Any thoughts?? 

Haven't had a chance to shower yet

Good. It's cheap and the coverage is fine.

This. 
I heard Kayo are interested, i don't want to have to pay kayo prices to watch the aleague

Kayo is Foxtel,  in all but name.

This.

Only one bidder for Matildas is a surprise to me.

It's probably bundled which may have put them off. Guessing here?

Unless I missed it I can't work out if it includes the ACL and what that means for Paramount's A League coverage.

This is a media deal between Football Australia and Channel Ten/ Paramount . The APL has its own media deal.
I think FA would be involved in dealing with the AFC’s competitions.

In the last deal the FA packaged all AFC properties (including the ACL and AFC Cup) together with Matildas and Socceroos friendlies and sold them to Paramount.  From what I read I am assuming (and its an assumption) that the AFC club competitions are no longer part of the Paramount/FA package. Make of that what you will.  The APL do not/did not  own the rights to the AFC club competitions.

I really wanted it on Stan but seems most of you are content with Paramount it is what it is 

There are many people (me included) who only want to watch/pay for Australian football so a subscription to Stan would not be worthwhile.

Was hoping for a little more. But 50 million with over 100 games broadcast live is not bad either, especially considering were we where say 3 years ago.

SMH reporting that teh News figure of 50 million is well short of what was actually paid.

FFA and ch10/P+ have negotiated the tv deal over the next 5 years:https://www.smh.com.au/sport/soccer/matildas-socceroos-to-remain-on-network-10-for-next-five-years-20240827-p5k5n2.html

Football Australia has clinched a rich new broadcast deal with Paramount Australia that will see all matches involving the Socceroos and the Matildas – except for the next men’s FIFA World Cup – shown on either Network 10 or the paid Paramount+ streaming service.

The five-year agreement means Network 10 and Paramount+ will broadcast the Matildas’ next two major tournaments: the 2026 Women’s Asian Cup, which will be hosted by Australia, and the 2027 FIFA Women’s World Cup in Brazil.

The vast majority of matches at both events, however, will be shown behind the Paramount+ paywall.

It is the first time FA’s national team rights have been sold as part of a bundle with both the Asian Football Confederation rights and the Women’s World Cup, which the federation secured in separate deals to then on-sell to boost the value of the rights they own.

FA would not disclose the financial terms of the deal; previous reports of a $200 million agreement were wide of the mark according to sources who were speaking on the condition of anonymity due to the confidential nature of the deal.


Chief executive James Johnson would only say it was a new high-water mark for FA’s broadcast revenues and would enable them to continue investing into growing the brands of both national teams and the programs of junior teams that sit beneath them.

WHAT’S INCLUDED IN FA’S NEW BROADCAST RIGHTS DEAL

• All Socceroos qualifiers for the 2026 men’s World Cup (home matches only on free-to-air, the rest on Paramount+)
• 2026 Women’s Asian Cup (six matches on free-to-air, the rest on Paramount+)
• 2027 Women’s World Cup (15 matches on free-to-air, the rest on Paramount+)
• 2027 men’s Asian Cup (all matches exclusively on Paramount+, the rest on Paramount+)
• All Socceroos and Matildas friendlies 2025-2028 (15 Matildas friendlies, 10 Socceroos friendlies on free-to-air, the rest on Paramount+)
• Australia Cup finals 2025-2028
• AFC U23 men’s Asian Cup 2026 and 2028

“It reflects, I think, the growth of the sport, and in particular the brands, the Socceroos and the Matildas, and also the aggregation of all the content that we’ve been able to bring together,” Johnson said. “We are reaching new heights in terms of investment.”Paramount was largely unchallenged in its bidding for the rights, with FA keen to sell the rights to a single party.

Both Foxtel and Nine (the owner of this masthead) looked at the rights but made no serious bid, sources familiar with the plans said.

Approximately half of all Socceroos and Matildas matches for the next broadcast cycle – there will be over 100 in total – will be shown behind a paywall, which is a roughly similar carve-up to the expiring deal, and was stipulated by FA in the tender process.

Just six matches from the 2026 Women’s Asian Cup (which doubles as the qualification tournament for the 2027 Women’s World Cup) and 15 from the Women’s World Cup will be shown on free-to-air, while 15 Matildas friendlies and 10 Socceroos friendlies over the next four years will also be on free-to-air, with the rest on Paramount+. By way of comparison, the Seven Network also broadcast 15 matches from last year’s Women’s World Cup, with the remainder on Optus Sport.

The federal government’s anti-siphoning list stipulates that only World Cup matches involving the two senior national teams, and any World Cup qualifiers played in Australia, must be shown on free-to-air television.

“There are more matches behind the paywall because there are more matches overall in terms of the national team games,” said Beverley McGarvey, president of Network 10 and Paramount Australia’s head of streaming and regional lead.“There’ll be about 100 and half of them will be in front of the paywall. In terms of how we work it out, there are certain games that are big events, that are of national importance, that absolutely should be free-to-air, that the whole country absolutely will want to see. For the economics of the deal to make sense, of course, content has to live on Paramount+. The price point is $6.99 [per month] so if you’re a sports fan, if you’re a soccer fan ... it’s a fairly efficient entry point.

”The rights for the men’s World Cup – the next edition of which will be held in the United States, Mexico and Canada in 2026 – were sold by FIFA last year to SBS, which has been the Australian home of the tournament since 1986.The deal cements Paramount as the one-stop shop for Australian football content, and sits alongside their existing contract to broadcast the A-Leagues, which has two more seasons to run. Paramount has an option in their favour to extend it by a further three years; due to a failure to hit subscription-based targets within the contract, it has turned out to be worth a lot less than the $40 million-per-season figured trumpeted by the Australian Professional Leagues when it was signed.

The APL has since undergone significant belt-tightening, making half its workforce redundant and reducing annual distributions to clubs to just $530,000 per season – the lowest figure since the A-League’s inception. Network 10 retains a small, symbolic ownership stake in the APL, which formed part of the current A-Leagues rights deal.“They had lots of work to do, and they’ve done a lot of it,” McGarvey said. “I think they would hope they’re coming out the other side of it now and getting ready for a great new season.“We wouldn’t have chased another FA deal if we didn’t believe in football. Football’s our sport.

That’s what we have, that’s our main sport. And I say this just knowing our business well, Australia is a tough market size. We’re not big, and we’re not small. It’s tough to run particular types of businesses in Australia because we lack scale in certain areas and people have expectations here in terms of what they expect from their sporting codes, their entertainment propositions.

”While the APL is eager to discuss a renewal to shore up the financial future of A-League clubs, and is expected to begin the process of seeking a new rights deal by the end of the year, McGarvey said Paramount was in no rush.

Last week, Foxtel expressed an interest in potentially bidding for the A-Leagues rights again. Julian Ogrin, the CEO of Foxtel’s streaming and advertising division, which includes Kayo Sports, told Mumbrella the company would “absolutely” consider a bid for the A-Leagues, if the rights became available.

Just another article from Nine pouring sh*t on football…..to be expected really.

Do we know the dollar amount?

No figure was quoted in the FA announcement so I’d imagine there’s a lot of guesswork happening.

FA would not disclose the financial terms of the deal; previous reports of a $200 million agreement were wide of the mark according to sources who were speaking on the condition of anonymity due to the confidential nature of the deal.

Seriously why wouldn't the figure be exposed, so its not near the $200M boasted originally I suppose ????
I don't know.

Probably because it's underwhelming?
Much like the APL deal with paramount. 

Happy to let rumours swirl around. 

When deals are record breaking, figures are always stated. 
When they're not, they'll keep us guessing. 

Seems like it’s not just Nine pouring sh*t on Australian football.

Hmm not so sure about old Vince's "secret source" to be honest... Two quotes by JJ intrigue me:

Chief executive James Johnson would only say it was a new high-water mark for FA’s broadcast revenues and would enable them to continue investing into growing the brands of both national teams and the programs of junior teams that sit beneath them.

“It reflects, I think, the growth of the sport, and in particular the brands, the Socceroos and the Matildas, and also the aggregation of all the content that we’ve been able to bring together,” Johnson said. “We are reaching new heights in terms of investment.”

I wonder what all the "aggregated content" is btw :P

What was the old high water mark?

$100 mill for 3 years.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/jun/15/football-australia-secures-landmark-broadcast-deal-for-matildas-and-socceroos

To now being $200 mill for 5 years (despite Vince Rugari trying to spread misninforamtion that it is less than anticipated)

https://www.news.com.au/sport/football/football-australia-has-signed-a-new-fouryear-broadcast-deal-for-socceroos-and-matildas-games/news-story/3fa81c8178e54a1897b51aaf5fc7f04e

Why do you think its so low... there are a number of reasons for keeping it close to your chest... smh reporting its a lot more and I have heard from a mate who knows someone deep in Ch 10 who says it bigger...

Fa have anual budgets so it should come out eventually

I’ll be happy to be proven wrong one day if it when it’s finally for all to see.
I don’t recall of any major sporting body keeping quiet when a new or renewal is a good number.
Simple as that.

The negative reaction from most mainstream media proves how worried some other sports are about the financial traction FA are getting with JJ pulling the strings.

Well the APL doesn't exactly play a different sport but they are certainly dismissive ... I wonder if Vincenzo will now reveal his "anonymous sources"?

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/soccer/matildas-socceroos-to-remain-on-network-10-for-next-five-years-20240827-p5k5n2.html

FA would not disclose the financial terms of the deal; previous reports of a $200 million agreement were wide of the mark according to sources who were speaking on the condition of anonymity due to the confidential nature of the deal.

Slater saying that the new deal is 15% higher than the previous. So we've gone from $33 mil/yr to $153 mil over 4?

Mentioning Bulldog 
His article was paywalled for me.
Can anyone load it up here 

‘Sick to my stomach’: Why TV deal is a disaster for football
Robbie Slater

The rift in Australian football has been highlighted by Paramount and Ten being extended as the host broadcaster of the sport. Leaving Australian soccer in a horrible position once again, ROBBIE SLATER writes.

The bitter feud that raged for years before the APL divorced itself to run the A-League and the FA concentrated just on running its own affairs still exists and is evident in this new deal trumpeted by the FA.

It is extraordinary how football has messed things up in this country.

I have met with the important people in this country and talked to people at all levels of the game and I can tell you now - there is no plan.

I am pissed off that we have now got ourselves in this position that after everything the game has endured, we should go and pat everyone on the back about getting a new TV deal and thank Channel Ten for how they’ve treated football in this country by rewarding it with the Socceroos and Matildas.

It makes me sick to my stomach.

This is a broadcaster that has done no favours at all for the domestic game and told the A-League it must languish in its current deal for the next two years until it expires.

We saw with the pitiful distribution of just $530,000 per club for this upcoming season exactly what Ten and Paramount think of the APL.

Make no mistake, this mega-deal bandied about for many months of $200 million over the next four years is simply not true. I am told the exact figure is well south and is just a 15 per cent increase on their last deal which was reported to be $100m.

You would hope the FA learnt from the APL that this deal is not full of contra and KPIs to trigger bonus payments because that has proven to be a complete disaster for the APL.

It is a risk climbing back into bed with Ten and Paramount given all stories of the financial struggles at Ten and the massive cuts globally at Paramount who are trying to wipe $3 billion off their business.

Was there even a thought given that the mere existence of Ten could be under threat in the coming years?

Ten and Paramount only want football for the Matildas. There is no love for football or desire to grow the game.

It’s just what they saw at the World Cup and the massive ratings and the records that blew every other sport out of the sky.

Don’t forget this is the same broadcaster that didn’t foresee the Matildas mania for a home World Cup - how dumb are they?

They could’ve beaten Seven to those rights but they sat and twiddled their thumbs while Seven broke every record and did a magnificent performance of hosting the World Cup.

Now they’ve paid more, but has the horse bolted in some respects?

I know Australia will host the Asian Cup in 2026 and the Matildas will have a very similar line up with hopefully Sam Kerr back, but after that there are no big tournaments for a long time and the World Cups are all in terrible time zones.

If they think the Matildas alone will transition into massive subscriptions for the ailing Paramount they’re mistaken.

The simple fact will be, the Matildas will be on Ten’s main channel and there will be no need to register for Paramount to watch them except when they play in bad time zones overseas.

And the Matildas brand took a hit at the Olympics, no doubt about it.

The game needs to start championing the next stars of the Matildas for when the champions like Kerr inevitably retire - but there was no mention of supporting the ALeague Women’s or the ALeague Men’s that would help grow the domestic game.

I am disappointed in the FA who were in a position of power here. Every channel would’ve been interested in this broadcast deal, but FA opted to just stick with Ten.

You would hope CEO James Johnson has spoken to Ten and Paramount and said ‘what more are you going to do to promote the domestic game in Australia?’

Because right now Ten is letting the game tread water without a care in the world.

If the FA don’t help fight for the domestic game the APL will find itself in a very difficult position in two years’ time when their broadcast deal ends.

Would they be able to pull away from Ten and create a division of broadcast that impacts fans or do they just have to suck it up and stick with the same old same old.

I’m not making excuses for what the APL have done, they only have themselves to blame for the massive mistakes they’ve made and money they’ve wasted, but at the end of the day I know there’s been a feud and it has to end now.

I think the FA has a moral obligation as the head of football in this country to help the domestic competition - even when maybe there is an argument that it doesn’t really deserve it.

My biggest concern is that they are not treating the Asian Cup with enough respect. Only 6 games on FTA in a home Women's Asian cup. The men's is 100% behind a paywall. Granted, Paramount isn't excessively expensive, but all Socceroos games, plus the Semi Finals and Final should be on FTA.


This is the smoking gun that proves Robbie Slater is bitter about not getting a gig on Paramount. This line is total bullshit.

Simon Hill came out a few months ago and categorically stated that the reduced club distribution was an APL decision and not related to TV rights payments. After squandering $140 million, the APL need extra funds for their day to day running. 

Hill was having a go back at Slaters network. He conveniently failed to mention that Paramount did cut their payments to the APL, due to KPI's not being met.

'not related' ? maybe, if there was enough cash floating around to absorb the reduction.

Wasn't that Paramount KPI cutback a few years ago under Townsend? So Hill is probably correct that this current cutback is APL's call?

Always the APL's call.

'related' is the question that can be debated til the pubs shut.

though seriously, what does it matter how Slater quotes it, point is be it P or 10 is wrong to quote and the APL are the ones holding the gun how much money is distributed this season due to their own incompetance originally he's just screaming to the clouds for the game the way I see it, bitter, I think many supporters are bitter towards some who rock the boat, works both ways no..
I doubt he really gives a toss not being in the commentry no diff to Bozza, they got enough options and there isn't enough room in the first place but that they/he are football supporters saying their peace.
I have no issue with that for at least it gains some press and gets people to look into things for better understanding, if we can ever get understanding regards our games directions lol.....

Yeah so maybe 40mil a year

Obviously that is short of 50 mil but the fa's entire budget is about 100mil

Travel budget at all levels in 25 mil so thats 15 mil a year to spend on other things which is good

On the Women's Asian Cup - it's important to note that this doubles as qualification for the World Cup (and, in that case, being home qualifers, fall under the Anti-Siphoning list)
6 matches would be Australia's path to the final (3x group games, QF, SF and Final), so would assume that's why that's there.

Not sure I like this deal. Paramount as a platform isn't exactly flourishing. There's a possibility it might not last the full deal. On top of that, Ten and Paramount don't really have football quality experts and commentators. It's not the best coverage. 

Paramount will have to provide some serious benefit to subscribers because in a cost of living, people are not going to just keep parting with more money for multiple subscriptions. 

I agree with you but seems we have no choice but to accept it. They will only get the hardcore fans can't see new fans watching. Also I just want a midweek analysis show 

I don't know many good analysts that they could get for a midweek show. My biggest issue is that because it seems like the only option, Paramount know they don't have to get the best for the role. The level of football journalists in this country is not exactly flourishing. We haves some really good guys, then really poor, We need to fix this. 

I don't mind Paramount having it, but they need to do more than Foxtel did to grow the game. It's not hard considering Foxtel did sweet f all

The type of show you are after is now banished from time. Podcasts are what everyone wants these days.

Yeah I like podcasts but I really miss the old days of everyone watching the same tv show everything on Foxtel . I find most TV shows and movies are shite these days but that's another whinge 

So maybe, just maybe, the answer is to poll the hardcore fans and at least do the bare minimum of what they want... Ignoring them and chasing the "sport fan" isnt working... 

Except and this hurts to the core no other broadcaster wanted it and no one wanted to pay other than pennies.

Given 10 / P+ are not the leading broadcasters, however they are the only media player prepared to pay and broadcast me thinks we need to support them

well all you guys gals re AL need to support it and talk others into it hopefully.
I find P+ pretty useless overall incl the wife, we scan through and most to view is the same/similar as the other apps.
I loaded to watch some AL games but more so Roos/Matildas.
People mention rippa its cost effective, sure it is obviously but you get what you pay for as they say.
MCG wish's for show this show that back up well that is dreaming as mentioned at $10 a pop.
My devoted viewing using Optus Sport has so much to review, listen,read you get what you pay for I suppose.

Channel ten could put a weekly a league show it doesn't have to be Paramount exclusive 

I'd rather Paramount for its very cheap price and amazing qualifier access than someone a bit more 'flash'. While I'd like big punditry etc, the no nonsense approach and ease of access ensures the focus is on the match itself. I just don't think 10 has the money to roll out something big. I would like FTA to be the home of all games and have a dedicated team but it just won't happen. Paramount player is suspect at times so it's just the laptop for me. 

Dazn for example have gone hyper hip and it's now high priced pundits, events, esports and documentary or series after another. The issue is, it's mostly not interesting and doesn't tell a good story.

I think Optus do well and you can't blame anyone for cross promotion but their podcast is a bit of EPL then WSL and La Liga and that's when I turn it off. 

Three shows required:

30 minutes highlights from the weekend.
Serious football discussion and analytics show (maybe twice a week pre and post weekend).
Santo, Sam and Ed fun show.

If I had money, I would pay $200m for just Santo Sam and Ed

All that for $10 a month ?…..doubt it.
How much more would you be willing to pay?

I know what mean. But part of it is to help themselves! Add some content and value to their platform, make it attractive. Can always up the prices later once numbers are high.

trouble is that any FTA is not going to put aside half hour let alone an hour for a low viewing show/risk.
Only IF a large sponser is going to back up the $$$$'s and thats not going to happen.
FTA owners struggling to keep afloat in the meantime.

Well they should of done it ages ago even before COVID. Aye it's all gone downhill since the Fox sports days slater, bozza and peacock on before the EPL now those were the days everything is just shite since then 

You forgot the blur vision of the red button on Fox sports. Great days my arse.

You didn't have to push the red button through 

Noticed channel ten don't have a talking heads news show like the other channels in the morning