A rant
I haven't seen much British rugby on television recently. I could watch as much South African, New Zealand and Australian rugby as I like, because I have the sports package on Sky Television. Until this season I could have watched as much British rugby as I liked too, because it was on Sky and they showed loads of games.
Now Auntie has got in on the act. The BBC has brought the broadcast rights to the Powergen Cup and the Heineken Cup, along with the Autumn Internationals and the Six Nations. The BBC is the state broadcaster, accessible to anyone who has paid their TV Licence Fee (TV Tax) of a hundred and twenty odd quid a year to the BBC's tax-collecting arm authorised under the statuary powers of The Broadcast Act 1990.
God knows how much licence-fee-payers money went on out-bidding Sky for the rights, but I'd wager it's a lot. Of the eight games in the Powergen Cup last weekend, the BBC showed only one on terrestrial television. I managed to watch another by using my Sky box to watch Welsh television, defeating Aunties noble aim of free rugby on the box. This weekend, the same holds true.
Pat Younge, Head of BBC's Rugby Strategy said: "With the entire Six Nations back on the BBC, along with the autumn internationals, the Heineken Cup and Powergen Cup, we now have the best live rugby portfolio in our history. The return of Rugby Special, to showcase our Zurich Premiership and other highlights, is the final piece of the jigsaw.
No, Pat, the final piece of the bloody jigsaw would be actually letting people watch them. The BBC are so bloody egalitarian that instead of the people who choose to buy Sky being able to watch the team of their choosing or, perish the thought, more than one game of rugby a weekend, they now have to watch one that Auntie chooses and lump it. Auntie knows best, of course.
Now I've played the game - I like watching rugby and think that it's worth paying forty quid a month for. So I pay for Sky TV even though I'm not exactly flush for money. It pisses me off that some of the money I pay in a compulsory tax to the BBC has been used to buy the rights to games that Sky would have shown but now do not get broadcast. It's state interference with a market and it stinks.
Now Auntie has got in on the act. The BBC has brought the broadcast rights to the Powergen Cup and the Heineken Cup, along with the Autumn Internationals and the Six Nations. The BBC is the state broadcaster, accessible to anyone who has paid their TV Licence Fee (TV Tax) of a hundred and twenty odd quid a year to the BBC's tax-collecting arm authorised under the statuary powers of The Broadcast Act 1990.
God knows how much licence-fee-payers money went on out-bidding Sky for the rights, but I'd wager it's a lot. Of the eight games in the Powergen Cup last weekend, the BBC showed only one on terrestrial television. I managed to watch another by using my Sky box to watch Welsh television, defeating Aunties noble aim of free rugby on the box. This weekend, the same holds true.
Pat Younge, Head of BBC's Rugby Strategy said: "With the entire Six Nations back on the BBC, along with the autumn internationals, the Heineken Cup and Powergen Cup, we now have the best live rugby portfolio in our history. The return of Rugby Special, to showcase our Zurich Premiership and other highlights, is the final piece of the jigsaw.
No, Pat, the final piece of the bloody jigsaw would be actually letting people watch them. The BBC are so bloody egalitarian that instead of the people who choose to buy Sky being able to watch the team of their choosing or, perish the thought, more than one game of rugby a weekend, they now have to watch one that Auntie chooses and lump it. Auntie knows best, of course.
Now I've played the game - I like watching rugby and think that it's worth paying forty quid a month for. So I pay for Sky TV even though I'm not exactly flush for money. It pisses me off that some of the money I pay in a compulsory tax to the BBC has been used to buy the rights to games that Sky would have shown but now do not get broadcast. It's state interference with a market and it stinks.
If you ask me the desire to bring such sporting events to terrestrial is a good thing. This gives us more value to the 'TV tax' we're obliged to pay. However, as Ben has rightly pointed out whats the point in buying something and not showing it.
Question is, do broadcasters *have* to buy the entire series? I presume that the rights for a entire series are sold off as a lump e.g. the autumn internations were one bid, the Heineken Cup another, etc, etc.
The real problem (assuming my assumption is true and I suspect it is) is that if the BBC wants to add value to our service we are forced to pay for and show any rugby it must purchase the entire series. The BBC obviously don't have the capacity to show all the games especially when they're on at the same time where as sky (with its dedicated sport channels) does. So in my mind the real problem, if we assume that the purchase of such series was done under good intentions rather than to serve a a boast of how the BBC is 'championing the people', is that the people that sell the rights are at fault for not allowing a series to be split up.
What is so wrong with allowing the BBC to bid for the games it considers to be of most value/interest to the general public? This way it can show all the games it buys and leaves the door open for other broadcasters to bid for and show the remaining games.
Posted by
Anonymous |
Wed Oct 05, 03:57:00 pm
Well, they simultaneously show 6 games of tennis in Wimbledon week, through the magic of the red button. Why not do the same with rugby? And is this really politics?
Posted by
Matt |
Wed Oct 05, 04:58:00 pm
Spot on about the red button Matt - they've got the technology, they've got the broadcasting rights, what are they playing at?
I agree with both Chris and Gonce too. I'm wound up but a reasonable kind of guy deep down.
My point about state interference is that it's MY MONEY that has brought the rights to hide the rugby. That's what irks me the most - an arm of the state has compelled me to pay it to take away a leisure activity that I've already paid the private sector for!
I know I'm being over sensitive, but what the hell is the state doing in the sports broadcasting market if it serves to reduce the availability.
It's state interference because Aunty is choosing what rugby games I watch rather than me! grrr
There's clearly a market there - millions of people like me pay for Sky to watch what we choose. The state has waded in, with admittedly good intentions, and bollocksed the whole thing up. Ergo- state interference in a market.
I'm jolly cross. I'm told what to eat, not to drink or smoke and now I'm effectively being told what frigging rugby game to watch.
Told you this was a rant.
Posted by
Ben |
Wed Oct 05, 05:41:00 pm
Rugby World is quite a good magazine.
For web-sites Planet-Rugby is probably the best as it seems quite objective between the different facets of the northern and southern hemisphere games.
Great to find rugby fans your side of the pond!
Posted by
Ben |
Thu Oct 06, 10:03:00 am