they flick a switch and show it here?

At the very least have an internet feed we can watch like the NBA/MLB/NFL have

I did see the half time highlights on the AFL site, I guess the AFL will say thats your answer :roll:

Im sure someone said with OneHD this problem would be solved...


Try myp2p.eu. This is how I watch most sport. I watched the Geelong v West Coast game this morning. It shows just about every sport in the world.
cennals05
League Bench Warmer
 
 
Posts: 1487
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 12:43 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has liked: 146 times
Been liked: 248 times

Re: More disgraceful coverage by the AFL

Postby Dutchy » Sat Jun 13, 2009 9:55 am

Guess what?

We get the pleasure of having 3 channels broadcasting the Port/Bullies game tonight :roll:

Usually we have 4 games to watch on a Saturday, this weekend we get 2 and we can only watch 1 :evil:

The WCE/Richmond game is a CH10 game elsewhere yet in Adelaide they take the FOX feed of the Darwin game and put it on both 10SD and 10HD (even though its not a HD signal!)

Absolute disgrace....
User avatar
Dutchy
Site Admin
 
 
Posts: 46254
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 8:24 am
Location: Location, Location
Has liked: 2648 times
Been liked: 4316 times

Re: More disgraceful coverage by the AFL

Postby Psyber » Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:29 am

rod_rooster wrote:..Exactly right Dutchy. Each to their own but i am not sure why people are so opposed to pay TV. I am just not sure why people feel it is their right to get things for free.
It is the requirement to pay for a lot of programmed rubbish in the basic package before you can subscribe to something you want to see that gets up my nose.
I feel insulted that they think they can make me believe all this stuff makes their minimum charge good value, and that they are trying to con me in this way.
If they just said our minimum monthly fee is this, and you can select what you want, I may respond to the honesty and decide whether it is worth it to me.
While I feel they are trying to con me, instead of being up front, I'm not interested.

It has its parallel in mobile phone pricing.
They suggest you join, for example, their $49 cap plan and get $200 worth of credit, but when you read the fine print you are up for 37 cents flag fall and 40 cents per 30 second block.
By contrast my phone plan costs no flag fall and 39 cents a minute and is only charged by the second...
So, a 61 second call costs me 40 cents, whereas under the "bargain" capped plan it is $1.57..
At that rate the "$200 credit" is worth about $50 and big users may finish up $1.00 in front at the end.

[Obviously, longer calls make the deal a little better, but I've posted elsewhere a Neurosurgeons article about heavy mobile phone use and brain tumours.]
Last edited by Psyber on Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:40 am, edited 2 times in total.
EPIGENETICS - Lamarck was right!
User avatar
Psyber
Coach
 
 
Posts: 12247
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:43 pm
Location: Now back in the Adelaide Hills.
Has liked: 104 times
Been liked: 405 times
Grassroots Team: Hahndorf

Re: More disgraceful coverage by the AFL

Postby Adelaide Hawk » Sat Jun 13, 2009 10:30 am

rod_rooster wrote:Each to their own but i am not sure why people are so opposed to pay TV. I am just not sure why people feel it is their right to get things for free.


I can't talk for others, but in my case I don't enjoy watching AFL very much any more. I rarely do, so what's the point in paying money to watch bugger all? In my case, it has nothing at all to do with expecting to get things for free. If I thought the brand was good enough to pay for, I would do it, but I wouldn't walk across the street to watch a lot of the trash the AFL serve up masquerading as football. We should sue the AFL for consumer fraud.
User avatar
Adelaide Hawk
Coach
 
 
Posts: 7339
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:52 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

eagles v tigers.. no telecast

Postby catchit » Sat Jun 13, 2009 3:40 pm

why have 2 games on a sat night in a split round and only telecast 1 of them?? why was there not a saturday game??
port and bulldogs will be a good game to watch but its pretty obvious witch game i would like to see :roll:
I used to eat a lot of natural foods until I learned that most people die of natural causes.
User avatar
catchit
Assistant Coach
 
Posts: 4058
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 7:06 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Re: eagles v tigers.. no telecast

Postby catchit » Sat Jun 13, 2009 3:41 pm

:evil:
I used to eat a lot of natural foods until I learned that most people die of natural causes.
User avatar
catchit
Assistant Coach
 
Posts: 4058
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 7:06 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Re: eagles v tigers.. no telecast

Postby the big bang » Sat Jun 13, 2009 6:26 pm

i know!

and why not split the games in half, 4 each week. then we can still have a game in each of the normal timeslots! fri night, saturday arvo, saturday night and sunday arvo!

what is there thinking behind splitting it the way they do?
wuuuzzzzz
User avatar
the big bang
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 3194
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 2:48 pm
Has liked: 16 times
Been liked: 9 times

Re: eagles v tigers.. no telecast

Postby The Sleeping Giant » Sat Jun 13, 2009 6:28 pm

All complaints should be forwarded to the AFL. 'cause I don't want to read ya whining.
Cannabis is safer than alcohol
User avatar
The Sleeping Giant
Coach
 
Posts: 13693
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Not dying alone
Has liked: 69 times
Been liked: 193 times

Re: eagles v tigers.. no telecast

Postby The Sleeping Giant » Sat Jun 13, 2009 7:23 pm

Actually, I think it's a great thing. Not only you don't have to watch two crap teams play, but we get spared a week of the Ben Cousins "soap opera / media circus".
Cannabis is safer than alcohol
User avatar
The Sleeping Giant
Coach
 
Posts: 13693
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Not dying alone
Has liked: 69 times
Been liked: 193 times

Re: eagles v tigers.. no telecast

Postby CUTTERMAN » Sat Jun 13, 2009 9:07 pm

catchit wrote:why have 2 games on a sat night in a split round and only telecast 1 of them?? why was there not a saturday game??
port and bulldogs will be a good game to watch but its pretty obvious witch game i would like to see :roll:

Blame Foxtel and Demitriou, chasing the money and ,making the books look good. Stuff what's best for the footy public!
'PAFC don't want any advantages in the SANFL. It would only take away from any achievements we earned.'
Keith Thomas ABC 891 Radio, 21/6/14.
CUTTERMAN
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 2962
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 10:50 pm
Has liked: 214 times
Been liked: 126 times

Re: eagles v tigers.. no telecast

Postby gadj1976 » Sat Jun 13, 2009 9:44 pm

I contacted Foxtel last week after having to listen to the Carlton vs Brisbane game on the net. They've basically told me they have an agreement with the AFL blah blah blah. I still think it's bollocks but I'll be emailing the AFL as well.
User avatar
gadj1976
Coach
 
 
Posts: 9347
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:57 pm
Location: Sleeping on a park bench outside Princes Park
Has liked: 826 times
Been liked: 898 times

Re: More disgraceful coverage by the AFL

Postby Dutchy » Sat Jun 13, 2009 9:44 pm

and for the 2nd week in a row we have 3 TV Channels and 3 radio stations covering a terrible contest, meanwhile the game thats BLACKED OUT gets no coverage at all

Is it 2009? :?
User avatar
Dutchy
Site Admin
 
 
Posts: 46254
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 8:24 am
Location: Location, Location
Has liked: 2648 times
Been liked: 4316 times

PreviousNext

Board index   Football  AFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests

Around the place

Competitions   SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums   Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |