19 teams playing 22 games will lead to 9 extra matches over the course of the season.
Players EA up for negotiation at the end of the year I believe. They were waiting for the tv rights deal to be done.
Per round it will be the same - one team will have a bye each round.
If every team is to get 11 home games each, it will be 11 extra games no?
Hope the games that on delay in QLD are Suns home games so it gives casual qld footy fans an added incentive to go to the games if they want to watch the game live
Yeah I think I stuffed it up. Anyway there will be more matches of a course of a season. No need for those split round 6 match rounds.
This is my quick math
With 19 teams and 22 games, every team will have to have 2 byes, because you canât have 3 rounds with no byes. That means you need to fixture 38 byes (2 per club) over 24 rounds (22 games played plus 2 byes).
38 byes - 24 rounds = 14 âextra byesâ, which divided by 2 gives us 7 rounds with 8 games instead of 9.
So I would expect 17 rounds with 9 games and 1 team on bye, and 7 rounds with 8 games and 3 teams on bye
At what point does 7 see theyâve got the dud part of the deal? Now fox takes their signal and can add their own graphics and commentary?
If I was 7, I wouldnt even bother producing those games anymore. Just re-broadcast the Foxtel signal for all of those games.
And in fact⌠a few years into this deal⌠I can see this happening.
They will be donât worry.
Thoughts on this âunbiasedâ article?
Although the AFLâs broadcast revenue has grown significantly in raw terms since then, the 2002 deal stands out as a watershed moment. The losers from all this largesse have been AFL supporters.
Before 2002, AFL fans could watch every game their team played essentially for free, albeit with an indirect cost borne by consumers when they buy the advertised products. While not as bad as Premier League, which shows almost no games for free, the AFL essentially forces genuine supporters to purchase a Foxtel or Kayo subscription.
There has never been a time where you could watch your team live on FTA every week, let alone full match delayed.
Having 3.5 games on FTA live is as good as its ever been.
2002-2006 was arguably almost as good, but 4/5 FTA games were on delay.
I think what the writer means was that prior to 2002, interstate games played by Victorian teams were (almost) always televised live on FTA. So a fan of a Victorian club could attend all of its clubâs matches played in Victoria at the ground and watch the interstate games live on FTA.
SMH business writer Elizabeth Knight has written an opinion piece on the AFL broadcast rights inflation.
Does that include current value? Or is that $200,000 currrent?
I think the 1971 figure is what was paid back then, $200,000 would still have been a large amount of money at the time. And hence the CPI comparison.
I believe pre 2016⌠we had 4 live games yes? Friday Night, Saturday Afternoon / Saturday Night and Sunday Afternoon.
2012-16. The Saturday arvo 7 game was delayed on FTA by 90 mins for Vic audiences
Regardless of the outcome, someone will complain - yeah we could have ended up with a âbetterâ deal, but it could have been âworseâ as well.
My biggest issue is there is no impetus for sports or broadcasters to be particularly innovative about how they approach sports rights - some of that is because our broadcasters are somewhat afraid of risk-taking, some of the sports arenât particularly broad thinkers, and some of it is because we have a requirement for âfreeâ access that made sense when it was written but has failed to keep up with the times.
Iâm a little surprised the AFL has committed to such a long period - a lot has changed since Fox and Seven became the rights holders - but we have a deal that is in practical terms pretty well similar for a further extended period, meanwhile the rest of the world will shift to meet what people want and technology allows.
Are the VFL rights included in this deal?
Wasnât mentioned at all. I would say state league deals are seperate.