Anti-syphoning laws

[Red Bear]

There have been some articles on this over the last little while, a few last year then again in todays SMH regarding anti-syphoning rules with sport, which Foxtell wants to be relaxed. I seem to recall the NRL and supporters on here thinking this would be a good thing with regards to the rugby league tv rights.

If a situation arose where league was to leave free to air broadcast it would be an absolute disaster IMO. Look at sports like Rugby and Soccer. Rugby gets little to no exposure of its premier club competition because it is on fox exclusively, meaning it struggles to gain new fans. Likewaise soccer, which is on the rise in this country, has its growth and potential growth capped by the fact that the only time you get to see the Socceroos on TV is at the World Cup and the A-League is never on tv. If this were to happen to league any so called battle with AFL would be all over red rover.

 

[LazyDreamer]

Thought this was solved with those gizmos that stop syphon hoses from going all the way in.

 

[Chief_Chujo]

Rugby League will never be off free to air. Not even Gallop would be stupid enough to do that. Your comparisons to Soccer and Union don't work. They aren't of free to air because free to air doesn't want them. They don't rate well enough and buying the rights could bite into going after the ratings winners like League, AFL etc.

Basically the advantage is we get antoher bidder. So for example if we split the game into Fri night, saturday night etc packages Fox can come in and directly bid against Seven for one of those packages.

 

[Tigger Madness]

We need to see the laws relaxed, not abolished.

For instance, if Channel 9 refuse to show league in Victoria live then Foxtel should be allowed to show it.

 

[m0nty]

Being off FTA doesn't hurt the EPL in Britain. Come to think of it, isn't Super League in Britain also exclusive to Sky?

The situation in Australia is different though, granted. The big danger in all of this is soccer, imo. It could very well be that when the A-League finally makes it to FTA, it attacks NRL timeslots, or even replaces them with the NRL games going to Foxtel.

 

[bazza]

Being off FTA doesn't hurt the EPL in Britain. Come to think of it, isn't Super League in Britain also exclusive to Sky?

In the UK there is very little sport on FTA. The exceptions are things like the Olympics, 6N RU which are shown on BBC and get extra exposure than their popularity would warrent - thus proving the value of FTA coverage

 

[jc155776]

Being off FTA doesn't hurt the EPL in Britain. Come to think of it, isn't Super League in Britain also exclusive to Sky?

The situation in Australia is different though, granted. The big danger in all of this is soccer, imo. It could very well be that when the A-League finally makes it to FTA, it attacks NRL timeslots, or even replaces them with the NRL games going to Foxtel.

A-League is played in Summer.

League in Winter.

You fail.

 

[jc155776]

If FTA cannot show the sport live then it must be allowed to be shown on PayTV.

Austar and Foxtel are gorwing in subscriptions every year. If the NRL was offered enough money to be exclusively on Fox SPorts, and that money would guarantee survival of the league, then you would be nuts to not take it.

There is only 3 games a week on FTA anyway, and not long ago only two. It never hurt in getting people loving the game and supporting clubs.

 

[Green Machine]

Being off FTA doesn't hurt the EPL in Britain. Come to think of it, isn't Super League in Britain also exclusive to Sky?

The situation in Australia is different though, granted. The big danger in all of this is soccer, imo. It could very well be that when the A-League finally makes it to FTA, it attacks NRL timeslots, or even replaces them with the NRL games going to Foxtel.

The UK is a different kettle of fish. The UK doesn’t have 3 commercial networks like Australia does. The BBC dominates over the other channels, but they don’t have the bargaining power of Sky TV.
Australia’s FTA TV is a mixture of the UK’s public broadcasting and the USA’s commercial networks. In a America, the commercial networks are well served with major league sport

 

[Bulldogs_4_Life]

I'm happy with the current set up. I can't stand ad filled delayed games, though.

 

[m0nty]

A-League is played in Summer.

League in Winter.

You fail.

That may not always be true. But yes, you got me.

 

[Borat.]

There have been some articles on this over the last little while, a few last year then again in todays SMH regarding anti-syphoning rules with sport, which Foxtell wants to be relaxed. I seem to recall the NRL and supporters on here thinking this would be a good thing with regards to the rugby league tv rights.

If a situation arose where league was to leave free to air broadcast it would be an absolute disaster IMO. Look at sports like Rugby and Soccer. Rugby gets little to no exposure of its premier club competition because it is on fox exclusively, meaning it struggles to gain new fans. Likewaise soccer, which is on the rise in this country, has its growth and potential growth capped by the fact that the only time you get to see the Socceroos on TV is at the World Cup and the A-League is never on tv. If this were to happen to league any so called battle with AFL would be all over red rover.

Would be a great thing if the laws are gone- but the NRL would not allow it to go 100% pay at the moment....maybe in 10 - 15 years ++, when the pay tv numbers compare to US and Uk then it wouldn't hurt us...

UK FTa is SH1TE!

 

[beave]

There have been some articles on this over the last little while, a few last year then again in todays SMH regarding anti-syphoning rules with sport, which Foxtell wants to be relaxed. I seem to recall the NRL and supporters on here thinking this would be a good thing with regards to the rugby league tv rights.

If a situation arose where league was to leave free to air broadcast it would be an absolute disaster IMO. Look at sports like Rugby and Soccer. Rugby gets little to no exposure of its premier club competition because it is on fox exclusively, meaning it struggles to gain new fans. Likewaise soccer, which is on the rise in this country, has its growth and potential growth capped by the fact that the only time you get to see the Socceroos on TV is at the World Cup and the A-League is never on tv. If this were to happen to league any so called battle with AFL would be all over red rover.

I think you will find that people want the rules relaxed for a different reason mate, I don't think anyone out there in league land wants to see it only shown on pay tv.

The syphoning laws (from what I understand) also prevent 9 from showing league into Vic live on their other channel Go!..................... I don't ever want to see Rugby League to be soley a pay tv sport, but surely some common sense has to prevail, if they aren't prepared to show it live into melbourne on their main channel, surely they should be allowed to show it on their 2ndry channel. This is what you will find most people want changed.

 

[Perth Red]

Fox couldn't afford to buy NRL completly. Would cost them well over a $billion for exclusivity and they won't pay that much.

 

[j5o6hn]

I cant see why in the AFL states we dont get the same deal the the AFL does and games 9 refuses to show in Perth Melbourne ect go on the Main Event Channel,but I think it will all be very interesting soon enough,with Murdock and his pay mob fast alienating the Federal Govt.
With the digital FTA if win AFL they say it will be on Go or whatever Digital channel they have while the League is on the main FTA channel.
I think pay may be in a bit of trouble as the digital channels improve sport programing why pay Murdock if you can get it off FTA,I know I would reduce my package if League was on 9Go here in Perth,

 

[aussies1st]

Keep them in place but make sure the FTA network actually shows the game live in the main states at the very least. Melbourne have a team so there is no reason why they should be getting delayed coverage if we want to build the game over there.

 

[El Diablo]

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-new...ve-to-use-sport-or-lose-it-20100219-ojn8.html

Free TV may have to use sport or lose it
February 19, 2010 - 9:24AM

AAP

The federal government has flagged changes to anti-siphoning laws, saying there is a valid case to force a "use-it-or-lose it" policy on free-to-air television stations.

Pay-TV operators are pushing the government to relax the laws which prevent them from acquiring exclusive rights to listed sporting events such as the Melbourne Cup, AFL and NRL matches, rugby tests and international cricket matches in which Australian teams are playing.

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy says the government is "quietly talking" with sporting organisations, free-to-air broadcasters and subscription networks about the issue.

He would not reveal details of a conversation he had with billionaire businessman James Packer, whose company Consolidated Media Holdings owns 25 per cent of pay-TV operator Foxtel, during a round of golf the pair played earlier in February.

But Senator Conroy said free-to-air television operators had damaged their argument for retention of current arrangements by purchasing sporting rights and then not broadcasting them.

"That has led to an enormous backlash against commercial TV," he told ABC Radio on Friday.

"I think there is a very valid case to be made for a use-it-or-lose-it style provision."

i wonder if that means use it in all markets?

 

[Lambretta]

Foxtel aren't asking for the laws surrounding Free to Air sports to be abolished, rather they're asking for a relaxation of the laws towards TV channels HOARDING games they have no intention of showing.

For example the UK Super League here in Australia.

Channel 9 currently hold the rights to not broadcast these games.

Foxtel would like access to show sports that Channel 9 or other Free to Air stations decline to show.

Currently they are not able to access these events as the free to air broadcaster, in this case Channel 9, has the exclusive right to not show them.

I for one would welcome the relaxation of the rules in regards to this form of hoarding. I have little or no interest in re-runs of dramas I didnt want to see when they were aired midweek and when they're shown at the expense of things I actually want to see it infuriates me. A dedicated sports provider is far less likely to replace Super League with "Pretending to be on a Boat" or whatever the f**k these shows are called.

Commercial stations are in a difficult position of trying to please most of the people most of the time. Dedicated broadcasters do a much better job of looking after their niches and should be allowed to do so freely if the Commerical stations arent interested.

 

[Lambretta]

El Diablo beat me to the punch! But yes, that's what I was referring to.

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

There have been some articles on this over the last little while, a few last year then again in todays SMH regarding anti-syphoning rules with sport, which Foxtell wants to be relaxed. I seem to recall the NRL and supporters on here thinking this would be a good thing with regards to the rugby league tv rights.

If a situation arose where league was to leave free to air broadcast it would be an absolute disaster IMO. Look at sports like Rugby and Soccer. Rugby gets little to no exposure of its premier club competition because it is on fox exclusively, meaning it struggles to gain new fans. Likewaise soccer, which is on the rise in this country, has its growth and potential growth capped by the fact that the only time you get to see the Socceroos on TV is at the World Cup and the A-League is never on tv. If this were to happen to league any so called battle with AFL would be all over red rover.

You my friend are an idiot.

Super 14's and Soccer aren't on FTA TV because they get sh*thouse ratings end of story.