Cup Final

[cc1]

At last, they think it's all nearly over, but why on earth is it on two channels? An intelligent programmer would have put something really good on instead of the football. Not even half the population is remotely interested, whoever is playing.

[factor-fiction]

Less than15 million people watch TV anyway on a Sunday night. If only one channel showed football tonight they'd get maybe 10 million and the other channel would get maybe 5 million. Neither channel wants only 5 million viewers so rather than toss a coin they both settle for 7-8 million each. It's BBC2 and Channel 4/5 who could benefit

[4getmenot]

because they both paid for it

[imhotep]

Well, I'm just watching snippets of the football while I'm bashing away on my keyboard here.
My mum is watching Katherine Jenkins on S4C singing her heart out.... :)

[VHG]

>An intelligent programmer would have put something really good on instead

Wrong. Why should they pay to show a major film for example, and then find almost nobody is watching it.

I think you will find a lot of the population are interested, my wife and her sister both sat and watched it, and neither of them usually watch football.

[chrissa1]

I agree cc1 and I say again, why not put it on a dedicated Sports Channel and leave the main ones for non football/tennis/golf/motor racing/snooker/athletics/cricket viewers. I know there is Sky Sports but not everyone can afford these.

[Buenchico]

4getmenot has provided the answer to your question. ("Because they've both paid for it").

ITV have invested a great deal of money in buying a package of programmes which included the World Cup Final. They will have hoped to recoup their outlay (and to make a profit) by selling advertising around those programmes. They have to show the match in order to get their advertising revenue..

The BBC will have also bought a package of programmes. Apart from the 'loss of prestige' that they'd suffer if they failed to show the Cup Final, it's likely that FIFA would not have offered them a package which did not include the rights to show the Final. Licence payers would rightly protest if the BBC failed to show a programme which their money had been used to pay for.

Chris

[tamborine]

maybe fill a channel with the spoilt England team hiding out on 7* tropical beaches....hope they get sun-burned !

[ELVIS68]

Boring final anyway, spent most of it flicking between Sky news and BBC news on the Moat story

[trt]

Good answer tamborine and hope when England play a friendly in August everybody will boycott going to the game or not watch it on TV to give a message to the players that they don't try enough.

[quizzywig]

I agree - boring final!!! what a lead-up to such a dirty match!

[knowabit]

I watched Beaches on Channel 4 and sobbed me heart out!!!!

[chrissa1]

Well Buenchico, they could still show the match and receive revenue from it by placing it on one of their many other channels, BBC4 or ITV3 and leave the mainline channels for the majority of the viewing public.

[Ankou]

the final was a bit dull, but why were the beeb so anti-dutch ?

[Tizzi24]

I agree cc - put it on a sports channel I say! Glad I had some DVD's worth watching. At least its over for another four years. Lol!