While those of us in North America will be treated to the Grand Final live this year (and I like to think of the work of AFANA has made a difference in that), many fans around the world this year will not. Coverage is live in the US, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, and much of east Asia and the western Pacific. The latter two are only happening courtesy of the ABC Asia Pacific service and even the AFL was unaware they were doing it until AFANA told them.
For fans in continental Europe, western Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Central and South America, they will be lucky to see anything at all. It's a shame. Fans from many countries wrote AFANA in desperation but we couldn't offer much comfort. The blame rests squarely on the AFL and their "strategic partners" FOX Sports International (FSI).
The phrase "strategic partners" isn't mine. No, that was used by the AFL in response to complaints from some of us about the problems in the coverage after last season, particularly when it wasn't clear that FOX Sports World would carry the sport this year.
I'm sorry but if FSI cannot get their own affiliated networks to air the most important event on the footy calendar, even on tape delay, then you have to wonder just how important that relationship is to FSI. Furthermore, given the declining state of international TV coverage this season, just what is the AFL getting for their multi-year commitment to FOX?
I suppose, as I have stated elsewhere in this blog, it reduced the annual headache that international coverage was for the AFL. But if popularizing the sport internationally isn't at least a little work then it wouldn't be worth doing, now would it? Furthermore, since it seems more and more likely footy will not be back on FOX Sports World in the US next year, this will raise further doubts as to just what FSI can do for the AFL. FSI is the parent of FOX Sports World US, FOX Sports Latin America (no coverage for the past several seasons). It is affiliated with FOX Sports Middle East & FOX Sports Israel (no live GF).
Sadly, I suspect we are stuck with FSI until the current contract ends after the 2006 season. I doubt the AFL would break the contract so our only hope is that FSI voluntarily pulls out. Otherwise, it is once again up to the fans in the various countries around the world to hound networks in their own countries to pick up the sport and bother the AFL to support that effort. It will be an uphill battle.
The AFL spends A$400,000 per annum on the various international leagues. It is money well spent. So where is the commitment to improved TV coverage? Fan development? That's missing. I have it on good authority that AFL Films lived with a reduced budget this past season. Instead of improving the lot of the international fan, the AFL is making it worse.
It's a shame that AFANA is now the principal source for information on international TV coverage of the AFL. We do it for free. We do it because it needs done for the future of the sport and someone should care about the fans. Isn't it time the AFL either makes FSI deliver or gets someone who will?
-Rob (who is counting the hours until the big match)
Posted by rkdesantos at September 26, 2003 12:16 AM
Related Blog Entries:
I have to wonder to what extent the AFL is obligated to the FOX empire, given the existence of the FOX Footy Channel and FOX Footy Extra in Australia. (Which I'd MAIM to get access to...)
Not to denigrate any other part of the world, but one would THINK that outside of Australia and New Zealand, the USA/Canada and Europe would be the primary targets for coverage and fan development, if only because of language issues -- it's NOT one for the US, Canada and the UK (except perhaps for minor idiom issues) and much of Europe's population has English as a second language.
I'd like to know why the AFL hasn't gone to FSI with something along the lines of "Look, you said you would HANDLE this for us -- and given the number of complaints we're getting from overseas fans, you aren't doing a very good job of it. Why are fans in the US having to beg every year to be sure they get their footy? Why are large parts of the world covered by FOX Sports nets not carrying footy at all? What's going on?"
I have to admit that my anticipation of the GF has been dampened a bit by reading that the chances of coverage continuing on FSW are slim... it may be less than ideal, but at least it's THERE.
*sigh*
GO LIONS!
George
On a related subject, I remember earlier in the footy season, trying to log onto Melbourne radio 3AW for a live broadcast of a game with my beloved by dreadful Demons. At precisely 2pm, the station removes its internet coverage.....as ordered by the wonderful AFL...that bunch of money-grabbing corporate bastards who do not give a rat's arse for supporters of the game. You have to pay to get any live coverage on the net now.
As someone said, you would think that promoting the game internationally would appeal to them...even to their greed. But apparently the prospect of making a few bucks was too tempting for them.
As for tonite, I don't care who wins as long as it is not Collingwood.
Posted by: Laurance at September 26, 2003 02:42 PMGeorge - While it is true that areas where English the primary language are probably natural markets to pursue, English is the leading second language just about everywhere in the world now. That said, it's not the issue. The AFL had coverage in much of the non-English speaking world for years and has now lost it.
I wish I knew what the AFL and FSI have said to each other but I'll bet that it isn't much. If I'm correct that part of the AFL's goal for turning things over to FSI in the first place was the desire to get rid of a "problem", they aren't going to say much until they are publicly embarassed into doing so.
Fear not... coverage will reappear somewhere next year. I have a high degree of confidence that once fans get mobilized and the target networks identified, we'll get our footy in 2004. Who knows, it could be better. It's been getting worse year by year on World.
Laurence - The 3AW issue is whole different kettle. That has more to do with the AFL and Telstra making their web deal worthwhile to both parties and less to do with promoting footy. Telstra paid a lot of money for the internet rights and wants some of that back. International fans have more or less resigned themselves that they have to pay for it. The upside, however small, is that when we finally can get live coverage, even by pay per view, fans here in the US will likely pay for it.
The grand final was broadcast on 3aw this year.
Apparently the AFL cast broke down according to a fan in North Wales England. He hunted around and found 3aw.
The AFL streaming rules where were they on Saturday and the previous week.
I listened to Brisbane Sydney game on 3aw as a try out on prev Saturday, and I have not paid any money to AFL. I live in West Oz
Keep it in mind for the future.
Rgds
Keith, thanks for the note. While it is interesting that 3AW was in the clear, they obviously did that despite the AFL's contract with them which prohibits it. Yea, it could have been due to an unavoidable technical issue. I just don't think fans can count on that being the case in the future. After all, if 3AW is always in the clear why would fans pay the AFL site at all?
In any case, my point in the blog was about international TV coverage not radio which is a different animal.
Posted by: Rob de Santos at September 30, 2003 11:31 AMCan someone tell me if i have any chance of getting the AFL Grand Final in India? I'm currently in Hyderabad and will eitgher be here or Visag. Anyone???
Cheers
James
James,
Contact AFANA at aussief at
afana dot com and we can help you. That's a better way than here on the blog.
Regards,
Rob