Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Live TV appearances 2013-14

Because I produce a monthly schedule of what live football is on TV for my mate's bar - so I have the info to hand, and because I live abroad so don't get to see The Addicks much, I thought I would look at how well spread (or otherwise) Sky coverage of the Championship is, and whether that fairly reflects what's going on in the league. As Charlton have had only two live league games shown since 2011(I think?) obviously I am a bit miffed, but I do understand that this suits most people who attend games and that of course "We never win on TV". But it does put the club at a financial disadvantage both from the facility fees paid and the value of ground/shirt advertising.

I have tried a very unscientific way of discerning who "deserves" the most TV coverage by awarding points for position in the league and position in the average attendance chart - top team in each gets 24 points, bottom gets 1 point. Then I have added them together. this is the first number after the team's name, the second is the number of live league matches that they appeared in on Sky in 2013/14.

We all know where the respective teams finished in the league, but for the sake of a quick reference point, the top six clubs in order of attendance were Brighton, Leeds, Leicester, Derby, Forest and Wednesday. The bottom six (lowest first) Yeovil, Doncaster, Bournemouth, Millwall, Barnsley and Burnley.

Leicester 46 - 10
Derby 43 – 7
Brighton 43 – 4
QPR 37 – 10
Reading 36 – 4
Forest 34 – 7
Ipswich 33 – 2
Leeds 33 – 12
Wigan 30 – 2
Burnley 29 – 8
Wednesday 28 – 5
Middlesb’ro 26 – 3
Blackburn 26 – 3
Watford 24 – 4
Bolton 21 – 3
Charlton 21 – 1
B’mouth 18 – 1
Hudd,field 15 – 2
Birmingham 15 – 2
Blackpool 13 – 6
Millwall 10 – 2
Barnsley 7 – 2
Doncaster 5 – 3
Yeovil 2 – 4

I think by any criteria, we get a fairly poor coverage, but at least we are not the only ones...

Comments

  • Why are sky so fascinated with Leeds United ?. They were bloody awful last season yet they got 12 live games.
  • Why are sky so fascinated with Leeds United ?. They were bloody awful last season yet they got 12 live games.

    my guess is that Sky think that Leeds have a lot of supporters spread all over the country and others don't.
  • Id imagine that Leeds games were against good sides. So you've got a high flying side playing against a well supported side, its gonna get viewers.
  • I watched two league games of ours last season. Hope there will be more next season.
  • Even the strategy of being in a relegation battle didn't get us more live games. We'll have to try the other end next season.
  • Yeah, I think the analysis needs to be referenced with which teams each club played for their TV matches.

    It also needs to address the opposition each team has at specific times. There might be half a dozen prime games and if four of them are on the same weekend then clearly not all of them would be in TV.

    In the case of Leeds, due to the number of sides in Yorkshire there are probably more 'big' games involving them (other teams Cup Final and all that) even if United are not challenging at the top.

    The other thing that needs to be examined is where the teams were when the games took place. Leeds were, for example, 5th and very much in with a chance of promotion at the half way stage of the season.
  • lets be honest.....it was bad enough watching Charlton at the Valley last season....and the season before that, why subject others to it? I support Charlton. I watch Charlton. I buy Charlton products, tour the ground, bought a brick etc....but if I was in charge of tv listings I'm not sure I would pick us as a live game to watch? As many of my friends, colleagues etc have told me over the years - in other peoples eyes, we are a boring club. I don't agree with them, but I've heard it so many times. We've never played attractive football - not in the last few years anyway. We're not high goal scorers....other than a small proportion of the population, who would be interested in watching us on the TV? it's not like Charlton is a town on it's own somewhere in the country...like Leeds, Derby, Norwich etc. It's just an area of our capital city......there is little attraction to the neutral fan is what I think i'm trying to say.
  • How did Blackpool get 5 more games than we did
  • Yeah, I think the analysis needs to be referenced with which teams each club played for their TV matches.

    It also needs to address the opposition each team has at specific times. There might be half a dozen prime games and if four of them are on the same weekend then clearly not all of them would be in TV.

    In the case of Leeds, due to the number of sides in Yorkshire there are probably more 'big' games involving them (other teams Cup Final and all that) even if United are not challenging at the top.

    The other thing that needs to be examined is where the teams were when the games took place. Leeds were, for example, 5th and very much in with a chance of promotion at the half way stage of the season.

    I did say it wasn't entirely scientific, but even taking everything you say into account, 12 appearances for Leeds and one for us is still grossly unfair. As it happens their appearances break down as follows: Aug - 3, Sept - 0, Oct - 1, Nov - 0, Dec - 1, Jan - 2, Feb - 2, Mar - 1, Apr - 2, May - 0. So 3 when we had no idea whether they would be world beaters or shocking, and five by the time we found out they were pony.

    To pick out a few of examples of games early in the season that were apparently no more compelling than any others, including the ones we were taking part in: Brighton v Watford, Watford v Leicester, Bournemouth v Brighton - all games that were scheduled for TV coverage before the season even kicked off. Sheff Wed v Huddersfield was on tele the same day we played at QPR, with few London derbies and many Yorkshire derbies, maybe there's a case that the London game should be the one to show?

    On Dec 21st they showed Millwall v Middlesbrough, why would that be any more interesting/uninteresting than Bolton v Charlton? The same day Blackpool played Burnley, and Leeds played Barnsley - their "cup final" - but they decided against showing that?

    I couldn't see an occasion where four prime games clashed, and we have played the top six home and away like everyone else - they didn't all clash with more "attractive" fixtures. And on some weekends Sky found room to show two Championship fixtures, but never ours...

    If it was a one off, I could accept that, but in two and a half years we have had half the appearances that Yeovil had in just one season.

    Braydex - I don't see how we are less attractive than Donny, Barnsley or Millwall our average attendance is a better gauge of interest than being a one town club, surely? We pull in more than Middlesbrough, Birmingham or Blackburn. And how on earth would your friends know how good we are if they only get to see us once a year - although I admit it doesn't help when the only games they do show are the local derbies we don't turn up for... :-(
  • Yeah, I think the analysis needs to be referenced with which teams each club played for their TV matches.

    It also needs to address the opposition each team has at specific times. There might be half a dozen prime games and if four of them are on the same weekend then clearly not all of them would be in TV.

    In the case of Leeds, due to the number of sides in Yorkshire there are probably more 'big' games involving them (other teams Cup Final and all that) even if United are not challenging at the top.

    The other thing that needs to be examined is where the teams were when the games took place. Leeds were, for example, 5th and very much in with a chance of promotion at the half way stage of the season.

    I did say it wasn't entirely scientific, but even taking everything you say into account, 12 appearances for Leeds and one for us is still grossly unfair. As it happens their appearances break down as follows: Aug - 3, Sept - 0, Oct - 1, Nov - 0, Dec - 1, Jan - 2, Feb - 2, Mar - 1, Apr - 2, May - 0. So 3 when we had no idea whether they would be world beaters or shocking, and five by the time we found out they were pony.

    To pick out a few of examples of games early in the season that were apparently no more compelling than any others, including the ones we were taking part in: Brighton v Watford, Watford v Leicester, Bournemouth v Brighton - all games that were scheduled for TV coverage before the season even kicked off. Sheff Wed v Huddersfield was on tele the same day we played at QPR, with few London derbies and many Yorkshire derbies, maybe there's a case that the London game should be the one to show?

    On Dec 21st they showed Millwall v Middlesbrough, why would that be any more interesting/uninteresting than Bolton v Charlton? The same day Blackpool played Burnley, and Leeds played Barnsley - their "cup final" - but they decided against showing that?

    I couldn't see an occasion where four prime games clashed, and we have played the top six home and away like everyone else - they didn't all clash with more "attractive" fixtures. And on some weekends Sky found room to show two Championship fixtures, but never ours...

    If it was a one off, I could accept that, but in two and a half years we have had half the appearances that Yeovil had in just one season.

    Braydex - I don't see how we are less attractive than Donny, Barnsley or Millwall our average attendance is a better gauge of interest than being a one town club, surely? We pull in more than Middlesbrough, Birmingham or Blackburn. And how on earth would your friends know how good we are if they only get to see us once a year - although I admit it doesn't help when the only games they do show are the local derbies we don't turn up for... :-(
    Out of interest, the teams I've highlighted were all in the playoffs the season before. I have to say I think it is fair enough to put schedule them before the season has started as I don't see a better way to identify teams to show.

    I think Leeds are a special case, and I suspect that they will be tempted to choose a London game as it is easier to get to, when there is little else to choose between two games.

    Incidentally, I wasn't having a pop at your analysis - it is interesting to see the numbers irrespective as to how they are analysed. I just think that there are decisions made that we might not agree with that might, in any event, have little to do with the audience figures. Personal preferences, the facilities available to the broadcasters, interest of those within Sky itself. However, I think that most of it comes down to the fact that the general public don't, really, want to watch any of the games outside of the Premier League so I think they go for the so called bigger clubs, and those that have had the most media attention recently - QPR being a great example.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Yeah, I think the analysis needs to be referenced with which teams each club played for their TV matches.

    It also needs to address the opposition each team has at specific times. There might be half a dozen prime games and if four of them are on the same weekend then clearly not all of them would be in TV.

    In the case of Leeds, due to the number of sides in Yorkshire there are probably more 'big' games involving them (other teams Cup Final and all that) even if United are not challenging at the top.

    The other thing that needs to be examined is where the teams were when the games took place. Leeds were, for example, 5th and very much in with a chance of promotion at the half way stage of the season.

    I did say it wasn't entirely scientific, but even taking everything you say into account, 12 appearances for Leeds and one for us is still grossly unfair. As it happens their appearances break down as follows: Aug - 3, Sept - 0, Oct - 1, Nov - 0, Dec - 1, Jan - 2, Feb - 2, Mar - 1, Apr - 2, May - 0. So 3 when we had no idea whether they would be world beaters or shocking, and five by the time we found out they were pony.

    To pick out a few of examples of games early in the season that were apparently no more compelling than any others, including the ones we were taking part in: Brighton v Watford, Watford v Leicester, Bournemouth v Brighton - all games that were scheduled for TV coverage before the season even kicked off. Sheff Wed v Huddersfield was on tele the same day we played at QPR, with few London derbies and many Yorkshire derbies, maybe there's a case that the London game should be the one to show?

    On Dec 21st they showed Millwall v Middlesbrough, why would that be any more interesting/uninteresting than Bolton v Charlton? The same day Blackpool played Burnley, and Leeds played Barnsley - their "cup final" - but they decided against showing that?

    I couldn't see an occasion where four prime games clashed, and we have played the top six home and away like everyone else - they didn't all clash with more "attractive" fixtures. And on some weekends Sky found room to show two Championship fixtures, but never ours...

    If it was a one off, I could accept that, but in two and a half years we have had half the appearances that Yeovil had in just one season.

    Braydex - I don't see how we are less attractive than Donny, Barnsley or Millwall our average attendance is a better gauge of interest than being a one town club, surely? We pull in more than Middlesbrough, Birmingham or Blackburn. And how on earth would your friends know how good we are if they only get to see us once a year - although I admit it doesn't help when the only games they do show are the local derbies we don't turn up for... :-(
    the general public don't, really, want to watch any of the games outside of the Premier League so I think they go for the so called bigger clubs, and those that have had the most media attention recently - QPR being a great example.
    Agree.

    I would add to this teams likely to be involved in high scoring matches are more attractive to broadcasters than those that are not. Further, teams that play entertaining football will be more attractive to broadcasters than those that do not.
  • Best live game last season was Wednesday v Leeds.
  • Yeah, I think the analysis needs to be referenced with which teams each club played for their TV matches.

    It also needs to address the opposition each team has at specific times. There might be half a dozen prime games and if four of them are on the same weekend then clearly not all of them would be in TV.

    In the case of Leeds, due to the number of sides in Yorkshire there are probably more 'big' games involving them (other teams Cup Final and all that) even if United are not challenging at the top.

    The other thing that needs to be examined is where the teams were when the games took place. Leeds were, for example, 5th and very much in with a chance of promotion at the half way stage of the season.

    I did say it wasn't entirely scientific, but even taking everything you say into account, 12 appearances for Leeds and one for us is still grossly unfair. As it happens their appearances break down as follows: Aug - 3, Sept - 0, Oct - 1, Nov - 0, Dec - 1, Jan - 2, Feb - 2, Mar - 1, Apr - 2, May - 0. So 3 when we had no idea whether they would be world beaters or shocking, and five by the time we found out they were pony.

    To pick out a few of examples of games early in the season that were apparently no more compelling than any others, including the ones we were taking part in: Brighton v Watford, Watford v Leicester, Bournemouth v Brighton - all games that were scheduled for TV coverage before the season even kicked off. Sheff Wed v Huddersfield was on tele the same day we played at QPR, with few London derbies and many Yorkshire derbies, maybe there's a case that the London game should be the one to show?

    On Dec 21st they showed Millwall v Middlesbrough, why would that be any more interesting/uninteresting than Bolton v Charlton? The same day Blackpool played Burnley, and Leeds played Barnsley - their "cup final" - but they decided against showing that?

    I couldn't see an occasion where four prime games clashed, and we have played the top six home and away like everyone else - they didn't all clash with more "attractive" fixtures. And on some weekends Sky found room to show two Championship fixtures, but never ours...

    If it was a one off, I could accept that, but in two and a half years we have had half the appearances that Yeovil had in just one season.

    Braydex - I don't see how we are less attractive than Donny, Barnsley or Millwall our average attendance is a better gauge of interest than being a one town club, surely? We pull in more than Middlesbrough, Birmingham or Blackburn. And how on earth would your friends know how good we are if they only get to see us once a year - although I admit it doesn't help when the only games they do show are the local derbies we don't turn up for... :-(
    the general public don't, really, want to watch any of the games outside of the Premier League so I think they go for the so called bigger clubs, and those that have had the most media attention recently - QPR being a great example.
    Agree.

    I would add to this teams likely to be involved in high scoring matches are more attractive to broadcasters than those that are not. Further, teams that play entertaining football will be more attractive to broadcasters than those that do not.
    All true - and then you get your four Yeovil games, which turns it all on it's head...

  • From memory, Yeovil play reasonably attractive football and were more likely to be involved in high scoring games than us.
  • I can see I'm fighting a losing battle here, and you guys, by definition see a lot more of how bad we are than I do - LOL.

    I shall just have to accept that we are the most unattractive team in the league (along with Bournemouth) and be grateful for the one telly appearance a year. :-D
  • I can see I'm fighting a losing battle here, and you guys, by definition see a lot more of how bad we are than I do - LOL.

    I shall just have to accept that we are the most unattractive team in the league (along with Bournemouth) and be grateful for the one telly appearance a year. :-D

    I think we were only on at all because every team has to be on once. However watching us on the tele reminds me of the Roy 'Chubby' Brown gag when he finds his friend having sex with his wife and he asks him why he's shagging her and goes on to say that he only does it because he has to!
  • If i was sky i wouldnt show us, they put us on... and it was probably the worst game of the season.
  • Thanks for the like Stig - despite the apathy I shall return next year with my one man crusade... LOL
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!