Sky's the Limit

When tensions run as high as they do in football it’s inevitable that a fully panoramic array of villains will emerge, from the cuddly Robbie Savage to Kyle Lafferty who’s just a cu… completely different kettle of fish. In recent times however, the real baddies aren’t the players but the businessmen; the suited Emperor Palpatines who provide the new money needed to tempt Vader into badge-kissing on the wrong side of the city (three months after signing a new five-year deal with your club).


But far worse than the owners who wade into looking for a quick buck and depart leaving decimated infrastructure and a bloated wage bill, is the true dark side of the force: the far less transient television companies and their ongoing battle over ownership of viewing rights. Does this free-market approach provide us fans with quality through competition or would it just be easier if one person everything? Is the real villain in top-flight football coverage the established companies who seek to extend their monopoly, or the smaller channels trying to cash in by convoluting the system and providing inferior service for their additional cost?


I think you would be incredibly naïve to fall back on the ‘traditional’ football fan’s argument that, ‘they’re my team, who are the big TV companies to charge me to watch them, those big wigs no nothing about football ECT’. The game has developed into a multimillion-pound industry (and has greatly benefited from it) that relies as much on attracting less avid, or ‘part-time’ fans as appeasing the die-hard season ticket holders.


It is unrealistic to expect terrestrial channels to being able to cater for all needs; in actual fact, the BBC has done admirably in keeping Match of the Day running so long (remember the dark, dark season when ITV’s The Premiership took over). It manages to provide that rare mix of extensive coverage and mostly valid opinions (Mark Lawrenson and Martin Keown aside) but lacks the funds to really cover everything. If, like me, you want to be able to watch some form of football every night of the week, and completely exile yourself from work, girlfriends, and responsibility in general on Saturday afternoons the Beeb can’t realistically be expected to invest license-payer’s money in helping you.


So some form of private investment is needed. And for nearly fifteen years Rupert Murdoch’s Sky has provided this admirably. There are always going to gripes from fans of the smaller teams that their needs are not sufficiently services, but the fact is that the vast majority of the big games in club football are covered and covered well. There aren’t any instances of ill-advised ad-breaks cutting off crucial goals either, or the signal cutting out halfway through a match (a problem anyone who has tried to stream international channels on the internet will be well aware of); generally you get to watch most matches in their entirety.


In the spirit of laissez faire though, competition developed, with Setanta the first to try undercutting Sky’s dominance. Dear God it was awful. Apart from lacking the personalities needed to compete with the likes of Jeff Sterling and Andy Gray, they invested their money in the rights to the SPL – a league then (and perhaps still) on the decline – while Sky boasted superior Premier League coverage supplemented with coverage of La Liga, which few would argue was more appealing to the casual fan than Dundee visiting Fir Park. And anyone who ever flicked over to Setanta Sports News will join me in raising a thankful toast to the company’s demise.


ESPN has enjoyed slightly more success since attempting the transition from the all American sports channel to some kind of hybrid that encourages the ‘special relationship’, but when you actual look at their schedule it is difficult avoid the conclusion that they are simply picking a carcass that Sky has pillaged fairly thoroughly. The priority is getting any game involving a ‘big club’ – which to the Americans means Chelsea or Man United – and the result is that Sky get the dog-fights, the derbies and the really important matches (i.e. everything anyone wants to see) while ESPN show teams parking the bus and trying not concede more than three at Old Trafford.


Why not just cap how much a company can charge viewers and put more games across the one network – introducing more channels if need be – instead of causing fans to miss games?  That way people could pay one company one price and see their team play more often with better coverage and analysis. Because frankly ESPN is a terrible investment for the average football fan, even at £7 a month.


There is however, I would argue the irrevocable need for some things to remain on terrestrial TV, namely a decent highlights show and European club football, as well as some of the internationals. Here again however, competition has detracted from the quality of service, rather than adding to it.


I think I speak for many when I say the Champions League and ITV are as synonymous as Match of the Day and the BBC: staying up late on a school night and not caring how limiting five channels could be because at least you got the Champions League. In much the same way the BBC dropped the ball by not snapping up what was given to them, and thus allowing The Premiership to run for a long, long season; ITV has blown their budget on luring Adrian Chiles away from MOTD 2, and subsequently has halved the number of CL games on offer, from a pretty measly two to a unacceptable one game (out of eight) a week.


They are obviously unaware that it doesn’t matter how good the pundit it fans want to watch football. And when the ‘expert’ analysis comes from Gareth Southgate, having a witty anchor is useless because all the jokes go over his massively elongated head. Similarly, Channel 5 has, for reasons unbeknown to anyone anywhere, bolstered their all star commentary team this year with the addition of David Pleat, who even ITV rejected.


Why can’t ITV replace X-Factor and Corrie repeats with that second game a week and then you could have all the European games terrestrial TV gets over their four channels? Ditch Southgate, get Marcel Desailly on the couch more often, double viewing figures, and give nine-year boys whose parents don’t have Sky something to talk about at school on Thursday mornings.


The rights to the FA Cup have historically only be sold to one station – either the BBC or ITV – and as a result, the games are spaced out so there’re usually three or four over the weekend, everyone gets to watch it them. Don’t make things more difficult that they need to be: one competition needs one station showing it live across multiple channels with decent coverage and analysis, highlights later on terrestrial TV if necessary.


During the World Cup everyone I know, when they had a choice, watched the BBC coverage rather than ITV, because there weren’t any breaks and Mick McCarthy was commentating. Football fans don’t want choice; we'd rather be able to watch our team play and listen to someone who knows something about the game tell us what’s going on. Most of us accept that to watch all or most of the games we’re going to have to pay: let us pay one company one price for decent coverage instead of having to fork out for extra for substandard service.


The real villain of football as far as I’m concerned is he (or she) who prevents fans from following it and enjoying watching the beautiful game. Let’s move away from the culture of purely pay-per-view coverage – not an impossible eventuality if you consider the Ukraine vs. England match last year and the Utrecht vs. Celtic match this week – and accept that if we’re going to have to pay for it, lets pay someone who knows what they’re doing and can at least give us a good standard of service. It may not be in the spirit of equality but established networks have the experience, the personnel and the funds to do things properly, and that to me is more important than paying some cowboys to do a half-arsed job.


For the casual terrestrial fan, more European games on ITV and ITV alone, and some kind law outlawing the removal of Match of the Day would surely go along way to making sure more can watch and enjoying watching the game. For the more avid fans, if a monopoly over football viewing rights must exist, lets at least make it a proper one. Don’t allow ESPN to spoil one weekend in four, and take your money for the pleasure; if I’m going to have to pay someone, Sky’s the limit thanks.