I'd be amazed if this Kentaro company get the sort of numbers they're predicting. No one in their right mind is going to pay this for a meaningless game, when the coverage could probably crash, and you could probably search around the internet and find it for free anyway.
Or as Plaaayer said it's available to watch through Bet365 if you've got an account with them, so instead of spending a fiver through Kentaro, open up a Bet365 account and put it on an odds on match, like Dagenham to beat Darlington, Notts County to beat Torquay or France to beat the Faroes and you'll see the game and stand a good chance to make some money.
Im pretty sure none of them have the highlights either. The winning company (online) would not have let them, otherwise everyone would just wait for the highlights and not pay for the live coverage (not that many will anyway).
Not that im bothered as i'll be be out there. Don't expect me to provide an insight into the game when I return as im hoping to be too pissed to remember!!!
I'm not overly bothered, but will log onto justin.tv to see if someone there is streaming it, as I wont be at the Oldham game, but either way, not fussed.
[cite]Posted By: Swisdom[/cite]And what if you live in a notspot and can't watch? Disgraceful selling it to Sultana in the first place - our national team should never be on a minority channel and should always be free
it's not as if they need more money so that shouldn't be a factor
The rights to the match belong to the Ukraine FA, not the English FA. Presumably Setanta offered the best deal and now that England have qualified none of the usual suspects see any point in buying the rights.
[cite]Posted By: Swisdom[/cite]And what if you live in a notspot and can't watch? Disgraceful selling it to Sultana in the first place - our national team should never be on a minority channel and should always be free
it's not as if they need more money so that shouldn't be a factor
The rights to the match belong to the Ukraine FA, not the English FA. Presumably Setanta offered the best deal and now that England have qualified none of the usual suspects see any point in buying the rights.
Or buying at the price the Ukranians may well have been asking more like.
Seems daft to me. I've already got a Bet365 account and so I can watch it for free. I won't though because we've already qualified - what's the point? I agree with Large: Argentina v Peru is far more interesting.
A huge debate on whether broadcasting live sport on the internet is the way forward. I know, lets ask a media expert his view. Step forward....Rio Ferdinand.
I seem to be the only one who isn't caught up in this debate about it being streamed on the internet, most likely because:
(1) I will be on the train back from The Valley
(2) There will be plenty of people streaming it for free anyway so no-one with any sense is gonna pay for it (p2p, justin.tv, ustream etc.)
(3) I dont really give a s**t as weve already qualified. In fact i'd quite like Ukraine to get 2nd place in the group ahead of Croatia, and a win against us will pretty much guarantee that as it will mean they go into their final group game 1 point ahead of Croatia, with Andorra to play.
I can't see this taking off until it's much more common for people to be using the internet on their TV. I can't see many people being prepared to pay money to watch a match on their computer.
In addition to the above, the Under 21 Championship qualifier of England v. FYR Macedonia being played at Coventry's Ricoh Arena is to be shown live only on Chelsea TV. It seems no-one else expressed any interest in it.
Personally I think we should riot. That's the only way the FA would take any notice. Seriously, if this happened in Italy or Germany there would be complete uproar, would this happen in France?
No wonder Jack Walker pissed himself laughing at our World cup bid.
Probably. 95% of French people only pay any attention when they get to the quarter finals.
Ha ha ha! Yes, true.
While your comment is funny I really don't see this as something to laugh about. England matches should be protected by law. End of.
This argument will only be settled when another national team restricts their match coverage to those who are in a position to see them on the basis of finance and ability to access appropriate technology. Only then will we be able to compare our access to our national game to others.
Probably. 95% of French people only pay any attention when they get to the quarter finals.
Ha ha ha! Yes, true.
While your comment is funny I really don't see this as something to laugh about. England matches should be protected by law. End of.
This argument will only be settled when another national team restricts their match coverage to those who are in a position to see them on the basis of finance and ability to access appropriate technology. Only then will we be able to compare our access to our national game to others.
I don't see how English law could be applied to a match played in another country under the auspices of a competition run from abroad.
I don't see how English law could be applied to a match played in another country under the auspices of a competition run from abroad.
Yes.. You're right. Lets just allow our national game, the game of our nation to eroded by corporate intent. And while that's happening perhaps we could all move to Germany and watch their national side playing on RTL for free where anyone can watch.
I don't see how English law could be applied to a match played in another country under the auspices of a competition run from abroad.
Yes.. You're right. Lets just allow our national game, the game of our nation to eroded by corporate intent. And while that's happening perhaps we could all move to Germany and watch their national side playing on RTL for free where anyone can watch.
Please explain how the UK parliament could legislate to prevent a foreign football association from selling the rights to their games to the highest bidder. Thanks.
Not so much an explanation, but surely if the Government can state that World Cup Finals have to be on terrestrial, they can do the same with all away England games?
[cite]Posted By: allez les addicks[/cite]Not so much an explanation, but surely if the Government can state that World Cup Finals have to be on terrestrial, they can do the same with all away England games?
Why can they? It's already been stated that away games are out of their control as the home country sells the rights. Kentaro bought the game expecting there to be something riding on it but our amazing form has seen it turn to a dead rubber. Best thing to do is to not buy it, or try and see it free somewhere else online. Hopefully Kentaro will lose loads of money and it won't happen again.
[cite]Posted By: allez les addicks[/cite]Not so much an explanation, but surely if the Government can state that World Cup Finals have to be on terrestrial, they can do the same with all away England games?
Interesting point, but I think the distinction is between determining how games are shown and whether they are shown at all.
If the Ukraine FA own the rights and can set their own price, it can't be right for the UK government to tell broadcasters (probably the BBC) they must pay whatever is asked.
The problem seems to be with the national associations controlling the rights in the first place, but I'd imagine that's a can of worms.
I could put up with the argument that the live game has been 'sold' to the highest bidder, i.e. Sky, ITV, BBC. At least you would have a choice of seeing it on a decent screen in your home/pub/club etc.
What I cannot understand is why the owner of these rights seeks not to sell the secondary rights , that is the delayed broadcast so that fans of this country have a right to see there national team.
An ability to pay should not be the only basis that these rights should be bought on. Fifa should exclude any TV/ media company from barring any interested country wanting to screen these secondary right, as part of the competition rules, providing that a resonable fee is agreed ( set by the broadcasting union)
This is the free market 'rights' to make money overidding national and International interests. Football is our national game, I hope that a way is found to broadcast this game to a wider audience as possible, not on someones sole ability to pay, in that narrow self interest remit this seems to be the only winner. What next the Olympics only available through McDonalds......
[quote][cite]Posted By: Valley_floyd_red[/cite]Personally I think we should riot. That's the only way the FA would take any notice. Seriously, if this happened in Italy or Germany there would be complete uproar, would this happen in France?[/quote]
There's a 'Law' in Germany that all 'big' sporting events (World Cup, Olympics, national football team matches, etc.) have to be on Free to air Channels so that everyone can watch.
For some reason they don't show any Charlton matches...
Christ, watching international games was never a human rights issue, people need to get a grip.
Anyway, pretty much any top league or international game is free to view on the internet someplace or another if you spend about 9 seconds looking for it.
Comments
I don't know a single person who will bother to pay for this game. It's not as if it even means anything, we've already qualified.
Or as Plaaayer said it's available to watch through Bet365 if you've got an account with them, so instead of spending a fiver through Kentaro, open up a Bet365 account and put it on an odds on match, like Dagenham to beat Darlington, Notts County to beat Torquay or France to beat the Faroes and you'll see the game and stand a good chance to make some money.
Im pretty sure none of them have the highlights either. The winning company (online) would not have let them, otherwise everyone would just wait for the highlights and not pay for the live coverage (not that many will anyway).
Not that im bothered as i'll be be out there. Don't expect me to provide an insight into the game when I return as im hoping to be too pissed to remember!!!
The rights to the match belong to the Ukraine FA, not the English FA. Presumably Setanta offered the best deal and now that England have qualified none of the usual suspects see any point in buying the rights.
Or buying at the price the Ukranians may well have been asking more like.
Doubt they will get a tenth of that.
(1) I will be on the train back from The Valley
(2) There will be plenty of people streaming it for free anyway so no-one with any sense is gonna pay for it (p2p, justin.tv, ustream etc.)
(3) I dont really give a s**t as weve already qualified. In fact i'd quite like Ukraine to get 2nd place in the group ahead of Croatia, and a win against us will pretty much guarantee that as it will mean they go into their final group game 1 point ahead of Croatia, with Andorra to play.
No wonder Jack Walker pissed himself laughing at our World cup bid.
We are pathetic.
Probably. 95% of French people only pay any attention when they get to the quarter finals.
While your comment is funny I really don't see this as something to laugh about. England matches should be protected by law. End of.
This argument will only be settled when another national team restricts their match coverage to those who are in a position to see them on the basis of finance and ability to access appropriate technology. Only then will we be able to compare our access to our national game to others.
I don't see how English law could be applied to a match played in another country under the auspices of a competition run from abroad.
Please explain how the UK parliament could legislate to prevent a foreign football association from selling the rights to their games to the highest bidder. Thanks.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7438763.stm
Why can they? It's already been stated that away games are out of their control as the home country sells the rights. Kentaro bought the game expecting there to be something riding on it but our amazing form has seen it turn to a dead rubber. Best thing to do is to not buy it, or try and see it free somewhere else online. Hopefully Kentaro will lose loads of money and it won't happen again.
Interesting point, but I think the distinction is between determining how games are shown and whether they are shown at all.
If the Ukraine FA own the rights and can set their own price, it can't be right for the UK government to tell broadcasters (probably the BBC) they must pay whatever is asked.
The problem seems to be with the national associations controlling the rights in the first place, but I'd imagine that's a can of worms.
What I cannot understand is why the owner of these rights seeks not to sell the secondary rights , that is the delayed broadcast so that fans of this country have a right to see there national team.
An ability to pay should not be the only basis that these rights should be bought on. Fifa should exclude any TV/ media company from barring any interested country wanting to screen these secondary right, as part of the competition rules, providing that a resonable fee is agreed ( set by the broadcasting union)
This is the free market 'rights' to make money overidding national and International interests. Football is our national game, I hope that a way is found to broadcast this game to a wider audience as possible, not on someones sole ability to pay, in that narrow self interest remit this seems to be the only winner. What next the Olympics only available through McDonalds......
There's a 'Law' in Germany that all 'big' sporting events (World Cup, Olympics, national football team matches, etc.) have to be on Free to air Channels so that everyone can watch.
For some reason they don't show any Charlton matches...
Anyway, pretty much any top league or international game is free to view on the internet someplace or another if you spend about 9 seconds looking for it.