A little crispy one Garry - The footy media thread

They pay hundreds of millions for these rights.

And they’re claiming they can’t pay a handful of staff for a 6 hour shift every week at (up to) 9 locations, and 3x return flights for the commentators and anyone else Melbourne based?


it’s important to realise that every cent paid to actual staff to produce actually half decent content takes caviar off the plate of Rupert’s 13th mega yacht. Think of the real victims.


Rupert would be getting the same amount of profit either way. If the product cost more to produce it’s the value of the rights that would decrease. I’m sure the AFL would be involved in the decision. The discussion would be something like, we could have local commentators but we’d pay you $10m less per year. It’s more than likely the AFL that is choosing the moolah over the presentation of the TV coverage. If nothing else the rights deal is the driver of the AFL big wigs bonuses.

So Fox are doing this to save the AFL money, not themselves?

I find that extremely unlikely.

And I’m not sure why they’d need to staff a TV studio. That bit has always been done from the main studios, and it works fine. It’s only the comms that should be done locally.

I bet 7 haven’t stopped flying their Comms around. Just the “premium” Fox product.

Not save, earn.

E.G they present a bid for $950m for a 5 year deal(made up number). AFL says no we want more, we want it to be a billion. Fox goes hmm, how can we offer that while still earning rupes $$$. We have to cut $50m in cost to offer that. Someone says we could do the coverage in Melbourne that will save $10m a year there’s your $50m. They then offer the Billion.

That’s the way business works. Nobody cuts into profit. If the AFL made them cover locally there’s only 3 options 1) cut something else 2) pay less for the rights or 3) charge more for Foxtel. Good luck if you try and present the business case where Rupert is the loser and wears the cost.

We’re ultimately saying the same thing.
It’s penny pinching, one way or another.

Happened to watch Channel 7 News on the weekend .

Timmy Watson, your job is looking shaky, because Shirvo looks really good in a suit and presents well. Its time for a change anyway with Timmy being just over 60.

The headshot isn’t the money shot for Shirv.


Tim Watson is decades past his use by date.


Trouble is, Shirvington is a Sydney ( NRL) sort of guy. But imagine if they put purple or any of the other AFL scribes in on Monday to Thursday night CH7 news in place of Tim

1 Like

I don’t know how some of you people consume so much football media. There’s more intelligence in an insane asylum.


Come on Bomber Girl, Shirvo is a legend.

Brad Scott and Shirvo have one big thing in common.


Both male?

I said BIG

Big male egos???

1 Like

Both born with three legs but only two femurs

1 Like

If anyone’s watching The Front Bar tonight the whole Jezza Cameron stuff has been some of the worst tv I’ve ever witnessed, yet nothing to do with the man himself.

Time they hung up the boots

GeeZ they spent 2 segments talking about him.

What were you watching.

I love the show but they’re probably better off getting retired players on.

Not the best ep, but I thought it was fine

1 Like

Worst show on TV, with the biggest Woke flog starring in it.