the brilliantly leaping gazelle

Proof, if any were needed, that football is a massively more popular sport than rugby was evidenced earlier this year by ITV’s decision to screen adverts during the Six Nations rugby thing. No surprises there. ITV is a commercial broadcaster after all and derives all of its income from adverts. Except these adverts didn’t appear during the regular scheduled advert breaks. They appeared whilst the play was actually happening. 

‘How is that even possible?’, one might reasonably ask. Well when a scrum is called, there is a bit of a kerfuffle while everyone gets ready, there is some some jostling and general fannying about. So some bright spark at ITV had the idea that if they screen split in two when a scrum was called they could show both the kerfuffle and show a 20 second advert as they did so. The screen thus returning to full screen once the advert had finished. Which is exactly what they did.  

Apparently there was a backlash. I didn’t notice. But what I did notice, like everyone else watching the football World Cup, was the absence of any adverts during the ‘hydration breaks’ of any of the matches shown on ITV.  How galling for them, to see all of that potential advertising revenue wasted. 306 minutes worth spread out over 51 games. Not all of it primetime given the time difference, but a guaranteed audience nonetheless.

But potential was all it ever was. Ofcom – the broadcasting regulator – stipulates that all of the UK’s  commercial broadcasters can only show 168 minutes of adverts a day and no more than 12 in any hour. That means that any extra time ITV dedicated to adverts during a ‘hydration break’ break would need to be taken away from other programming.  Meaning that if they were already using the maximum 12 minutes during a game, they would need to show shorter ad breaks before the game, at half time, or at full time. And because of the contract agreed with FIFA for the rights in the first place, they could only show adverts for the sponsors of the World Cup anyway. And they’d have deals agreed with FIFA anyway, so FIFA would take a slice of that action. Reducing still further the revenue ITV would get. All of which is why ITV is one of of the few global commercial broadcasters not to screen adverts during the ‘hydration breaks. 

So whatever guff ITV comes out with ‘about respecting the game’, ‘not wanting to take fans out of the moment’, or some other piffle, the fact is that they’re trying to spin things to their best advantage. To turning the legislative shackles from which they find themselves into a noble gesture of selflessness. Which makes me wonder; why did they do it at the rugby? Did  it not occur to them that there might be a problem. Or maybe it did, maybe they thought ‘Try it out at the rugby and if all goes well, we’ll do it the proper World Cup.’

                        ***************************************

And on the subject of the ‘hydration breaks’ one can’t help but notice the incredible restraint that both the BBC and ITV are showing when mentioning them. The commentators have to mention the loud booing that greets such a break, mainly because as it is so loud, they have no choice. But aside from that, apart from the occasional reference at the start of the completion of ‘we all know why they’re there’ – without actually mentioning what is is we all know – there has been nothing. 

Sure, the pundits have discussed the effects that the breaks are having on the games. The disruptive nature of them and the ability it affords managers to change tactics and the fact that for some games they aren’t needed at all. The ones that take place in the rain and those that take place in covered stadia with the air-con on. But not the reason for them. They never draw the obvious conclusion that a 3 minute ‘hydration break’ is uncannily similar to the length of a commercial break.

What do I think is behind this? Basically, that both the BBC and ITV are terrified that FIFA will award the UK broadcast rights for the 2034 World Cup to either You Tube, Amazon or Netflix. League. Terrified that legislation which has been in place since 1991, which ensure that the ‘crown jewels of sport’ – of which the football World Cup is one – must be shown on the BBC, ITV, C4 or C5, might be watered down or otherwise circumvented. Actually, Amazon would be the more likely. They already own the rights to the all the Premier League matches and the UEFA Champions League.

                             ******************************

And briefly, it can’t go unremarked that football commentators have some truly wonderful euphemisms for fouls, brutal tackles on display at this World Cup. Not to forget the various theatrics that accompany them both.

For example, ‘Leaving a early marker’ or ‘he left something on it’ and its variant ‘letting him know he’s there’ are used to describe the kind of foul that leaves the hapless recipient of it writhing in agony on the ground. Everyone knows the part that they have to play. The commentator will use a tone of voice more reminiscent of a 1950’s Ealing comedy. Picture Lionel Jeffies or Bernard Cribbins shaking his fist and his head in a ‘just you wait until I get my hands on you, you cheeky scamp’ kind of way and you get the idea.  

The player whose committed the foul will affect air air of outraged innocence at being so unjustly accused. This despite knowing that there’s an instant replay showing the incident in slow motion over and over again on the large screens inside the stadium. The player whose fouled meanwhile, is giving the impression that he’ll never walk again or that his dreams of moonlighting at a ballet company are forever shattered. This impression is undercut a few moments later, when after having been awarded a free kick or getting the other player booked, he miraculously springs to his feet and resumes playing. He does at least have the good grace to pretend to have to walk it off, sometimes throwing in the occasional wince for the aforementioned camera’s 

Quite what euphemisms commentators will use to describe Englands dismal performance against Mexico early tomorrow morning remains to heard. They could always recycle the one’s they used to describe Scotlands unsurprisingly execrable performances, I suppose.

                  *********************************