[mlt11]

Interesting Media Guardian article today:

"The English Cricket Board and Rugby Football Union have made a last-minute plea against adding to the "crown jewels" list ahead of a government review of which sporting events must be shown on free-to-air TV, due to be delivered within the next week."

It was reorted a few weeks ago that The Ashes may be added to the List. But I don't think there had been much speculation of more rugby union being added (currrently only the World Cup Final is listed).

The IRB sells the World Cup rights so if the RFU are protesting this must surely relate to England internationals (though the Six Nations is technically sold by the Six Nations committee I think).

All in all it's looking as if Davies is going to recommend very significant increases to the List.

I suspect a major row is brewing. And of course the question remains as to whether the Government can get a new List through before the General Election.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009...ts-free-to-air

[Charnham]

why is it these sports want to be made culturally irrelevant, they are not football, do they really think that being behind a PayTV barrier is going to help grass roots, it wont because to many youngsters will not know the sport exisits, or if they do, they just wont care.

[ariusuk]

This links nicely with Charlie Sale's report today that club rugby bosses are concerned about the BBC's lack of interest in their sport (as opposed to the national game - the BBC now has no club rugby from England).

With two packages of Guinness Premiership rights still for sale after Setanta's demise, they were probably hoping the BBC would enter a bidding war with Sky and ESPN.

[mlt11]

Ben Bradshaw (the Cuture Secretary) has given a speech today.

Per Media Guardian:

"Bradshaw also predicted "an almighty row" when Ofcom completes its review, due shortly, of the sporting events that should be broadcast free to air."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...tories-luvvies

A report last week said the Davies Committee would issue its report this week. If this is correct it means the report will be issued in the next couple of days.

I think the Bradshaw comment above is a further pointer to a quite significant expansion of the List - if this is the case as he suggests there is about to be a very big row indeed.

But whether Labour can get this through before the General Election will be the key issue.

[Irish Mark]

Davies works for sky and has done for years, so I'm sure there will be an impartial response from him.

I think these sports are more worried about losing a huge amount of income if ofcom forces sky to lower their wholesale prices for rebroadcasting their sports channels. Sky wont be able to pay the big bucks anymore, so if significantly less money is involved it is better for the sport to be seen by as many people as possible.

Personally speaking I think all sports should be on the dedicated sports channels, as I think they offer better and more comprehensive coverage.

[andy-i]

Originally Posted by ariusuk

This links nicely with Charlie Sale's report today that club rugby bosses are concerned about the BBC's lack of interest in their sport (as opposed to the national game - the BBC now has no club rugby from England).

With two packages of Guinness Premiership rights still for sale after Setanta's demise, they were probably hoping the BBC would enter a bidding war with Sky and ESPN.

I cant imagine GP rugby being popular enough to generate a bidding war. It only pulls in about 100K viewers on Sky and whats the figures for ITV4 highlights?

[ariusuk]

Originally Posted by andy-i

I cant imagine GP rugby being popular enough to generate a bidding war. It only pulls in about 100K viewers on Sky and whats the figures for ITV4 highlights?

Including the ITV1 showing, the highlights gets 500-600,000

[andy-i]

Originally Posted by ariusuk

Including the ITV1 showing, the highlights gets 500-600,000

Thats ok but they show them 3 times, so average per show is not that big. What did ITV pay for those highlights? I'm sure i read it was a pretty small amount.

Isn't it the ex Sentanta live package they have unsold. I still dont see how live GP games are a big draw.

SKY have pared their GP coverage back and spent money tieing up their Heiniken cup deal.

[dids858]

Around 350,000 for ITV4 and 1 on Sunday.

[hendero]

What, exactly, is the rationale for the "crown jewels" concept? That a sporting event is so important to the national psyche that the government will trample all over free enterprise?

It's like something out of the Soviet Union in the 1950's.

[andy-i]

Isnt it likely that all that will happen is that the 6Nations games are moved from the B list to the A list.

If they put all other home internationals on the A list they would have to do it for Scotland, Wales and England or be accused of bias.
None of the Home nations have to qualify for the RWC so in effect the AI's should be treated the same way as International Football Friendlies are.

As for club rugby, I cant see that being on the list.

It will probably just be the 6N and some games from the RWC on the list.

[GeorgeS]

Originally Posted by hendero

What, exactly, is the rationale for the "crown jewels" concept?

local guy/ team wins; people who dont understand the sport want to jump on the bandwagon but wont pay subscription to do so.

[Mikeandhersonq]

Originally Posted by hendero

What, exactly, is the rationale for the "crown jewels" concept? That a sporting event is so important to the national psyche that the government will trample all over free enterprise?

It's like something out of the Soviet Union in the 1950's.

This is Britain, not America. If people want commercialisation to be here in the extent that it is in America, then move there. UK policy shouldn't change to be more like a country.
The UK is about giving access to all. Sports being under a subscription barrier goes against that ideal very much.

[sky is tops]

I do not like the crown jewels sporting events. As how much time can BBC,ITV,Channel 4 & 5 give over to sport before they upset viewres that do not like sport.

But could SKY go for crown jewels events if they put them on on SKY 3/Sports News or any other FTA channel bid for crown jewels events that not BBC,ITV,4 or 5.

[mikw]

Originally Posted by sky is tops

I do not like the crown jewels sporting events. As how much time can BBC,ITV,Channel 4 & 5 give over to sport before they upset viewres that do not like sport.

But could SKY go for crown jewels events if they put them on on SKY 3/Sports News or any other FTA channel bid for crown jewels events that not BBC,ITV,4 or 5.

Seeing as sports are the primary driver for Sky they're not likely to give anything away for free in this area.

[hard_to_beat]

Originally Posted by sky is tops

I do not like the crown jewels sporting events. As how much time can BBC,ITV,Channel 4 & 5 give over to sport before they upset viewres that do not like sport.

But could SKY go for crown jewels events if they put them on on SKY 3/Sports News or any other FTA channel bid for crown jewels events that not BBC,ITV,4 or 5.

Sky can not bid for crown jewels events as there channels do not reach the 98% (IIRC) level of viewer penetration required. It wasn't until very recently that Five were added to the list.

I think that the list is in principle as very good thing. There are certain events which do very much go deep into the public consciousness, well beyond the group of normal sport followers. The three most obvious such events are the Olympic Games (summer and winter), the FIFA World Cup finals tournament, and the UEFA European Championship finals tournament.

However, there also some event for which I think its actually appropriate that they be on pay-tv, for example the Barclays Premier League.

I think that the event as it is is about right, and the only changes I make would be to add Six Nations and the Ashes to the A List.

[Mikeandhersonq]

Originally Posted by hard_to_beat

Sky can not bid for crown jewels events as there channels do not reach the 98% (IIRC) level of viewer penetration required. It wasn't until very recently that Five were added to the list.

I think that the list is in principle as very good thing. There are certain events which do very much go deep into the public consciousness, well beyond the group of normal sport followers. The three most obvious such events are the Olympic Games (summer and winter), the FIFA World Cup finals tournament, and the UEFA European Championship finals tournament.

However, there also some event for which I think its actually appropriate that they be on pay-tv, for example the Barclays Premier League.

I think that the event as it is is about right, and the only changes I make would be to add Six Nations and the Ashes to the A List.

But after the Switchover they can.

[hard_to_beat]

Originally Posted by Mikeandhersonq

But after the Switchover they can.

Well, this is the great unknown - can they or not after DSO?

I think they should probably have some sort of 'approved broadcaster' list attached to the crown jewels, which would act as some sort of control, with criteria relating to national significance and audience share, financial stability and format neutrality as well. In that situation then, yes, I'd have thought Sky would qualify provided they have a channel (Sky 3? Sky Free?!) across all formats (Freeview, FreeSat, Sky, Virgin).

Does anyone know the situation for definite after DSO?

[Digifriendly]

Originally Posted by hard_to_beat

Well, this is the great unknown - can they or not after DSO?

I think they should probably have some sort of 'approved broadcaster' list attached to the crown jewels, which would act as some sort of control, with criteria relating to national significance and audience share, financial stability and format neutrality as well. In that situation then, yes, I'd have thought Sky would qualify provided they have a channel (Sky 3? Sky Free?!) across all formats (Freeview, FreeSat, Sky, Virgin).

Does anyone know the situation for definite after DSO?

Most relays will have Freeview 'lite' service and AFAIK this will not carry Sky3/Sky Sports News but stand to be corrected if wrong. If this is the case unsure if it will constitute enough % of penetration required for these channels.

[The Wanderer]

Some multiplexes won't cover everyone. I think Sky 3 is included in this

[mlt11]

Originally Posted by hard_to_beat

Well, this is the great unknown - can they or not after DSO?

To qualify the channel has to be available in 95% of homes.

The problem for Sky is that even after DSO their Freeview channels are on muxes which do not have the same reach as the PSB muxes.

So I think it's actually touch and go whether Sky will qualify.

Remember Sky channels are available in all the 50% of homes that have Sky or VM. So they actually only need 90% Freeview penetration to reach 95% overall.

ie Sky / VM (50% * 100%) + Non Sky / VM (50% * 90%)

= 50% + 45% = 95%

And of course Sky / VM penetration is increasing every year - currently by about 2.5% of homes. If this continues Sky / VM penetration would reach 60% by 2013. This would reduce the Freeview penetration required to 87.5%.

(60% * 100%) + (40% * 87.5%) = 95%

[mlt11]

Update from Charles Sale re Listed Events in Saturday's Daily Mail:

"Former FA executive David Davies’s report to the Government on his recommendations for TV’s listed sports events will go to the Department of Media, Culture and Sport next week.

And the list - expected to include Ashes cricket and World Cup qualifiers - is bound to upset several sports governing bodies."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...#ixzz0W8EISzln

Interesting to note that the Media Guardian report on 27 October 2009 (see post 1) said the report was "due to be delivered within the next week."

So this is beginning to drag on for quite a long time - bear in mind that the consultation closed on 20 July 2009.

If reports are right and there are significant additions to the List then it seems highly likely that the affected sports governing bodies are going to attempt to draw out the whole process so it cannot be implemented pre General Election. Even small further delays will make this easier - after receiving the report the Secretary of State has to first form his provisional conclusions and then carry out a formal consultation with affected rights holders before taking the final decision.

I'm still unclear whether even after that he has to put a Statutory Instrument through Parliament - can anyone confirm?

[mad_dude]

Originally Posted by hendero
What, exactly, is the rationale for the "crown jewels" concept? That a sporting event is so important to the national psyche that the government will trample all over free enterprise?

It's like something out of the Soviet Union in the 1950's.

In the television without frontiers directive there are the following rationales applied

1.) To insure there are a plurality of broadcasters for sports content.
2.) To provide universal access to events that can provide cultural unity. understanding of cultural diversity,
3.) To maintain the popularity of the event.


There are also similar provisions in American law I think to insure the universal access of some events (If I remember my dissertation correctly) however it has never been inacted due to a relatively strong terrestrial FTA lineup.

[The Wanderer]

Originally Posted by mad_dude

There are also similar provisions in American law I think to insure the universal access of some events (If I remember my dissertation correctly) however it has never been inacted due to a relatively strong terrestrial FTA lineup.

I know that a couple of years ago when the New England Partriots were going for 16-0 record n the regular season, the final regular season game was due to be on only the NFL network. After a bit of "controversy" CBS and NBC showed the game too

[loyalsince]

Originally Posted by mlt11

I'm still unclear whether even after that he has to put a Statutory Instrument through Parliament - can anyone confirm?

Not 100% but it would be an ammendment to the 1996 Broadcasting Act- so I presume it must