General : ESPN, BT, Euro, Premier and Sky Sports news

[Richc1977]

BBC Extends Wimbledon Rights until 2024

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/38017299

[Off the Bit]

Motors TV acquired by Motorsport Network, owner of Autosport magazine.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report...ors-tv-channel

The revised channel will graduate to full HD (high-definition) status in March 2017, with content accessible from a wide array of platforms from desktop, mobile, tablet, streaming devices, gaming consoles and connected televisions to set-top devices such as Apple TV, Amazon Fire and Roku.

[OLD BOY]

Looks like Sky may be preparing to face up to global operators challenging them for sports rights - particularly for Premiership football - in the future.

http://advanced-television.com/2016/...ess-important/

Sky’s Group CEO Jeremy Darroch has said that while sport remains a key part of its broadcast portfolio, the content rights aren’t as important as they once were.

Speaking at a Morgan Stanley investor conference in Barcelona, Darroch said: “Sport is very important, obviously football is very important, but relatively, every day it is less important than it was and that allows us to make more choices about how much we spend, where we invest and where we choose not to.”


Bloomberg has reported that “younger viewers in particular are now less committed to watching entire games and are instead keeping tabs on smartphones” and playing down falling viewing figures for the Premier League this season citing the Olympics, Euro 2016 Championship, relegation of Newcastle / Aston Villa and game picks.

One equity analyst (from investment bank Exane/BNP-Paribas) said it saw these comments as broadly consistent with recent company commentary on content. “For example, at Sky’s investor day, the company argued consistently they will make ‘tough decisions’ on content and have also suggested that the loss of the Champions League to BT has had a limited impact on the UK’s operating performance. The group has repeatedly flagged the increasing diversity of its content offering, and increasing importance of premium TV series in its content roster. However, with 80 per cent+ inflation at the two recent critical auctions (EPL and Bundesliga) the group clearly is willing to pay up to sustain their content differentiation, especially in sport.”

[vincerooney]

I've found the premier league to be dreadful this year. Its a london love fest with constant cockney teams playing and irrelevant little clubs in the other games.

Im sorry but bournemouth in the premier league is just sad really. Its a fairytale for themselves but a team with a 10,000 capacity stadium... It shouldnt really be in the top flight.

The problem is a lot of big clubs are in the championship due to incompetence. Teams like forest, leeds, aston villa, derby, sheff wed, ipswich, birmingham etc etc. I could keep going on. Big teams who when they were in the premier league went for it. Went for ballsy signings. Spent money. Wanted to break into the top ten.

Meanwhile in the premier league you have stoke city, west brom, bournemouth, watford, swansea...some of the teams with the smallest attendances btw...are merely happy to survive. They dont spend a lot. They develop nasty defensive little sides, they collect their huge tv money and never really spend it...they develop a sort of hybrid mid table side.

Its why people are turning off.

The premier league consists of 6 teams who are trying to win the league.

The rest are just happy to keep drawing and ticking the points up to 40.

It doesnt make good viewing! Its so horrifically boring

[Superblade7]

Originally Posted by vincerooney

I've found the premier league to be dreadful this year. Its a london love fest with constant cockney teams playing and irrelevant little clubs in the other games.

Im sorry but bournemouth in the premier league is just sad really. Its a fairytale for themselves but a team with a 10,000 capacity stadium... It shouldnt really be in the top flight.

The problem is a lot of big clubs are in the championship due to incompetence. Teams like forest, leeds, aston villa, derby, sheff wed, ipswich, birmingham etc etc. I could keep going on. Big teams who when they were in the premier league went for it. Went for ballsy signings. Spent money. Wanted to break into the top ten.

Meanwhile in the premier league you have stoke city, west brom, bournemouth, watford, swansea...some of the teams with the smallest attendances btw...are merely happy to survive. They dont spend a lot. They develop nasty defensive little sides, they collect their huge tv money and never really spend it...they develop a sort of hybrid mid table side.

Its why people are turning off.

The premier league consists of 6 teams who are trying to win the league.

The rest are just happy to keep drawing and ticking the points up to 40.

It doesnt make good viewing! Its so horrifically boring

Spot on Vince!

Just the 20,195 watching a League One match at Bramall Lane this afternoon!

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by vincerooney

I've found the premier league to be dreadful this year. Its a london love fest with constant cockney teams playing and irrelevant little clubs in the other games.

Im sorry but bournemouth in the premier league is just sad really. Its a fairytale for themselves but a team with a 10,000 capacity stadium... It shouldnt really be in the top flight.

The problem is a lot of big clubs are in the championship due to incompetence. Teams like forest, leeds, aston villa, derby, sheff wed, ipswich, birmingham etc etc. I could keep going on. Big teams who when they were in the premier league went for it. Went for ballsy signings. Spent money. Wanted to break into the top ten.

Meanwhile in the premier league you have stoke city, west brom, bournemouth, watford, swansea...some of the teams with the smallest attendances btw...are merely happy to survive. They dont spend a lot. They develop nasty defensive little sides, they collect their huge tv money and never really spend it...they develop a sort of hybrid mid table side.

Its why people are turning off.

The premier league consists of 6 teams who are trying to win the league.

The rest are just happy to keep drawing and ticking the points up to 40.

It doesnt make good viewing! Its so horrifically boring

Google translate = your team Newcastle got relegated last season.

[Richc1977]

ITV has won the rights to the 2019 and 2023 Rugby World Cups

/http://www.sportbusiness.com/tv-sports-markets/itv-signs-two-world-cups-new-deals-start-roll

[denphone]

No surprise there as they have generally done a good job showing it for many years now.

[harry_hitch]

Originally Posted by vincerooney

I've found the premier league to be dreadful this year. Its a london love fest with constant cockney teams playing and irrelevant little clubs in the other games.

Im sorry but bournemouth in the premier league is just sad really. Its a fairytale for themselves but a team with a 10,000 capacity stadium... It shouldnt really be in the top flight.

The problem is a lot of big clubs are in the championship due to incompetence. Teams like forest, leeds, aston villa, derby, sheff wed, ipswich, birmingham etc etc. I could keep going on. Big teams who when they were in the premier league went for it. Went for ballsy signings. Spent money. Wanted to break into the top ten.

Meanwhile in the premier league you have stoke city, west brom, bournemouth, watford, swansea...some of the teams with the smallest attendances btw...are merely happy to survive. They dont spend a lot. They develop nasty defensive little sides, they collect their huge tv money and never really spend it...they develop a sort of hybrid mid table side.

Its why people are turning off.

The premier league consists of 6 teams who are trying to win the league.

The rest are just happy to keep drawing and ticking the points up to 40.

It doesnt make good viewing! Its so horrifically boring

Vince you make many excellent points and you have hit a lot nails on their respective heads, but I am going to have to disagree with you about Bournemouth. As a fan of a small club myself, Bournemouth have every right to be there. From what I have seen and heard, I understand they play decent football and fully deserve to be there. They are a great example for smaller clubs to show how things can be done, without breaking the bank. I would rather have teams like Bournemouth working hard for the right to be in the top 10, rather than clubs being ballsy and just spending money and hope it works.

Personally, I don't think their capacity should have anything to do with it. What difference does it make if they have 50,000 fans or 10,000 fans? The 10,00 fans at Bournemouth probably make more noise than those at Old Trafford or the Emirates. When we (Camb Utd) were only allowed to take 9,000 to Old Trafford we did not stop singing and were much louder than the rest of the stadium. It was a dire atmosphere at Old Trafford, even when they were 3-0 up. We even sang songs for them..... Equally when I saw Arsenal v Man City at the Emirates, the atmosphere again, was poor. Capacity, in my eyes, has nothing to do with teams being in the PL.

As you rightly say, look at what some of the bigger clubs have done, and look where they are now. Why should Bournemouth spend just for the sake of spending? They have every chance of getting into Europe, and I would be very happy for them if they do. I can't see them not finishing top 10 either. They are a well run club, based on hard work and team ethic. Yes, it is unlikely they will win the league or even reach CL, but as long as they play good football, don't play for draws and work hard for it, they deserve to be there.

p.s

For what it's worth, Bournemouth and Watford (and Burnley) have all won or lost more games than they have drawn, so I think its a little unfair to say they are happy to play defensively for draws. I fully agree with your broader point about some teams playing for draws and the money they will get as a result of staying up, though.

I look forward to the next round of bidding, and the PL potentially losing money from TV rights.

[Gavin-D]

Sky sport and movies are now half price for 12 months for customers with sky who don't have sports or movies already

Sky sports is £13.25 a month

[muppetman11]

YouView unveils new faster, cleaner, TV user interface

http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/1395...user-interface

[Chad]

Here's a trip down memory lane.

Can anyone remember when you could get just SKY Sports 1 & 2, both channels for about £21.00, if you didn't want to pay extra for the full collection of SKY Sports channels? I seem to remember having this in the past with Virgin Media but they stopped it about 5 or 6 years ago? I also seem to remember at some point if you had this deal SKY Sports 3 and 4 got thrown in at no additional cost.

Can someone verify this or is it just my mind playing tricks? Why did they stop it?

[telegramsam]

Originally Posted by Chad

Here's a trip down memory lane.

Can anyone remember when you could get just SKY Sports 1 & 2, both channels for about £21.00, if you didn't want to pay extra for the full collection of SKY Sports channels? I seem to remember having this in the past with Virgin Media but they stopped it about 5 or 6 years ago? I also seem to remember at some point if you had this deal SKY Sports 3 and 4 got thrown in at no additional cost.

Can someone verify this or is it just my mind playing tricks? Why did they stop it?

I remember it as you could subscribe to either Sky Sports 1 & 3, Sky Sports 2 & 4 or all 4 . As all the football was on either 1 or 3 those days us football fans had to take all 4 if you didn't want to miss out on any live games.

[bubblegun]

Originally Posted by Chad

Here's a trip down memory lane.

Can anyone remember when you could get just SKY Sports 1 & 2, both channels for about £21.00, if you didn't want to pay extra for the full collection of SKY Sports channels? I seem to remember having this in the past with Virgin Media but they stopped it about 5 or 6 years ago? I also seem to remember at some point if you had this deal SKY Sports 3 and 4 got thrown in at no additional cost.

Can someone verify this or is it just my mind playing tricks? Why did they stop it?

Sky customers can get Sports 1 & 5 for a £13.50 per month saving, eg if they only watch English football as this will give (almost) every match.
They can also get Sports 2 & 5 if they prefer cricket with lesser football like Scottish games.
WWE fans can also save with this as almost all WWE is now on Sports 5.

Originally Posted by telegramsam

I remember it as you could subscribe to either Sky Sports 1 & 3, Sky Sports 2 & 4 or all 4 . As all the football was on either 1 or 3 those days us football fans had to take all 4 if you didn't want to miss out on any live games.

Looking at above it's not so different now for Sky customers.

I'm not so sure about your memory.

I thought it was that you got Sports 3 for free with either Sports 1 or 2.
Then Sports 4 came free with both.

Sports 5 was added a few years ago to gauge support for Champions League in its final year.

Sports Xtra was made internet only too at some point.
It was originally a channel.

[telegramsam]

Originally Posted by bubblegun

Sky customers can get Sports 1 & 5 for a £13.50 per month saving, eg if they only watch English football as this will give (almost) every match.
They can also get Sports 2 & 5 if they prefer cricket with lesser football like Scottish games.
WWE fans can also save with this as almost all WWE is now on Sports 5.



Looking at above it's not so different now for Sky customers.

I'm not so sure about your memory.

I thought it was that you got Sports 3 for free with either Sports 1 or 2.
Then Sports 4 came free with both.

Sports 5 was added a few years ago to gauge support for Champions League in its final year.

Sports Xtra was made internet only too at some point.
It was originally a channel.

Think you're right now you've refreshed my memory.