BBC have released figures showing Clubs' earnings from TV rights. Top of the list, Manchester United, surprise ,surprise!! 25 games shown. Chelsea with 16 games shown, behind, wait for it, Liverpool Spurs and Arsenal !!!!!!!!!!!! Let there be no more bollocks about TV bias, it's there for all to see. Given that Clubs earn in direct proportion to matches shown, it is clear that the Broadcasters give a financial leg up in line with their bias. Interestingly, matches Broadcast have little connection to teams popularity as per attendance figures, which were also revealed today. The FA should stop this favouritism immediately and distribute funds equally despite number of games broadcast. A classic case of everyone being equal, except some are more equal than others.
Do you really think Sky, ESPN or whoever really sit there and think 'better not put Chelsea on, don't like them'? They want to maximise viewing figures, so would preferably show United and Liverpool every week if possible. Beyond that, they'll show the teams people want to watch as much as possible.
Repetitive stain on society Here's the link you wanted http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22610584
See where you are coming from but I've long thought Sky are very unscrupulous with their fixture selection. We are European Champions and shown less but when we were defending PL Champions we had 4 games on a Monday Night and all of them were away, compared to our title rivals United that had just the two and both were in Manchester. This season, more than half of our televised games were away which shows Sky are only likely to put us on when they believe there is an upset on the cards. 5/7 games we've had have been against City, United, Liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs, with the other two being Villa (who had beaten us in the corresponding fixture last season) and Newcastle (who had beaten us in the corresponding fixture last season). I know it may seem like a far-fetched conspiracy to non-Chelsea fans but I think raised eyebrows are understandable. Sky/ESPN are happy when Man Utd are winning, hence why they show them at home to the likes of Swansea, Reading and Fulham. Games they know United will by all accounts win.
Don't care which games are shown, just pointing out that TV Companies financially profit some clubs and deliberately disadvantage others, which the FA should put a stop to. Total revenue should be split evenly amongst all. We surely dont need a system like Spain where huge amounts go to only acouple of Clubs.
Anger at first, then defiance, then smugness. We have the best trophy haul in the past 10 years bar none. If our televised games and TV revenues don't reflect that, we may just end up with the best haul over the next 10 - the more they conspire, the deeper the siege mentality, the stronger we get, the more we win.
I just wonder if there is any conscious bias or that has more to do with fixture scheduling! That is to say, kick off dates/times etc! Our huge schedule this year has had re-arranged fixtures and coverage of a lot of non-PL games! It surely cant be the case that the Spuds are more watchable/attractive than us nationally or internationally!
Whilst it perhaps does show bias, 16 games is little, especially considering the backlog towards the end. However, in monetary terms 5mil is absolutely nothing to Chelsea!
True, but it's a lot to West Ham, Fulham etc which is my point. I don't care if Chelsea get a lot less, but others should get a lot more.
Question: Are Chelsea shown live less than Arsenal/Spurs/Liverpool every season or is this a one off?
Well seeing as your thread title is 'Anti Chelsea bias', you can understand the mistake! I do agree that the money should be better distributed, of course the top clubs could and do reasonably argue that they attract the most viewers and deserve the bigger pot. Its true but all it does is help to keep the top clubs at the top, its a form of monopolising really.
No one has answered my question yet, but I do wonder if you finishing 6th last season had anything to do with it, assuming forward planning and so on. If Mourinho arrives I think you will find a big increase in media interest don't you!
Not sure you're directing this to the right people. It's the Premier League and TV companies that decide. Has zero to do with the FA.
Maybe so Spurf, but the Champions League winners should be shown a lot more than 16 times regardless of where they finished! I understand why United are shown the most, they have the most armchair fans. Arsenal/Spurs were too four last season. Only strange one is Liverpool, and the reason I can think of there is their large armchair base too.
As these decisions are made by media companies it's just about their take on viewing figures I assume. These figures don't include CL do they? If they do then it is very strange.
Don't think they include CL no. That would be ridiculous! Our drop out into Europa can't have helped our cause.
Then it maybe that overall you have had the most TV time and the fact that you were featured heavily in the CL reduced the League appearances.
