[url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/internationals/8286886.stm ]apparently.[/url]
That's an idea that I hope crashes & burns....
Setanta went bust & nobody else wants it
I don't see the problem
i can't get the internet
Why worry? They'll have Sven 'the Expert' Erickson expressing his opinions.
It will be a shite game like most England games are.
I've given up watching England unless nothing else is on or its a tournament.
It will be a shite game like most England games are.I've given up watching England
I can see that your lack of accuracy in the first statement is a direct result of your second.
England have played very well in the qualifiers. I think it's a great loss that the game isn't on.
Hopefully this is the first step towards phasing out international games during the season.
excellent, get more poo ball off the TV
hmm - whilst i don't want to watch football on my laptop - maybe this will be a driving force to up demand for multi media pcs and the like...
England are through and I can confidently predict that they will not win the tournament so it matters not. Hardly any cycling makes it onto national free to air TV, why does that not make the news?
England are through and I can confidently predict that they will not win the tournament so it matters not. Hardly any cycling makes it onto national free to air TV, why does that not make the news?
Because, by and large, the population of this country couldn't give a **** about it.
Hopefully this is the first step towards phasing out international games during the season.
So just when would you suggest they play world cup qualifiers? In the close season a full year before the tournament? In the weeks running up to the tournament beginning?
Yop idea, less pooball on tv can only be a good thing.
less pooball on tv can only be a good thing.
In your opinion. Unfortunately for you, there is a massive audience for football so any important match/tournament gets huge coverage and will be played on terrestrial/satellite tv as well as saturating all the other media outlets such as the press, radio, magazines etc. And just think of all those cars and vans with flags waving next summer.
I LOVE football and can't wait for next summer. Especially as it will upset all you 'wendyball' haters so much 🙂
The issue here is that the FA did not have the rights to the game as its an away match.
I think its a good idea especially once people have got used to having some kind of computer/console/multimedia device hooked up to there TV.
But from the sound of it they are deliberately trying to limit the number of people connecting because they dont want problem with bandwidth.
This is one advantage broadcasting signals has over streaming it doesnt matter how many devices are connecting within the broadcast area.
Would be better if they charged like £2-£3 and tried to get as many people to connect as possible but sounds like their systems cant handle that.
England are through and I can confidently predict that they will not win the tournament so it matters not. Hardly any cycling makes it onto TV, why does that not make the news?
Fixed it for you.
Why do they have the boreathon that is the road world champs on BBC1 live but not even put DH world champs on (anywhere that its easy to find) especially when a Brit won it last year?
but not even put DH world champs on (anywhere that its easy to find) especially when a Brit won it last year?
Because road cycling has broader appeal (think Tour de France).
Some people need to reality check here - programmers plan based on what they think will appeal to a large enough audience.
DH is rubbish to watch on TV, as is XC, mainly due to fixed cameras in uninspiring places, road racing is better as they can use camera bikes and get closer to the action
It being on the net isn't a problem,that's how I watch baseball 🙂
Ian
DH is rubbish to watch on TV, as is XC, mainly due to fixed cameras in uninspiring places, road racing is better as they can use camera bikes and get closer to the action
You should try explaining televised sailing to people!
It usually goes along the lines of 'look dear the boats have started racing........oh look! That ones now going in completely the opposite direction.........why? Oh look at that lovely coloured sail......why can't the other ones put there's up?.......is he in the lead?' Pishhhhht (that's the sound of beer opening....)
I dont pay when i watch premiership/european football online,
why would i bother with a qualifier that is effectively a friendly
why would i bother with a qualifier that is effectively a friendly
it's not a friendly to the Ukraine who are still hoping to qualify or to the England players still hoping to make the 22 for the WCF's
And will the results have any further impact on seeding for the finals? It could prove very important if it does.
What's the chances that enough infrastructure has been put in place to support the possible demand?
What's the chances that enough infrastructure has been put in place to support the possible demand?
If there was any demand it would be on the tele.
Two hours footy is relatively cheap TV (once they've paid for the rights) - get three has-beens in cheap suits in an overbright studio to discuss the blatantly obvious and that's about it. It doesn't take much in beer and BMW adverts to pay their fees. If more than a hundred people with an income were planning to watch it, it would almost certainly be on.
Apparently "less than half a million".
I'd be interested to know [i]how much[/i] less than half a million.
it was live on my tv here in Norway
but i didnt watch it cause i hate football
it was live on my tv here in Norway
As well as TV2 loads of other satellite channels took it, I think there was a dozen or so European feeds
It seemed to be all over the place except the UK 🙂
It was offered to the UK TV stations for £3million . Seeing as England were already through they all said no. So only other option was internet feed.
This thing about it being the 'future' is the FA putting on a brave face.