TV sports game drags on and on as Conroy takes his time
James Chessell
From: The Australian
September 07, 2011 12:00AM
IT is becoming difficult to remember a time when the anti-siphoning rules governing sports broadcasting were not in the process of being changed.
If you take as your starting point the release of a discussion paper on a review of the scheme in August 2009, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has been fiddling away for more than two years. No less than 13 prime ministerships have taken less time. And that's not including Julia Gillard, whose administration is looking shakier than a toddler in high heels after just one year and 75 days.
Of course, sports broadcasting nuts will tell you that Conroy did announce the broad bones of a revised scheme last November. This included new rules that would compel the free-to-air networks to show "iconic" events such as the Bathurst 1000 live, allow the same networks to show lesser events such as regular-season NRL games on digital channels and give pay-TV the ability to bid directly for some regular-season AFL and NRL matches.
He also announced an updated list of sporting events that were "protected" for the free-to-air networks, which contained some minor inclusions (Twenty20 cricket matches involving Australia) and deletions (Rugby World Cup games not involving Australia).
But all this took the form of a rather general agreement that required the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 to be amended. It also included the very important caveat: "Changes to the listing of NRL and AFL games will only be made once a regulation is in place or an alternative mechanism to protect the quality of free-to-air games is agreed by stakeholders."
A press release added: "Changes to the anti-siphoning list will be implemented shortly."
Nearly 10 months have passed and there has been no legislation. Nor is there an agreement on how the mechanism should operate in relation to the NRL.
These issues may seem like fine detail to the uninitiated, but they go to the heart of the upcoming NRL broadcast rights negotiations as well as the Gillard government's ongoing battle with News Limited (publisher of The Australian, 25 per cent owner of Foxtel and 50 per cent shareholder in Fox Sports). The reason no legislation has made its way to Canberra yet is that there are still discussions going on behind the scenes over what form it will take.
To be fair to Conroy's office, dealing with the various television factions is not easy: the free-to-air networks do not always agree with each other, and they never agree with the pay-TV industry.
Furthermore, the loyalties of the sporting bodies can change depending on what offer happens to be on the table. Plenty of consultation is required, and Conroy's best-case scenario is that all parties end up a little bit unhappy.
An exposure draft was circulated among the various broadcasters and sporting codes in May. The wording was so complicated it would not have looked out of place in a tax act. But the important point is that it did not mention the "quality" mechanism by which AFL and NRL games would be divided up between free-to-air and pay-TV. A second draft is now in front of interested parties. It does include a reference to the mechanism.
Under the old anti-siphoning rules, all AFL and NRL games were "protected" for the free-to-air networks. However, these networks did not want to show every game and passed on four out of eight AFL games per round and five out of eight NRL matches per round to Foxtel. The new anti-siphoning agreement announced in November aimed to reflect the market by delisting four AFL games and five NRL games each round. The idea being that this would create more price tension for the football codes, which rely on the broadcast rights as their major source of income.
But Conroy made it clear the delisting would only occur once the mechanism was in place.
This was done with the AFL as part of the recent negotiations for the 2012-16 rights. The code must ensure the two best games of AFL are broadcast by a free-to-air network on Friday and Saturday nights. As a result, the four AFL games currently shown exclusively on pay-TV will be delisted.
The NRL finds itself in a interesting position. The code and Foxtel had expected that pay-TV's five games would be delisted once the new independent commission was formalised next month. But it is understood Conroy will wait until the next broadcast deal takes shape before taking action. This is a win for the free-to-air networks in general, and incumbent broadcaster Nine in particular.
Fox Sports has more options if it can bid for NRL games directly. It may have to work more closely with a network if they are not delisted. Nine does not want a repeat of the AFL deal where every regular-season match is simulcast on pay-TV because it will reduce the value of its exclusive rights.
Conroy's move will make it a little bit easier for Nine to keep some games to itself, although a first and last rights option is the network's main trump card. Nine (or Seven or Ten) could even bid for more than the three games it currently broadcasts without competition from Foxtel.
Conroy will say there are good reasons for this course of action. He does not want either type of TV walking away with games on the cheap. And a similar approach certainly worked reasonably well with the AFL negotiations. But there is no doubt the minister is in no mood to do News any favours.
