Channel Nine ‘Still the One’ for ruining sports coverage
By Benjamin Conkey, 19 Jul 2009 Benjamin Conkey is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- British Open, Channel 9, Golf, sports coverage
I know many out there say “just get pay television if you want to watch sport.” But some sporting events should be left sacred for as long as possible – like the British Open.
Channel Nine has once again let down sport lovers, with one of the most bizarre and ridiculous scheduling decisions of all-time.
Despite having the free-to-air rights for the British Open, the network has decided not to show the tournament live. It’s the equivalent of buying a Ferrari and leaving it in the garage to gather dust.
It follows similar questionable decisions to not show sport live, including the World Club challenge between Manly and Leeds, which was on at 5am. Instead the network showed a replay the next night at around midnight.
Also the Wimbledon coverage, where Nine pretended to show a Stosur match live, while crossing to Lleyton Hewitt’s match. The phony coverage was expertly uncovered by Media Watch.
Now, back to The British Open.
Channel Nine director of sport Steve Crawley was quoted in the Daily Telegraph as saying “it’s a difficult situation, the fact is, the British Open doesn’t really work on free-to-air.”
What a load of bullocks. The event finishes around 4am each round.
Surely Nine has room in their graveyard timeslot for live sport?
I understand that golf isn’t everyone’s cup of tea, but I think it’s a bit better than selling fancy sponges and abdominal exercise equipment on looped American infomercials. Or playing an old movie or re-run of Matlock.
What makes the decision by Nine even more ridiculous, and contradicts everything Steve Crawley says, is that the network will show highlights of the tournament from around midnight!
So the other night we were able to witness the highlights from the first day of the Open, while the second round was underway.
If the British Open doesn’t work on FTA, why is Nine showing it at all?
And also what is the point of having a High Definition channel if you don’t use it? Nine puts the AFL Footy Show on at 9:30pm on HD for Queensland and NSW viewers, so they don’t have to wait up to watch. Wouldn’t it seem logical to utilise the HD service for golf?
The cynic in me says a sneaky cash payment could have been made by Foxtel to Nine to prevent them from showing the event live.
Something like that must have happened, because it just doesn’t make sense why Nine would pull out at the last minute, when it doesn’t affect their prime-time programs.
I’m hoping an Australian wins The Open more than ever now. It will be karma for a network that used to be ‘switched on’ when covering sport. To get the network back to where it used to be (i.e. ‘Still the One’), executives should start asking the question: What would Kerry Packer do?
Clearly he wouldn’t give up a premier sporting event like the British Open, especially when one has the rights to show it live.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
- Explore:
- British Open, Channel 9, Golf, sports coverage

Rob said | July 19th 2009 @ 11:02am | Report comment
I agree it is poor form to not show the event live. I am now a big fan of SBS who are of course showing the Ashes live as well as the Tour de France on SBS Two.
Well done to SBS.
MVDave said | July 19th 2009 @ 11:21am | Report comment
Thank goodness SBS has the World Cup next year.
Brett McKay said | July 19th 2009 @ 3:49pm | Report comment
So let me guess Conks, you changed channels thinking the golf was on, saw ads for fancy sponges and abdominal exercise equipment, and instead headed for the computer….
Sneaky pot-shot at your motivation aside, you’re spot in here. Nine, and to a lesser extent Seven, have a long history of this. They’ve been claiming “live and exclusive coverage” of Wimbledon for years, which is fine if you overlook the mere detail of Fox Sports also covering the Championships. I’ve even got my suspicions that Seven squeezed extra ads in during the Bledisloe last night, and that while it may well have started live, I suspect the coverage finished a few minutes later than the game.
SBS dual handling of the Ashes and Le Tour has been fantastic, exactly what digital multi-channelling should be used for.
MVD, you mention you’re glad SBS have the World Cup in 2010 – unfortunately, Nine has the RWC 2011 rights…..
Justin said | July 19th 2009 @ 4:01pm | Report comment
No Bledisloe live in Melbourne Brett, not on 7 anyway.
AussieGolfer said | July 19th 2009 @ 4:36pm | Report comment
Absolutely. Well said. It’s a disgrace and I think your suspicion may be correct.
Who are the “rights” actually bought from?
Perhaps in future, whoever is selling the British Open rights should make sure the buyer shows the event live.
Phil said | July 19th 2009 @ 11:07pm | Report comment
Surely 9 is cutting off its nose to spite its face by not exercising free to air rights on the British Open, and other events. Forcing people off to Foxtel can’t be in 9′s long term interests. As for the event “not working on free to air”, that is just pure spin that the likes of Kevin Rudd and Mike Rann would be proud of. Ah well, off to bed.
Crutcho said | July 20th 2009 @ 12:49am | Report comment
This article is spot on the money, reflecting the appalling attitude shown by the commercial networks to their viewing audience in recent years, particularly with the scheduling and screening of sport. Is there any surprise that savvy consumers … the ones I thought would have been most attractive to advertisers … are switching to internet streaming, downloading and various other techniques to circumvent the whims of out of touch executives and ensure they see the programs they want at the times they want?
But, I digress.
The rub in this for me is, and always has been, the so called “anti-siphoning” laws and related legislation that is supposed to prevent major sporting events being shifted from FTA to pay TV. While I’m certainly no expert in matters legal, my layman’s understanding of this legislation was that certain sporting events could only be moved to pay TV if FTA channels did not wish to screen the event live (or perhaps at least the 21st century definition of “live”).
Seems reasonable, no?
Well, didn’t anyone ever notice that those who own the commercial FTA networks are also the primary owners of the pay TV systems?
Strikes me that when you have the same party owning the two distribution channels, any expectation that popular events would continued to be screened through the “free” channel (and now that pay TV carries advertisements anyway) is akin to a 34 year old believing in Santa Claus.
As a child I said I wanted a space shuttle for Christmas. I was told it’s just not going to happen. Perhaps seeking popular sporting events to be screened according to viewer preferences when an alternative, more lucrative distribution mechanism is being offered by the same provider is in the same category.
Choppy said | July 20th 2009 @ 9:24am | Report comment
I was under the impression the anti-siphoning laws also had a ‘use it or loose it’ clause where the events on the list that were not shown live in FTA would be taken off the anti-siphoning list next time and I hope the Open does get taken off as well as the French Open tennis that channel nine didn’t show.
Channel 9′s treatment of the sports they hold the rights to is disgraceful, channel 7′s isn’t much better with them shuffling the V8′s around the AFL when it suits them and not necessarily showing them live either.
If the commercial networks are not going to do the great sporting events justice, the least the legislators can do for the sports fan is give Pay TV parallel broadcasting rights and sooner the better.
The sport is the only thing that convinced me to get Pay TV and is the only thing keeping me paying is that I do get to see most of the big sporting events live that are not AFL or NRL.
Brett McKay said | July 20th 2009 @ 9:42am | Report comment
Choppy, Crutcho, I’m not sure the anti-siphoning laws “use it or lose it” clause relates to live coverage actually. I’ve not read it in any detail (and I’m sure it’s a cracking read) and so will happily stand corrected, but my understanding of ‘use it or lose it’ was that whoever holds the rights is still allowed to show them on a reasonable delay. I base this on the coverage of ARL, NRL, Wimbledon, Olympics, etc, which have always been allowed to have some component of delayed coverage.
Of course, the variable here is what is ‘reasonable’, and obviously legislators may well have a differing view to the affected sports fans.
I think ‘use it or lose it’ is there to stop networks “warehousing” events, which is another thing Ch9 were once guilty of once upon a time..
AussieGolfer said | July 20th 2009 @ 11:34am | Report comment
So it turns out Channel 9 did show the golf live last night! How weird?! I flicked over around midnight and there it was!?!