Free-to-Air or Pay TV?

Question

I have always believed free to air tv in Australia is a joke when it comes to sport always delayed telecasts and replays late at night

The Federal Government's Anti-Siphoning laws say people should not have to pay to watch sports (Foxtel) what a joke this is Ch 9's desision that the Tri-Nations game between Australia & NZ will be a 90 min delay this station wont show any nrl games live on Fri or Sun even if the games are not played in Sydney Ch 10 not much better no Swans games show live at night always a 30 min delay in Sydney not to mention what Ch 7 did to afl in Sydney before Ch9 got the rights they were just as bad

Ch 9 coverage of cricket is ordinary always cut offs if not finished in time for the evening news

Ch 9 decision proves that if you dont want to show it dont buy the rights

Foxtel has proved over the years if you want a good coverage of LIVE sport its worth paying

I have had Foxtel for many years and will never support free to air

What do others think?

Answer 1

i agree ,they should take rugby league off of channel 9 and give it to foxtel,i think that channel 9 is a disgrace ,the comentaters are overated, warren,gould,vautin,sterling,they are so negative,when a player makes a mistake you never hear the end of it,on second thoughts just for the pensioners maybe they could let the abc have the 2 games as well as foxtel,,

Answer 2

I agree that free-to-air sport is pathetic in Australia. Unfortunately, while the ads on TV pay for your viewing, they also manage to stuff up a great Aussie pat-time. Even when sports are shown live, ads always manage to be on when something happens - be it a great mark, a bone-crunching tackle, or a quick single resulting in a run out. And don't even get me started on those stupid ads that move across the bottom of the screen telling you to watch Who Wants to Be A Millionaire, while covering the score.

At close to $100 a month (not sure how much, but it depends on which channels you want), Foxtel/Austar is definitely a bit pricey, but considering the quality of the coverage, it's worth it if you can afford it. Instant replays, alternate views and scoreboards at the touch of a button is great for a couch potato. If you get them when they're having a special, you can usually get free installation, but you're still stuck with the ongoing costs.

As far as sport, I think Pay TV should have the right to play all sport that Free-to-air won't play live. h**l, if channel 9 cracks a wobbly because Fox Sports wants to show the Friday NRL at 7:30pm when it's played instead of an hour delay, then get rid of Burke's Backyard or whatever the h**l they're showing at 7:30 these days, and play the bloody thing live.

Despite this, we should be grateful for what we have. We still have the best free-to-air TV in the world (or close to it). For example, I believe you have to pay for your "free" TV in England, and they're still showing old episodes of Neighbours.

EDIT: Just of note, actually found an article while looking up information about the upcoming tri-nations. Mirrors some of what I just said. An interesting read: http://kangaroos.leagueunlimited.com/new...

Answer 3

Sorry Daff, gotta agree with jb. Not all pensioners are old-age. There are also a lot of disabled people who can't afford expensive satellite equipment as well as the ongoing costs. The basic program starts at about $75 per month. How does this compare to prices in other countries?

P.S. And if it wasn't for all thos people living in the "cow paddocks" what would you be eating today?

P.S.S. What? Iv'e just learnt that Foxtel didn't show the Tri Nations game untill 10pm. Doesn't say much for your argument Daffy.

Answer 4

I question why Foxtel needs to charge so much when pay TV elsewhere can charge half that amount and make a healthy profit. Does Foxtel hold some patent law the forbids competitors entering the market for the first ten years? If they charge half that amount or even 25% less, they would more than double the number of viewers they've got.

Australia is a big sporting nation, I'm sure if they can get the average income earners to subcribe, fox would make a very nice profit.

Answer 5

My questions to you Daffy is this: Does watching the game change what the final score will be? Does a game that is live on cable, contain anything better than a game that is delayed? Does anything change if a game isn't telecast live?

Yes you may be able to watch 3 live games, but how many games are there per week? Why can't you watch the others live? If you're that dedicated to being able to watch the games live, then why don't you take the screen and front frame off your tv, and go to every game and watch it through your very own tv screen?

I'll tell you why you can't. (an i'm sure others could as well) It's because they are played in all different areas aswell as some of them being played at the same time.

I'm not a pensioner but I'm someone that has no need for cable. I don't spend all my waking hours and spare time infront of a TV. There are some things in life more important than TV. If you have nothing better than to watch TV all the time and complain that there are some some sports that are delayed telecasts (even though the score doesnt change if it's live) then you need to really consider where your life is going.

Last thing i'd like to add, THE OLYMPICS!!!! They are sports and alot of them were LIVE but it wasn't possible to have them all on because of the overlapping events!!!!

Answer 6

If you go to the web site www.mysport.com.au and let your voice be heard. am all for free to air.

Answer 7

Daffy,Daffy,Daffy.......What are we going to do with you?What about the pensioners like myself who live outside the metro area?The set up cost is prohibitive and the ongoing costs CANNOT be met on a pension.Admittedly, the coverage and the commentators at times leave a lot to be desired

.However it's ALL we've got and can afford and I believe 10% of something is better than 100% of nothing.Please take this into consideration.