Rugby World Cup FTA Coverage

[MrMouse]

Ok, we all know the RWC has fallen to 9.

We've had threads discussing possibles and probables for commentary with one or two loopy passes and a few exciting prospects. Not to mention plenty of Mungo bashing.

But I am really, genuinely freaked out about the FTA coverage.

Exhibit A: Australia's opening Cricket World Cup game. The marquee sport in 9's stable. Our darlings. 9 doesn't bother to throw over there until 11:40. Some saps refrain from checking internet scores, deciding to watch a delayed game. Instead, we find that the entire first half of the game with AUSTRALIA BATTING has elapsed, and Andrew Voss walks us through the wickets before rejoining the host broadcaster's live feed for the insipid second innings.

Exhibit B: Our Super highlights package being pushed through mid-week at midnight.

Exhibit C: Channel 9 are not showing any non-Australian games at all. For instance, I learned that minnows Netherlands were challenging England from ABC 24, the least sporty channel alive. This was a game that can capture imaginations and ignite interest. None of the other top nations are being broadcast either.

Exhibit D: According to the program, the entire extent of the ANZAC contest coverage, the Chappel-Hadlee game, Kangaroo vs Sheep, Chicks in Bikinis vs Shorn Sheep, Man vs Sheep is a one hour highlights package from 11:30pm.

How the hell can we believe these mullets will do even a passable job of our biggest sporting event if they can't even do the cricket any more?

 

[Novocastrian]

I don't know that cricket is the "marquee sport in 9's stable". Sure they show domestic tests but that's probably just because they've paid for them till 2013 so they may as well use them rather than buying daytime TV filler that they'd otherwise be forking out for. Summer is non ratings period for TV so they're happy to show ODI's/T20 at night as it's not going to bump whatever 5 year old 'blockbuster' series they'd be showing at night during the ratings period. Pretty much any cricket that's OS will either clash with their prime time schedule or be too expensive to fork out for if it's going to be shown in the wee hours.

Agree that the RWC will get crappy coverage on 9, but that's because it's a niche sport in comparison to RL/AFL so it'll get that sort of treatment

 

[TOCC]

the RWC is covered by the reforms in the anti-siphoning legislation which should be approved in April/May, the RWC Grand Final is a tier1 event and must be shown live on the main channel, the Quaters, Semis and pool matches involving Australia are classified Tier 2 which states they must be show live within 4 hours on any of the channels...

Essentially i think what we will see is all Australian matches broadcast live in QLD, NSW and ACT on the main channel, and on one of the multi-channels live in Vic, SA and WA.
I reckon the big matches involving NZ and England will also be broadcast on the multi channels, something they haven't been able to do in the past.

 

[MrMouse]

It should be added that I was wrong on the Aus NZ cricket game.

But as cricket has been 9's marquee summer sport since the advent of world series cricket, I do think that's a fair description.

TOCC, it'd be good if NZ and English matches were broadcast but I won't hold my breath. At best, one suspects they'd be middle-of-the-night jobbies on multichannels.

I think it's pretty piss poor that the only guaranteed live coverage is the final. Tier 2 means diddly - as you say, within four HOURS on any channel.

Sadly, for many Australians it means the RWC may as well not happen, as they won't see any of it. Bah humbug!

 

[daz]

Sadly, for many Australians it means the RWC may as well not happen, as they won't see any of it. Bah humbug!

Come on MrMouse, get creative. I was in Thailand for 6 years (2003-2009) with no FTA or home satellite/cable coverage, but you get around that by organising a seat at the local ex-pat pub with a few mates.

Luckily I have foxtel now I am back in Oz, but if I didn't I know nearly every pub and club in Australia does. Not ideal, if you want to sit on the couch in your undies perhaps, but there are options.

If you really want to see a game, you will find a way.

 

[MrMouse]

I love my undies, and I love my pubs. It saddens me greatly that they're not compatible.

That's not really my point - it's less self-pitying and more horror at another incredible chance to impress rugby upon the national psyche that will go begging because a useless network with a poor track record will butcher the coverage. The majority of Australians (not those of us on the forum!) won't know/bother to go to the pub to watch Georgia vs Romania, France vs Tonga, Canada vs Tonga, Fiji vs Samoa...so many incredibly interesting games between far flung and remarkably different countries that make the RWC so bloody interesting. At best, they'll see the standard Aus vs games, typically jingoistic coverage and hardly anyone will love rugby more at the end of it than at the beginning. THAT is my concern.

 

[daz]

At best, they'll see the standard Aus vs games, typically jingoistic coverage and hardly anyone will love rugby more at the end of it than at the beginning. THAT is my concern.

Point taken, but I am sceptical about converting non-rugby fans to rugby just because of a world cup. I suppose the ARU will be measuring that stat though.

I wonder how many non-hockey fans would sit through an entire hockey world cup tournament? Not me, especially if it is Chile v Honduras or something equally unexciting; but if the Hockeyroos are playing (drool) then I'll happily flick across. As long as it doesn't clash with QI. Or Big Bang Theory.

The Socceroos as a national team may be the exception here, but again, I didn't stay up late to watch Bahrain v Mexico either.