Should Australia’s free-to-air TV have rights to the entire Women’s World Cup? | Jack Snape | OneFootball

There are fewer things in football more compelling than the elimination of a German national team. On Thursday the Women’s World Cup – like it has done on many fronts over the past two weeks – delivered. But for some fans, there was a problem – it wasn’t on free-to-air television.

The debate over free viewing access has made headlines this tournament, but major sporting bodies are opposed to a push to hand free-to-air television special priority in TV negotiations for a wider array of events. Athletes are mindful that a mix of platforms in broadcast agreements can be beneficial, especially when it comes to growing the women’s game.

Optus Sport has the rights to every game of the 2023 tournament, and Channel Seven is broadcasting 15 matches. But the success of it has revived calls for the entire tournament to be listed under anti-siphoning law, which gives free-to-air companies first option to purchase rights ahead of subscription services.

Jon Marquard, who heads up broadcast rights consultancy Janez Media and who worked with Optus on securing the rights in 2021, said that might end up actually reducing the value of the rights.

“I worry that if the Women’s World Cup is on the anti-siphoning list, you get the situation you had in Europe where the UK government did put it on the anti-siphoning equivalent over there,” he said. “They almost didn’t sell the rights because it meant there was no competition.”

In the UK, communications regulator Ofcom listed the tournament as one of “national interest”, thereby requiring broadcasters to make it freely available to all audiences. Fifa criticised bidders earlier this year for not offering fair value for the rights, before an 11th-hour deal was signed by the BBC and ITV.

In Australia, Optus won the rights though Channel Seven is broadcasting the Matildas’ fixtures, four round of 16 games, two quarter-finals, the semi-finals and the final under sub-licence. Optus Sport, which costs $24.99 per month or $6.99 for Optus customers, is also offering some matches free of charge on its platform, such as Thursday’s Morocco versus Colombia clash.

Seven has trumpeted that its coverage has reached 9.4 million viewers, including 1.3 million on its streaming service 7Plus. Optus Sport hasn’t reported ratings for its programs. However, the company announced on Friday that Australia versus Canada was its 17th most popular streamed match ever – attracting more viewers than marquee English Premier League fixtures such as Manchester City against United last season. Meanwhile, ticket sales for the tournament have passed 1.7 million, exceeding expectations.

Some have criticised the mix, highlighting that every match of the 2022 men’s World Cup in Qatar was broadcast on SBS. Australian matches in the men’s World Cup, as well as the final, are on the anti-siphoning list.

The list is currently under review “to ensure that it operates effectively in a contemporary media environment”, according to a spokesperson for communications minister Michelle Rowland. “The review is considering the application of the scheme to streaming services, and the composition of the list.”

Submissions to the review show how the sports themselves don’t believe a listing is always in their best interests.

The Coalition of Major Professional and Participation Sports, which includes the AFL, NRL and Football Australia, cautioned against extending the list to cover more events.

“Including a women’s event on the anti-siphoning list may not automatically assist in developing and growing that women’s sport and could have counterproductive consequences if it means that the sporting organisation is not able to maximise its commercial revenue,” it stated.

“Free access may dissuade people from attending the event when sports are seeking to maximise on-site fan engagement, attract crowds and create atmosphere at women’s sporting events.”

Australian Professional Leagues, which operates the A-Leagues, warned “caution must be taken to ensure any change does not reduce flexibility of broadcast arrangements”.

“There is no doubt that any unnecessary coverage obligations and/or other regulation would have an impact on future broadcast rights negotiations,” its submission stated. “The competition for broadcast rights is likely to reduce while the value of the rights is also likely to reduce leading to reduced investment in our game and its players.”

But SBS said more women’s events should be included. “High visibility for these sports plays a crucial cultural role in Australian society, providing role models and demonstrating pathways for young women and girls to become professional sportspeople,” the SBS submission stated.

Beau Busch, co-chief executive of players union, Professional Footballers Australia, said it was important to understand the nuances of broadcast rights.

“The current debate indicates that two things can be true at the same time: that opening up the bidding process for rights allows the sport to maximise revenue for the women’s game from the highest bidder, but that can come at a cost to visibility of the tournament for many without subscriptions,” he said.

“The other nuance is that by potentially restricting new, emerging or existing platforms from the bidding process would significantly impact those platforms’ overall viability,” Busch said, warning that platforms like Optus Sport could be lost.

Despite expressions of frustrations from some traditional television viewers, Marquard argues the current mix has struck a good balance.

“The nation is united around the Matildas, fans are flocking to the matches in record numbers, Fifa is delighted with the broadcast deal it has with Optus, there is wall-to-wall coverage on Optus, while all Australians get access to the big matches free on Seven as well.”

Header image: [Photograph: Carl Recine/Reuters]