Skip to the content

Would you pay £12 to watch a football match on a computer screen?

By Tony Bonsignore | 13:26:48 | 07 October 2009

It looks set to be a landmark moment in the history of UK sports broadcasting. 

For the first time ever, it seems, fans of the England national football team not wishing to travel abroad will only be able to view Saturday’s match via the magic of the internet.

The situation has come about due to the collapse of sports broadcaster Setanta, which had originally purchased the rights to all England’s qualifiers for South Africa 2010.

But following Setanta’s demise the rights passed back to international broadcaster Kentaro, who after some deliberation has now decided to stream the game exclusively live over the internet through a number of partner websites.  

Meanwhile a last-ditch attempt by ITV to buy highlights of the game – for broadcast immediately after Saturday’s X-Factor, no less – has apparently fallen through, leaving us with the prospect of no traditional TV coverage of the game whatsoever.

Fans wishing to watch the game therefore currently appear to have two options.

First up is a trip to your local Odeon cinema – assuming they are showing it (only 13 cinemas are currently scheduled to show the match). There, for the price of a cinema ticket, you can watch the match on the biggest of big screens.

Second - and in stark contrast to the experience of watching the match at the cinema - you can tune in to the match on your very own computer or mobile phone, via a ‘high quality’ stream provided by Kentaro.

The company is currently charging £4.99 for the privilege of watching the match, rising to £12 on match day. Other broadcasters, meanwhile, will be watching the move closely to see whether it takes off; whether this is the future of sports broadcasting.

So what do you think, then – is the future of live football really online?

Will you be coughing up to watch the match on Saturday? Maybe invite the boys round for a few beers and then crack them open while crowding around the three-year old Dell laptop with the slightly cracked 13.1 inch screen?

Or is a trip to the cinema on the agenda, as an alternative to the usual pub/ football excursion? Will you be swapping that pint for a jumbo-sized Pepsi and pile of popcorn?

Or do you think the football authorities and broadcaster have gone off their rockers?

Is this an ill-judged experiment doomed to failure? Is it damaging to the game? Has the game sold its soul to the highest bidder?

Who on earth can stand to watch a whole match on the internet anyway? 

Thoughts please.

Comments (28)

RPK-20 - They lost their way a long time ago

15:07 | 07 Oct 2009

I think that the fooball authorities lost their way a long time ago and with it they lost the majority of viewers who enjoyed the games on BBC or ITV.

Alan Gent - Pass

15:10 | 07 Oct 2009

er, no. I wouldn't pay anything to watch the already over paid, under talented wasters in the England team, or any other come to that!

Don Babbage - 12 Squid!?!

15:17 | 07 Oct 2009

12 notes? Don't they realise that there are sites where you can do this for free? Bet your bottom dollar that this will be on one of them at some point tonight!

MP - High quality stream - slow net speeds?

15:29 | 07 Oct 2009

Bonkers - To get a decent full screen picture view, whilst streaming live and you need a seriously good internet line (I'm guessing 3-5x the average household speed in England). Pay £12 and you could be sitting there whilst your pc "buffers" the life out of you!

Nobby Brown - No chance

16:01 | 07 Oct 2009

I wouldn't pay £12 if it was on TV, so no way would I risk it on the Internet.

I've completely avoided PPV anyway, I pay enough already with SKY Sports and my TV licence

Nick Pearson - £12? I wouldn't pay 12p to watch it live!

16:05 | 07 Oct 2009

Pay £12 to watch a team that are not even in the top 10 international sides in Europe. Not on your nelly.

Dave - Sportive Balls

16:07 | 07 Oct 2009

Speaking personally, I wouldn't give twelve quid for a football team.

When sport becomes entertainment it looses whatever social value it might have and apparently becomes an investment for the 'big spenders' and 'wise investment boys'.

So much for big boys in short trousers.

David Mitchell - Internet football

16:11 | 07 Oct 2009

This is a no-no idea. My computer is upstairs in my study - I don't have a laptop - and I am sure I am not going to sit up there all alone watching on a small screen despite the fact that I am very interested in football and especially the England team. But all these problems are gradually stifling my interest in football generally speaking.

David Mitchell

Andrew Trowell

16:22 | 07 Oct 2009

I think the FA should consider what strategy they are progressing full stop!

Football (certainly for the International arena) is about allowing the nation to support their team, not about selling the rights to the highest bidder so they can enjoy another banquent at a posh venue slapping themselves on the back saying what a great job we've done.

John C

16:34 | 07 Oct 2009

Like others I personally would not pay £12 to watch a soccer match - full stop. However soccer fans are still better off than cricket or rugby fans.

What? - Yet more money to be poured down the football drain

16:39 | 07 Oct 2009

Ridiculous transfer fees, hugely overpaid footballers, ludicrous prices for club merchandise and general financial excess at every twist and turn. Tax all of it, very heavily, particularly the transfer fees, that should bring them down to earth. The money could be used to scrap any plans to steal a year’s pension from people after 2016.

Martin Porter - Football?

16:41 | 07 Oct 2009

You mean computers can be used to watch stuff other than porn?

DL - Let's hope this experiment fails

16:57 | 07 Oct 2009

Andrew Trowell - the rights to international fixtures belong to the home team's FA and they are free to sell those rights to whoever it chooses.

It this instance, our FA has no influence on who shows the match as it is up to the broadcasters to negotiate rights with the relevant FA.

However, I'm not defending the idea - I think it's a non-starter as few will have the requisite bandwidth to prevent it becoming a buffering nightmare.

Kentaro seem to be basing their experiment on the success of innovations such as bbc iplayer and youtube - catch up tv where buffering may not be such a big deal. Live feeds will be a different matter entirely.

David Robert - It must be stopped

17:12 | 07 Oct 2009

30% of homes do not have internet. And many are elderly people to whom TV is a lifesaver

Who are these greedy football people who allow this ? They must be stopped

All national games should be available to all people. Where are the politicians who should ensure that this happens ?

bighammo - Could be worth it?

18:28 | 07 Oct 2009

It could be worth it.

Get a PC cabled to the VGSA socket of most 32, 42 inch wide screen tellys and get your mates round, and charge them a couple of quid.

And you would be in profit especially if you get more than six people.

Pubs also if the do this would be in profit from the extra drinks alone.

It is so easy to connect a PC to a wide screen telly or projector.

Do pubs have to pay more I guess not.

But it is risky doing this over the net.

Like what happens if you have PC or bandwidth problems.

Carl

Raymond White - R W--Why encourage them.

18:37 | 07 Oct 2009

it will simply mean that those people without computers or access to the intenet will be denied the opportunity of supporting the national team.The older population in particular are less likely to use technology and even if they could are unlikely to be able to afford it

The term "snouts in trough" spring to mind.

David Probert - Buffering nightmare

20:01 | 07 Oct 2009

My pc struggles with bbc i player so how it would cope with hour and a half of live footy i hate to think. We have already qualified so really this match aint important had that not been the case you can bet itv,sky and the bbc would have been bidding furiously for it.

Would like to have seen the hilights at least.

I hope all england fans boycott this game to send a message that this is a £12 rip off to far

geoffrey dee - football

20:51 | 07 Oct 2009

pay for football? NO

Graham Williams - Will IsP's Allow It

22:06 | 07 Oct 2009

My experience of streaming radio is that BT is very quick to cut your speed so that after a minute it stops for a minute, and carries on like that.

Result you disconect from stream.With that probability I certainly would not risk a bob (5p) on trying to stream a whole football match.

alan - just look at boxing

22:44 | 07 Oct 2009

years ago every one could tell you who were the world champion boxers or english champions. but that was in the days when bbc or itv showed them,but some dimwit put it on sky and now ask any one the same questions and i bet you dont get the right answer many times. what i am trying to say is the english public who are only interested because it is on main television chanels will turn there interest of the football like boxing.that includes me .this is not flying the english flag it is selling it.

Simon Walker - Oh dear!

08:50 | 08 Oct 2009

What a shambling disgrace!

This will be a spectacular flop by any objective measure but someone with a vested interest will no doubt try to convince us otherwise.

Anyone wanting to watch the World Cup in Brazil had better get an i-phone pretty sharpish!

Alan Jones - FA Should be prosecuted!!

09:43 | 08 Oct 2009

Any sporting team that represents their country should have all their games available FREE for the nation they represent to watch. This is common logic and should be enshrined in law. The FA do not represent the country, as it stands, and should therefore be prosecuted for their lack of a duty of care to the nation.

PLEASE PASS THIS SIMPLE LOGIC ON AROUND THE COUNTRY.

Merle Davis - Would u pay 12 to watch a football match on a computer screen

10:00 | 08 Oct 2009

HELL NO, NOT EVEN ON MY 52" TV SCREEN7B4F2M

Alan - No chance

13:17 | 08 Oct 2009

People should resist pay to view as it only increases the cost for everyone else. If you cave in and buy this it just means you are more likely to have to repeat the exercise next time. Dont pay and the Beeb or ITV will be able to afford it next time.

I am not an England fan but you have my sympathies. The Scottish FA have done a lot worse.

Gerald de la Pascua - please don't pay

13:53 | 08 Oct 2009

I appeal to all footy fans not to pay for this.

If enough people pay for this, then it will be seen as a viable business model and we'll have all sorts of companies bidding to hold us to ransom for England games.

Its one thing for the live game, but no highlights on terrestrial ? for goodness sakes this is our national game, the FA should decree in the bidding that highlights should be available on bbc or itv.

The more people are prepared to pay, the more money we will be fleeced for.

Please don't pay it or eventually all england games will be like this.

G

Aint so grim Up North - Never paid yet !!!!

19:49 | 08 Oct 2009

Oh dear...

Somebody had better tell Kentaro...

You see there is this thing..well two actually and I have them both embedded in my PC....One is SopCast (free download)and the other is TVU Player(free download) and I have been watching Premier league on a Saturday afternoon and England games for over 3 years at a total cost of ..........BIG FAT NOTHING !!!!!

Except the eleccy charge :-)

JonnyB - Future

12:02 | 09 Oct 2009

I not keen on what is happening with this England game but I also think that it is the future for the way sports and TV will be shown. I watched The Ashes on a PC at work through Sky Player and thought it was excellent coverage, couldnt really fault it. but that is a monthly subsciption(which i don't mind) but having to pay £12 for practically a friendly......There having a laugh

Tom - Its all about price point

07:52 | 10 Oct 2009

For me pay per view whether TV, music, film or sports event broadcasts, it all comes down to price point. There has to be percieved value. There are no CD cases with a track less marketing costs a track should cost no more than 50p - then volume of sales is the way to make money. If you make price accessible you attract volume and cost becomes secondary. I only want to watch one teams matches if I can so would happily pay 1 per view. The same applies to movie rentals if its quick and easy to pay per view or download at a price which i don't have to consider whether its overpriced or not. I also think a pick and mix system would work much better. I hate paying for channels I don't watch or need.

Have your say here:

Protected by FormShield