Hey all...I'm currently in qatar visiting my father and so watched this weekends premier league games on the regions broadcaster Abu Dhabi Sports. My father pays an equivalent of £50 a year or £4.16 a month which is cheap in itself. However, the coverage is actually incredible. All games are in HD with either arabic or english commentary and the all round quality of the punditry is very professional and well thought out IMO, the technology they use is on par with that of sky. Its clear the channels have been primarily made for the premier league (although they do show f1 and other sports) with plenty of programmes and documentaries round the clock. If I had to choose between sky or abu dhabi broadcasting I'd actually pick the latter.
This all got me thinking about the quality of Sky's broadcasting, were constantly told its the best in the world, but is it really? I know they have good experience in broadcasting the league but at times I feel a bit let down by them. We over pay ( £20 a month just for sky sports is too high imo) but yet we don't even enjoy all the games, some are on espn etc. Also, you have to pay extra for HD channels, if the technology is there why not afford to all subscribers? So my question is does any body else feel that they're being short-changed by sky? and if so, would you be happy if another broadcaster bought up the rights when the license is up?
Sky sports vs. other broadcasters
posted on 8/4/12
The other day my friend and I were trying, mostly in vain, to name some decent pundits.
We suggested that maybe it would be good to use some premier league (or any other league) coaches. Ex-players just seem to be there on old reputation, rather than having anything intelligent to contribute. Coaches with good tactical knowledge and analysis woud be much better to watch. What do you lot think?
posted on 8/4/12
Gary Nev is surprisingly good, his comment today about a circus and the clown was classic.
posted on 8/4/12
I watch United games on the missus' Polsat. We pay a small amount every month for the full package.
It is United-biased so any matches on at the same time arent shown.
posted on 8/4/12
Yea I actually agree that the punditry on both sky and bbc has fallen off and is pretty poor nowadays. They seem to be giving silly analysis which is condescending to the majority of viewers. It seems they're taking a lot for granted!
posted on 8/4/12
I agree to an extent, Wengersphilosophyteacher but i would prefer to read or hear from coaches not currently in the game.
I like Wenger's current column on Yahoo sports, as he makes some very good points.
I have also enjoyed Ancelotti, Capello and even the fat Waiter ala Benitez's take on events as they seem to be more articulate.
However, some old pros are clearly knowledgeable. You dont need to be a United fan to acknowledge that G.Nev is a brilliant pundit , Dixon and John Barnes are very eloquent and Shearer is just shambles.
posted on 8/4/12
The_Red_Connoisseur (U9741)
Just watched Benitez on LaLiga just now, and agree he's good.
So long as Adebayor never goes near a studio microphone again, I'll be happy.
So many footballers these days seem to have only half a dozen brain cells - I'm worried who will be presenting some of the programmes in 15-20 years. Imagine Rooney and Ferdinand giving their two cents on the MOTD sofa.
I enjoyed Martin O'Neil during the World Cup, and it's a shame Slavan Bilic hasn't been on for ages - he's really good to listen to.
posted on 8/4/12
LOL@Rooney being an armchair expert. Lord, help us. I read he opined he wanted to try his hand at the comedy circuit , so maybe.
Ferdinand i think wll be a pundit or work in the game. He has a massive twitter following and whomever hires him will hope he uses his marketing nous and brings over his 2.5 million plus followers with him.
I mean, even Joey-thethug-Barton has written an article for a daily newspaper
posted on 8/4/12
I watch United games on the missus' Polsat.
posted on 8/4/12
Why the love Boris?
posted on 8/4/12
I've never heard it called a Polsat before.