are you sure? I thought his parents were nz. regardless, his line of argument is crap. who negotiated the TV deal with sky? ask him that. nz fourth estate needs to up their game
Wynton's World of Football on LiveSPORT
I'm sorry but I thought the interview was well balanced. He stated that he actually supported having the Nix in the a League and that he thought the A League should be an Australasian League. To be honest, I learned more from him than I have learned from Dome or Morrison on this whole license thing. I urge others to listen to this with an open mind, it will give you a clearer understanding of the situation.
I'm sorry but I thought the interview was well balanced. He stated that he actually supported having the Nix in the a League and that he thought the A League should be an Australasian League. To be honest, I learned more from him than I have learned from Dome or Morrison on this whole license thing. I urge others to listen to this with an open mind, it will give you a clearer understanding of the situation.
That's nonsense. it's been pretty clear that FFA have been leaking selective pieces of information to certain media outlets.
How often are business negotiations played out in public? Fudge all. There is only one side doing it and there is a clear strategy behind this. It's an attempt to create instability and put pressure on Sky to cough up more money.
In all the arguments, no journalist/interviewer has attempted to actual question the talking points that Cockerill and co are running. For starters:
- Why are the Phoenix responsible for negotiating the TV deal with SKY? Is the same pressure put on the other 9 clubs when negotiating with Fox?
- Why, as one of the few break even clubs in the competition, should the Phoenix being looking at paying $1m+ for one player than may have a small effect on crouds? Don't we want a sustainable club giving the issues at Brisbane, Newcastle, and Central Coast?
- Don't these fox sports pundits have a conflict of interest in discussing this as their employers have broadcast rights?
- Isn't a 10 year licence a necessity to allow long terms planning and investment?
Yet they are getting free reign to spout bullshark time and time again.
You know he's a kiwi?
Lived here for a while. Regardless, does it matter?
I'm sorry but I thought the interview was well balanced. He stated that he actually supported having the Nix in the a League and that he thought the A League should be an Australasian League. To be honest, I learned more from him than I have learned from Dome or Morrison on this whole license thing. I urge others to listen to this with an open mind, it will give you a clearer understanding of the situation.
That's nonsense. it's been pretty clear that FFA have been leaking selective pieces of information to certain media outlets.
How often are business negotiations played out in public? Fudge all. There is only one side doing it and there is a clear strategy behind this. It's an attempt to create instability and put pressure on Sky to cough up more money.
In all the arguments, no journalist/interviewer has attempted to actual question the talking points that Cockerill and co are running. For starters:
- Why are the Phoenix responsible for negotiating the TV deal with SKY? Is the same pressure put on the other 9 clubs when negotiating with Fox?
- Why, as one of the few break even clubs in the competition, should the Phoenix being looking at paying $1m+ for one player than may have a small effect on crouds? Don't we want a sustainable club giving the issues at Brisbane, Newcastle, and Central Coast?
- Don't these fox sports pundits have a conflict of interest in discussing this as their employers have broadcast rights?
- Isn't a 10 year licence a necessity to allow long terms planning and investment?
Yet they are getting free reign to spout bullshark time and time again.
That's nonsense. it's been pretty clear that FFA have been leaking selective pieces of information to certain media outlets.
Maybe so, but it doesn't take anything away from what is actually being said. If it is wrong then who is saying so?
How often are business negotiations played out in public? Fudge all. There is only one side doing it and there is a clear strategy behind this. It's an attempt to create instability and put pressure on Sky to cough up more money.
Maybe so on your last point. On your first point, you have no proof, even if we all have a pretty good idea. Cockerill even talked about the Fox situation when they first got the rights at a low price. From that comment I took that Sky was quite right to pay a low price at the beginning and any future decisions would be based on the value it perceived coverage to be worth in the current environment. He didn't once say they should pay more.
In all the arguments, no journalist/interviewer has attempted to actual question the talking points that Cockerill and co are running. For starters:
- Why are the Phoenix responsible for negotiating the TV deal with SKY? Is the same pressure put on the other 9 clubs when negotiating with Fox?
Cockerill didn't say it was up to Phoenix to negotiate the TV deal.
Why, as one of the few break even clubs in the competition, should the Phoenix being looking at paying $1m+ for one player than may have a small effect on crouds? Don't we want a sustainable club giving the issues at Brisbane, Newcastle, and Central Coast?
Cockerill did not say they had to buy a real marquee. Interestingly enough he said that some of the owners wanted to but morrisonw as dead against the idea.
Don't these fox sports pundits have a conflict of interest in discussing this as their employers have broadcast rights?
He is a journalist, of course he is expected to comment on sporting maters even if they involve his employer. People would be screaming if there was a Fox scandal and he didn't report on it. Everyone is welcome to place whatever value they want on his comments in the knowledge that he works for Fox.
Isn't a 10 year licence a necessity to allow long terms planning and investment?
Agree that a 10 year license is only fair and if they are withholding it just to try and get the Nix to put pressure on Sky or to find more money - that is shark.
Don't get me wrong, I think this is all bullshark, and probably a conspiracy is happening but I think you are reading too much into the interview and what is implied there.
I wasn't talking about just that interview. I was commentating on the numerous interviews he has done, the numerous columns he has written, as well as the others such as Gatt and Harper.
They are getting free reign to spout bullshark without any journalist/interviewee having the balls to pick apart their arguments. Frustrating as hell. At the moment it sounds like these people are writing the questions they are about to answers.
I wasn't talking about just that interview. I was commentating on the numerous interviews he has done, the numerous columns he has written, as well as the others such as Gatt and Harper.
They are getting free reign to spout bullshark without any journalist/interviewee having the balls to pick apart their arguments. Frustrating as hell. At the moment it sounds like these people are writing the questions they are about to answers.
Does make Lowy's fall funnier though.
That. FFA are already on record as saying they don't negotiate publicly. So instead they slip some (mis)information to a couple of journos. They run off and do a couple of articles. It gets picked up by other media. And the Phoenix are unable to respond in any meaningful way.
It's just a shame that most broadcasters here can only handle rugby and cricket and don't have the knowledge/ability to actually question some of that.
One thing about the interview is he brings up Foxtel's deal as an example of what the HAL is worth, but that deal, IIRC, is for both the HAL and Australian internationals.
Buy the Socceroos coverage and we'll throw in free A-League as a bonus (and a set of steak knives).
Bit of soap opera.
Do need a longer length extension.
Here's a yarn we had with Mossy pre - Grand Final