UKC

I watched Federer beat Stan-the-Man, yesterday evening, at our local sports club. We were officially there for a game of squash but kept having to duck out of the pit to check the score and watch a game or two. Sadly, and inevitably, it was Sky.

This, once again, pissed me off. I don't have Sky at home and even though I could now afford it - afford it enought to see past the fact that you have to buy a bundle that invariably means you're paying for channels you don't want - I still cannot bring myself to pay money to any corporate entity that's party of Rupert Murdoch's empire.

Hence the question: is it at all possible to get live sport broadcasts without lining Murdoch's pockets? I know the BBC do Wimbledon but I can't even get that, here on the Continent. Sky is pretty much the ONLY option and they've made it so because they buy exclusivity for every bloody thing.

I dream of a day when we can pay honestly for access to live sports without these exclusivity deals and bundled channels and without funding evil. For me, the very best would be an event-based subscription: you "buy" the 2017 Whatever Open and that means you get to watch any game or show from the event, live, for one price.

In reply to Xharlie:

Fortunately it's rapidly heading in that direction for a number of sports that have realised the importance of their audience. It won't happen for the big sports so much tho as they feel they are enough of a draw not to bother.

Is a big topic in f1 as pay per view has decimated viewing figures that is now affecting the teams being able to attract sponsors

In reply to balmybaldwin:

But... people are typically fans of a sport. So, for me, tennis is the best thing to watch, cricket is best for a nap. I don't really want pay-per-view, I want pay-per-event or even pay-per-season-per-sport. For example, I would happily buy "all the Grand Slams" or "all the O.D.I.s"

I'm pretty sure an F1 nut would buy "all the GPs" and a soccer nut would buy "all the Premier League matches".

Bonuses would include the add-on shows, analyses and stuff - this would distinguish broadcasters.

Another thing I noted about Sky was that it had tonnes of ads. That's another thing I won't pay for. It's free or it's ad-free - I'm not paying to watch other people's marketing.

In reply to balmybaldwin:

I don't like F1, so I have not interest in watching it, but isn't Murdoch lurking in the background with regard to this Liberty Media takeover.

In reply to The New NickB:
I think it was rumoured that liberty are bidding for sky rather than other way round.

What I was referring to was things like live streaming direct from the promoters for example the LTA or what ever the world body is could offer a streaming service £x month for all your tennis needs
The prob being they have to wait for all the exclusive deals they have to expire

In reply to Xharlie:

The best tennis coverage is on Eurosport. They also have the widest coverage of Motorsports and cycling.

Bit of a snag at the moment as Eurosport is owned by Discovery. And Discovery are in an argument with Sky about fees. At the moment all of the Discovery portfolio of channels will stop being carried by Sky/Now TV on the 1st of Feb. Needless to say that the loss of 12 channels means no reduction in charges from Sky.

Eurosport is available either via a direct app, or with BT or Virgin bundles

In reply to radar:

You mean Eurosport is not part of Sky? Really? I thought it was.

This changes everything. Perhaps.

In reply to radar:

Heard lots of cycling fans complaining about this - it means Sky subscribers can't see Team Sky !

In reply to Xharlie:
I agree with you pretty much 100% and don't have Sky for the same reasons. You can get free streams of sports using Kodi - but it is illegal and so I do not condone it. For sports, many Kodi users recommend the 'UK Turks' add-on or 'Bulldog'. Google is your friend if you want to find out more about Kodi add-ons and satisfy your intellectual curiosity! HTHs

In reply to Chris the Tall:

I'm one of those cycling fans! Truth be told I only got Sky for Eurosport, the rest was a bonus. Nowadays I watch stuff on Discovery, the BBC channels and Sky Atlantic. There are a lot of sport fans up in arms in Twitter about it - motor GP, tennis and snooker fans. Then all the Discovery/TLC fans too. At the moment I am waiting to see what will happen - otherwise it is BT for me.

I'm sure it will be resolved as Sky will lose a lot of customers over this. (They've already lost a lot because of football rights apparently)

In reply to Xharlie:

Check out Mobdro.

In reply to Xharlie:

I won't subscribe to Sky on principle, so miss out on a lot of sport. I wish the BBC would televise more women's sport. They could pay a fraction that the commercial broadcasters are paying for the men's equivalent and it would still have a huge positive effect on both the finances and image of women's sport while giving people like me something to watch when the cycling's not on ITV4.

In reply to Xharlie:

I refuse to pay subscription fees to watch TV channels (apart from by TV tax paying for the Beeb.) And I think that sports bodies signing restricted viewing rights revenue share deals with Sky et al are ripping off their fans and just being greedy for money. So screw them. If I want to go and watch actual footie match or F1 Grands Prix I can pay on the day at the stadium. So I should be able to do the same thing online. The channel combo satellite and cable and Internet TV suppliers like Sky are dinosaurs and ripe for overthrow.

So, to coin a phrase, believe in better.