.jpg)
This sort of thing plays right into the BNP's hands.

"It is perhaps a little unfortunate that large numbers of people were not able to see the match live,"Gormless Brown declared today "And that is something that I think a lot of supporters will want to have answers to." well you can talk to the courts Mr Brown. Setanta bought a product outright. They have the right to do with it what they wish. The people who may have wanted to watch the game and not visit a pub or subscribe themselves (1 million less viewers on Setanta than similar games on the BBC last season, a drop in the ocean to be frank) have a right to complain of course but that's where it stops. We're talking about a national team that failed to qualify for the European Championships over the summer, we're talking about a viewing package that was made available to every broadcaster and Setanta forked out the finance. The Evening Standard have a two page spread today announcing "The most loathed TV sports channel", the article itself does very little other than speculate as to the financial wellbeing of the company through rumours and conjecture. I think it's appalling that such an issue is being made of this. As a child I was unable to watch any live football. Any. Sky had a complete monopoly. My family couldn't commit to £35 a month for a minimum 12 months. Very few families could. Setanta offer a non-contract subscription service at an affordable price and goes out of its way to satisfy its customers by spending big on football. In an especially competitive industry such as football, to have the Prime Minister and a respected daily newspaper challenge the enterprise of a small broadcaster for perfectly legal and legitimate practice is despicable. It stinks of the Labour classist agenda to me.