By Adrian Musolino
January 31st 2010 @ 3:10am
Related coverage
Channel 7 has stifled this year’s Australian Open
Roger Federer of Switzerland, left, is interviewed by Jim Courier after beating Jo-Wilfried Tsonga of France to win the Men's singles semifinal match at the Australian Open tennis championship in Melbourne, Australia, Friday, Jan. 29, 2010. (AP Photo/Andy Wong)
The doomsayers are preparing the obituary. Tennis in this country is dying – as evidenced by the mammoth drop in television ratings for the Australian Open that shows a 40 per cent decrease in viewers from last year.
The magnitude of such a drop cannot be ignored. And there must be an underlying fault somewhere to explain why there are five million less of us tuning in to the tennis this year compared to last.
For many, it’s simply a reflection of tennis’ diminishing relevance to Australia.
Patrick Smith of The Australian argues: “It (tennis) leaves nothing permanent, brings nothing which can sustain the sport outside its 14 days of fame. Tennis, once one of this nation’s proud and triumphant sports, is now just a shrinking Australian pastime.”
Richard Hind of the Sydney Morning Herald argues that Channel 7 favouring its news programming over the tennis shows the “uncomfortable truth about (the) game’s standing.”
According to Rebecca Wilson: “Tennis has become a game for colourless wimps. Tennis fans are growing tired of watching tedious match after tedious match, between players who are, at best, robotic and, at worst, soft.”
Channel 7, in her opinion, were completely justified in switching from Samantha Stosur’s match with Serena Williams to their news coverage, knowing the candle has burnt out on tennis in Australia.
The fault is with the game, according to these luminaries, not Channel 7.
But it’s too easy, and baseless, to blame this massive drop in viewers on the game itself.
What’s happened in the game in the past twelve months, let alone the last five years, to account for this dip?
The absence of a genuine Australian contender is not a new phenomenon, and while this season’s Open may have not had a story ark that gripped Australia, it still cannot account for a 40 per cent drop.
There have been plenty of points of interest in the tournament, be it the continued rise of the likes Andy Murray and Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, Justine Henin’s return and Roger Federer’s class.
There is nothing wrong with the tennis product, certainly nothing that can account for such a drop
And if tennis has all of a sudden become robotic, as Wilson claims, how did the popularity of the game, and ratings, survive the Pete Sampras era?
If the game of tennis is struggling, then why the huge outcry over Channel 7’s coverage?
There’s no other indicator beyond television ratings to account for a decrease in the Australian Open’s popularity, with attendances at Melbourne Park increasing by approximately 80,000 over the past five years.
The exodus of viewers for the Australian Open is more of a boycott of Channel 7 than a reflection of tennis’ standing in this country.
Magnified by the absence of Fox Sports’ supplementary Open coverage (Fox Sports having been priced out of a deal by Channel 7), Seven continues to fail to grasp the importance of live coverage.
In the age of Twitter and iPhones (the Open has its own app feeding live scores, which is in the top ten downloaded free apps on the iTunes store), live coverage is paramount. With these technologies growing exponentially in the past 12 months, free-to-air television is starting to pay the price.
Tennis, due to its laborious nature, can easily be skipped over by viewers, especially when they know the live scores.
Seven’s approach to its coverage is as archaic as the anti-siphoning laws that have compounded the issue.
But aside from the delayed coverage, the most obvious flaw in Seven’s coverage continues to be the incessant cross-promotions that have become so embedded in the coverage.
Its intrusive nature has passed the point of acceptability, and the Open has been hijacked by Seven’s quest for ratings supremacy each year.
They’ve ruined the product on show.
The tennis, occurring conveniently just as the ratings season begins, has been the innocent victim of this ploy.
In an online poll run by TV Tonight, also published by The Daily Telegraph, relentless cross-promotions from the network was selected by 23 per cent of the voters as their main gripe with the coverage.
22 per cent lamented Seven’s failure to commit to covering matches live, and a further 20 per cent pointed to the anti-siphoning restrictions.
Only 20 per cent of those polled mentioned the tennis itself.
Seven’s coverage is flawed in so many ways, and they’ve been allowed to get away with it thanks to the backwardness of the legislation that governs Australian television.
This summer of tennis has been completely overshadowed by Seven. They’ve been the talking point of the tournament, be it the delays, the cuts to the newsroom, Henri Leconte or My Kitchen Rules.
Good sports coverage should be anonymous, showcasing what should be the main talking point – the sport. Channel 7 has been anything but anonymous this summer.
They alone are to blame for the damage done to the Australian Open. The game of tennis is the victim here, not the guilty party.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(39)
Sam el Perro said | January 31st 2010 @ 6:02am | Report comment
How about live coverage in Queensland?
What’s worse than being shown on delay? Being shown on delay when there is an hour long disruption to play (say, rain) and being forced to wait for the match to restart when it is already on in real life…
Simmo said | February 1st 2010 @ 3:40pm | Report comment
are you serious??
Mark Young said | January 31st 2010 @ 8:34am | Report comment
This is a really positive thing for free to air sport lovers such as myself.
Until the ratings start to decline, it won’t matter how many times we ring and complain or vent our spleens on opinion blogs.
They will respond to a drop in ratings and viewers. Otherwise, they can’t charge as much for ads.
The cross promotions are ridiculous. They are just as bad as the rubbish on 9 promoting Top Gear or the endless pieces of crap merchandise and memorabilia.
alan nicolea said | January 31st 2010 @ 9:23am | Report comment
Adrian
Its definetly not the Tennis that’s for sure. I find it a huge privilege to have the likes of Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, Andy Roddick, Andy Murray and the rest of the top ten battle it out in a Grand Slam down under. People make such a big deal about Tiger Woods coming over but i would much rather watch Federer swing a racquet than Woods swing a golf club. Channel seven is to blame here. And to think they stopped showing Sam Stosur in her greatest moment of need. So much for sporting passion!!!!!!
bever fever said | January 31st 2010 @ 10:25am | Report comment
Woods has been swinging his club quite enough lately.
Mr cheese said | January 31st 2010 @ 12:08pm | Report comment
nice one, bever
don’t forget to tip the waitress on the way out
Hansie said | January 31st 2010 @ 10:12am | Report comment
The main problems with the channel 7 broadcast are too many cross promotions (the focus is on channel 7, not the tennis) and too much John Alexander, who is irrelevant to the modern game.
Marshall said | January 31st 2010 @ 10:13am | Report comment
Or in Perth and Adelaide. The drop in viewers is a huge backlash against free to air tv. About time.
bever fever said | January 31st 2010 @ 10:29am | Report comment
Perhaps its a change in the ratings system, or the ratings are just plain wrong, tennis is of a good standard.
Here in WA everything is on delay, AFL footy is sometimes over in the east before we start watching it and ratings are pretty good.
I dont want to see a game of live tennis at 8.30 in the morning.
Campbell Watts said | February 1st 2010 @ 6:17pm | Report comment
Beaver
they could have been playing these games live – starting times in Perth would have been early arvo/news time.
Why not show the start live, then cut to the news if they have to, then back to live coverage?
I didn’t watch many games cause the delayed coverage just went too late! Turned the TV off and got the scores off the net!
THATS why their viewing figures are down!
Diesel said | February 2nd 2010 @ 1:55pm | Report comment
Excellent article. I HATE the delayed telecasts of sport in WA. If it’s not live, it’s not sport.
Richard said | January 31st 2010 @ 10:33am | Report comment
Channel 7 used to be the top sports channel many years ago. They sure have lost it. Now, even their football coverage is dreadful, frustrating to watch, loaded with ads. Channel 10 do a much better job. And Tennis on TV, with their enclosed blue courts, courts which look the same all over the world, and bland atmosphere is sooo boring anyway. So combine Channel 7 indifference to viewers with Tennis’ bland standardisation of the game and you’ve got a “must to avoid” TV experience right there. I vote for putting all sport on pay tv as well in future, so that we have a choice of style, and to heck with the anti-syphoning rules.
Marshall said | January 31st 2010 @ 10:35am | Report comment
Another point is the hosts – non-sporting identities likes Sonia Kruger etc. Others are now following. Fos adds for the Winter Olympics have Ruby Rose as a host!
Bay35Pablo said | January 31st 2010 @ 5:06pm | Report comment
Marshall, completely agreed. This use of a channel’s talent to present everything whether the person has any involvement or not is excrutiating. It is part of the cross promotion virus. They appear to have talent lying around on contract and decide they better make use of it, to the detriment of the product whatever it may be.
Again, the channels are starting to believe it is about them not their product.
ohtani's jacket said | January 31st 2010 @ 11:51am | Report comment
Seems like typical Australian over-obsession with itself to me.
Harry said | January 31st 2010 @ 2:29pm | Report comment
Come down here OJ matey and try watching it on Channel 7. The cross promotions are infuriating, the commentators drongoes. During the women’s final – a pretty good game to watch – I resorted to what I usually do for the S14 and test matches on Sky (Kearns, Marto) and muted the sound. Result = a greatly improved viewing experience, which the missus and kids, after initial scepticism, fully endorsed.
The presentations, with their over-commercialism, always make me cringe. You’ don’t see the Vauxhall Wimbeldon final or the Citreaon French Open. I accept they need sponsorship and advertising but do they have to ram it down our throats to the level they do?
Bay35Pablo said | January 31st 2010 @ 5:07pm | Report comment
OJ, as opposed to Kiwi over obsession with rugby?
LK said | January 31st 2010 @ 12:46pm | Report comment
The tennis itself has been pretty good this year, it’s a shame the ratings are down. Is the coverage much worse than previous years? Cricket has an ordinary one day series against Pakistan, a slobbering commentary team cross-promoting tv shows, memorabilia, and betting odds, and cutting from live action to go to the news. And their ratings are solid. Work that one out!
Daniel Leach said | January 31st 2010 @ 1:02pm | Report comment
Oh Adrian, you’ve hit the nail on the head. Seeing as Rebecca Wilson now WORKS for the Seven Network, her views cannot be factored into it – biased if you ask me.
Over in WA, where last night’s Women’s final had finished before it had really started, many people I know went to the radio or the internet to get their scores (some even watched the ESPN feed off the internet)
I saw just one match of the Australian Open on TV (Australia Day – Murray/Nadal) and it wasn’t terrible. The cross promotions weren’t as bad as I’d thought. To be honest, I’ve seen more cross promotion on Fox Sports & ESPN before. But as it’s the only match I’ve seen, I can’t really comment – I assume it’s also the way they’ve cross promoted that people have a gripe with.
The tennis itself has actually been outstanding. As you say, it’s Channel 7 who have butchered it.
Do we know how long they have the rights for?
Marshall said | January 31st 2010 @ 5:02pm | Report comment
Yeah not surprised Rebecca Wilson is defending Seven. Remember she was on that woeful show during the Beijing Games coverage.
Bay35Pablo said | January 31st 2010 @ 5:06pm | Report comment
Rebecca Wilson’s opinion didn’t matter a zac before she was on Seven anyway. The woman is a waste of oxygen.
Marshall said | January 31st 2010 @ 1:51pm | Report comment
It’s cause everyone has been talking aboute Seven. People have just given up on it. I haven’t watched a game all summer and I like tennis. Not bothering with Seven anymore
Short-Blind. said | January 31st 2010 @ 3:20pm | Report comment
Nice shot OJ could you explain how Australians are ‘typically over-obsessed’ with themselves and/or how this relates to a blog on the crap tennis coverage? If you had watched the coverage and do not agree that it was crap then you must be a little naive (I think not). Thus it must be a case of you needing to lean over and slide that chip off mate!
Justin said | January 31st 2010 @ 4:38pm | Report comment
Something is a miss with OJ, lately just about all of his posts are negative, anti AUS and well down on his previous efforts. Maybe the ABs lack of WC success has finally gotten to him
Que crazy rant from OJ regarding the over emphasis of the RWC in the grand scheme of rugyb
ohtani's jacket said | January 31st 2010 @ 9:35pm | Report comment
Look, Australia host one of the four biggest tennis tournaments in the world with strong crowds and a huge global audience and you have Australian journalists picking up on the ratings drop and declaring tennis a dying sport in Australia. Now I realise it’s called the “Australian” Open, but it’s an international Grand Slam event and to have it dismissed on the basis that the Australian viewing public may or may not be interested in it is ridiculous, particularly when you consider how hard Tennis Australia worked to bring the Aussie Open up to the level of the other three Grand Slams.
Aussie journalists seem to be preoccupied with death. I dunno why. I think it’s more the case that Australian journalists aren’t particularly interested in tennis. Eh, the whole thing is ridiculous.
Marshall said | January 31st 2010 @ 6:45pm | Report comment
Watching the final at the moment and it’s clear Seven has backed off on its cross promotions…. ever so slightly.
Mick said | January 31st 2010 @ 7:06pm | Report comment
What gets me is the rest of the world tv covering the tournament live & in oz it is delayed
I am waiting for the day that ch-7 stop the melbourne 1/2 way to show an advert
Mossy said | January 31st 2010 @ 7:21pm | Report comment
Thouroughly agree that Ch7 is squeezing the air passage of a sport that is already struggling for air in Australia.
I will however argue that the product is not fit for consumption in 2010, and is losing a fighting battle in a saturated market for Aussie minds.
In Ancient Rome the Emporers continued the long held knowledge (of the senate) that to keep the populus on side, two ingredeients were of importance – ‘bread & circius’… By providing enough food and entertainment (theatre, chariot races, gladiator games) stability was ensured throughout the empire.
Today is no different & we have an abundance of food & entertainment. while Ch7 is partly to blame for it’s poor self-promoting coverage, do you really think if the coverage was better people would watch it?
Or as I believe, there is too much competing circius on offer! In the late 90’s, as a young Poo & Pat were gracing the courts, the only other options were a repeat NFL game on the one foxsports channel & a soft porn arthouse movie with subtitles on SBS.
Fast forward to NOW, you have 3 fox chanels, ESPN, etc, belting out A-League, Big Bash, T20, plus more free to air options with 3 ABC channels, plus social networking giants Facebook, Twitter, etc, plus ‘must see flicks’ like Avatar, plus keeping up to speed with The Roar.
Too much circius is providing an abundance of alternatives to what was previously the only option in the last two weeks of January. Ch7 is crap, but a bit part player in the fall from grace of this once podium puller!
Sam el Perro said | January 31st 2010 @ 10:21pm | Report comment
So there was no cricket in the 1990s but there is now?
Marshall said | January 31st 2010 @ 8:13pm | Report comment
Agreed. Cricket has stepped up big time this summer and the A-League continues to grow especially with more games squeezed into summer. Tennis has a lot more competition in summer.
BigAl said | January 31st 2010 @ 8:52pm | Report comment
Not sure what you’re saying here ?
Tennis has creamed the cricket in TV ratings this summer (pardon the pun) – and the A-League is non-event in the same !
Gibbo said | February 1st 2010 @ 2:55pm | Report comment
i’m not sure where the pun was..?
Sam el Perro said | January 31st 2010 @ 10:22pm | Report comment
In what sense is the A League continuing to grow?
Marshall said | February 1st 2010 @ 3:27pm | Report comment
Look at the popularity of the midweek fixtures over summer.
Mick said | January 31st 2010 @ 11:31pm | Report comment
I liked the bit where the tennis boss Geoff Pollard said thankyou to ch-7 for bringing the aussie open “live” to all australians………. there is no hope
Harry said | February 1st 2010 @ 8:01am | Report comment
What is Pollard doing thanking a broadcaster anyway at a presentation? This is where we embarass ourselves on a global stage. Doesn’t even happen at the temple of consumerism that is the US, let alone the French or Wimbeldon. We need to lft our game.
Benjamin Conkey said | February 1st 2010 @ 9:54am | Report comment
Adrian, ratings may be down for Seven but it was a record attendance once again at Melbourne Park..so we have to take that into consideration.
I think the reason 5 million was lost was completely due to Seven’s coverage.
Last year for example 2 million tuned into to watch Dokic play her quarterfinal….a similar amount would have watched Stosur play Serena Williams if Seven didn’t go to the news. The same could be said when they went to the news during Federer-Davydenko.
Also I’m assuming the figures are based entirely on Seven’s coverage..but how many viewers were lost due to Fox Sports not covering this year’s event?
prowling panther said | February 1st 2010 @ 11:39am | Report comment
I hope one hd can get the rights to the tennis soon because the product aint that bad. My pet hate like many is the atrocious promotions of crappy Seven shows that are aired repeatedly. ARRRGGGGGGHHHH!!!!! After watrching that cheesy trash who would even think of watching my kitchen rules or, curse the thought, Cougartown **shudder. Not very effective advertising. Still the ratings will be strong for seven for the last days of the Open and especially the two finals. Any competition from the cricket on Sunday is microscopic thanks to the pitiful state of the Pakistani team. Even I, a cricket fan, watched the full match. I end my rant
PS. Roger Federer is pure class. I remember that gillete ad with 3 sports superstars of the time: Federer, Woods and thierry henry. Federer has and will probably continue to be an untainted god long after his time.
Brian said | February 1st 2010 @ 10:34pm | Report comment
A good Ozzie player would help rememeber that last year Dokic made the QF whilst prior to that Molik did the same. Also until the last couple of years Hewitt was an actual chance of winning it. The organisers must be desperate for Tomic or Klein to improve and quickly.