19 comments

• 

  Jarrett

  2 years ago

  I started seeing a change in my habits last season when I got Setanta. I really got into the ultra-competitive nature of the Coca-Cola Championship. Plus, Setanta has great specials in between shows, good pre-game and halftime features, etc.
  
  
  With the EPL on Setanta, I've done the same thing you've done, gone from being an FSC junkie, to a Setanta junkie. I really feel bad for GolTV. They have some excellent programming as well but I can hardly find time to give them the attention they deserve.
  
  reply
• 

  Anonymous

  2 years ago

  I have only FSC and go to the neighborhood bar to check the big games on Setanta when I have time. Hopefully, i will be able to watch all 3 soccer channels come next year. But the bottom line is that besides 4 EPL games on weekends, FSC has little to offer. I still watch the FFF(don't listen to the radio show), and I still like it. Then-FSW Report is a must, and Sky Sports News, Dream Team, and that's about it.
  FSC has to gone from being the only soccer channel in America 3 years ago to being the 3rd best(out of 3).
  
  reply
• 

  JC

  2 years ago

  I'd love to be able to watch Setanta, but my cable company still doesn't offer it (and I'm not able to get DirectTV nor is my DSL connection reliable enough (nor my wallet fat enough) to get it over the internet).
  
  
  Despite being stuck with only FSC, I find myself watching it less this year than last. There are simply less games, especially now that the PPV option is gone.
  
  
  
  So while most of you probably feel like this is the best EPL season in terms of tv coverage, I feel like it's the worst in recent memory. Time Warner Cable is doing their best to make me less of a fan.
  
  reply
• 

  Anonymous

  2 years ago

  My FSC viewing habits haven't changed too much on weekdays, as I mainly watch Sky Sports News and Foxsportsworld Report. On weekends now there isn't as much too watch as most times I watch the games on Setanta unless my team is on FSC (which isn't very often).
  reply
• 

  Anonymous

  2 years ago

  FSC: from the only soccer channel a few years back has become the worst one. Shame on them! And maybe they will start showing the EPL games LIVE, not with a 5 minute delay!
  reply
• 

  deeplennon

  2 years ago

  FSC needs to stop adding their in-house production to the feed. Watching a premiership match on Setanta is so much better with live pre-game, half, and post-game footage from the site of the match. You get a much better feel for the atmosphere of the match and much better analysis. Not to mention the low quality of Fox's production. Consistently wrong line-up displays, Ugly graphics, and horrible pronunciations. Highberry anyone?
  reply
• 

  riocharlie

  2 years ago

  FSC is fallin off the radar. The first problem is that they sold the rights of the first choice epl matches to setanta. Not only do setanta show more matches they have the higher quality matches.
  
  
  2nd, just how many livorno v empoli matches from italy can u really watch? GOL, thank god showed the milan derby and what a match that was.
  
  
  
  3rd, Fox's in house production of MLS matches the quality on the pitch. From the replays to the broadcasters, they are brutal.
  
  
  
  4th, UNCG V Winthrop womens soccer? Pass the heroin please
  
  reply
• 

  riocharlie

  2 years ago

  Gaffer,
  
  
  BTW, I love your blog and I wish you a great journey through the UK and many pleasant experiences at the matches. I look forward to following your journal as you make your way through.
  
  
  
  Go Gunners!
  
  reply
• 

  Anonymous

  2 years ago

  Can anybody cut and paste these opinions and send them to FSC? I already wrote them twice about starting the LIVE games w/ a 5 minute delay.
  That, combined w/ 3rd rate Italian games, women's college soccer, and pretty much nothing else has made FSC a joke.
  
  reply
• 

  Anonymous

  2 years ago

  I'm really disappointed that FSC stopped carrying French, German, and--a year back--Brazillian soccer. During the week I would always watch the German and French weekly highlight shows. FSC's soccer content is so dilluted that I only watch Premiership games on the weekend. Setanta's coverage is so thorough and diverse in comparison that I haven't regretted the $15 a month it costs.
  reply
• 

  eplnfl

  2 years ago

  I only have FSC, but do have Setanta broadband and see from the Gaffer on match days what Setanta can do. The only real plus for FSC has been the live broadcast on Saturday and Sunday. I'm an earlier riser, so I miss the FSC early match that Setanta now has. The nightly Fox Report is excellent, especially Bobby McMahon. However,the Sky Sports production qualities are the wonderful
  reply
• 

  fsquid

  2 years ago

  I'm digging GolTV right now. I find their commentators to be a breath of fresh air compared to what I've been watching.
  reply
• 

  tyler

  2 years ago

  I watch Setanta almost exclusively now, unless FSC has a more compelling match on the weekend.
  
  
  I will watch the news stuff on FSC.
  
  
  
  I like GOLTV and I think they do a better production job than FSC, but I don't usually plan my day around it.
  
  reply
• 

  Anonymous

  2 years ago

  I can't believe this. The Everton-Villa game had only 3 and a half minute delay from the live broadcast!!!! It usually is 4 to 5 minute delay on FSC. They are getting better. Maybe, Arsenal-Liverpool's delay on FSC will drop down to under 2 minutes...
  God, FSC is awful. Get a hint, amateurs!
  
  reply
• 

  Anonymous

  2 years ago

  i agree but i want to comment on something. sure, these college matches dont compare to the big games of the EPL, but did anyone watch the creighton bradley match for the MVC tourney last night? a fairly exciting (for college soccer) first half and it was 0-0 for much of the game. Then Bradley went up 1-0 with probably 30-35 mins left. Creighton had some good chances but never got the ball in the net. Then the ball went out of bounds deep in Bradelys part of the field with 20 seconds left... now this was exciting. Unlike the prem, the clock really does rule the play..and the seconds were ticking away like the final seconds of a basketball game. Anyway, they finally got the ball in with about 12 seconds...the ball bounced around, the keeper came out to try and knock it away. he missed and it fell to a creighton player with 4 seconds on the clock. with noone in the goal he has a free shot to redirect the ball in the net. it went into overtime and creighton ended up scoring (sudden death) to take the championship and go to the NCAA tourny. Sure, its not a big match...but its american college soccer, with passion and skill, and it REALLY meant something. i was suprisingly entertained and really happy that it was actually on tv. the local connect will always make FSC one of the channels i watch
  reply
• 

  Anonymous

  2 years ago

  1 game of men's college soccer is admirable and that's not the problem w/ FSC. They just don't offer much these days. Their production of the EPL games is a disaster. Maybe Setanta will get all the games next year and put FSC out of their misery. Beginning LIVE games w/ 5 minutes delay and having a retard from the LA studios cut into the commentary is pathetic.
  And no Spanish, German, Italian(3-rd rate games only), or French sootball. No UEFA Cup or Champions League, and they get the crappiest Euro'08 qualifiers. That says it all.
  
  reply
• 

  Anonymous

  2 years ago

  For my part, I have to say I'm totally unimpressed with the Fox Sports World Report. I think those guys are doing a good deed and trying hard, but the I find the level of analysis severely lacking. The only one who really knows his stuff is (non exactly surprisingly) the Scottish guy.
  
  
  On the other hand Sky doesn't add a whole lot, even from an English perspective. They deal with issues at a surface level, as if they're simply pulling headlines from Guardian and putting them to video.
  
  
  
  So where is the American supposed to go for learned commentary on football???
  
  reply
• 

  TrisMegistus

  2 years ago

  I don't know about these comments slagging off FSC. I may not the best guy to write anything in defense of FSC. For one thing, it's my first season as a subscriber so I can't compare it to the past. Number two: I don't have Sentanta.
  
  
  I agree somehat with people who've been having a go at FSW. The anchor’s are more football enthusiasts than experts and Jeremy guy is in such hurry to describe the action that he almost always finishes describing the goals before they’re shown. Amateur stuff.
  
  
  
  But, having said that, and being a European who's lived in the UK, it doesn't really matter where you are; crap commentators are everywhere. Not Marcelo Balboa crap, mind, but still crap). And FSW does have McMahon who is very good. Also, the back and forth banter between all of them can be quite funny (they don’t take themselves seriously at all, which is a huge plus).
  
  
  
  So when you are having a go at the Canadians or the guys in LA, just remember, the grass isn’t much greener on the other side. Commentators and analysts (sports and news) of quality are hard to find.
  
  
  
  Personally I’m perfectly happy with the FSC coverage. I like my English footie, but I don’t want or need my life to be consumed by it. I’d probably watch more games on FSC if they had my team (the Blades) every week or had the quality of ManU or Arsenal more frequently. But I’ve also got a life and I don’t need TV to be better than it is.
  
  
  
  Finally, I find the original source of this criticism (the owner of this blog) to be a bit dubious, since every other week or so, he'll write an editorial about the wonders of Sentanta who are the chief (only?) sponsor of the site and then link to their site. It’s one thing to be beholden to a sponsor, but I t cheapens the value of this site for the reader when he has go at the competition in this manner.
  
  
  
  There is nothing wrong with constructive criticism, but the way this blog in general and this thread in particular is having a go at FSC isn’t constructive and isn’t going to lead to anything good. For one, while Sentanta has a competitor, they will strive to make their programming better and keep it affordable. If FSC folds, you can bet they’ll become more expensive and their service will get worse.
  
  reply
• 

  The Gaffer

  2 years ago

  I have to reply to the following comments made about me:
  
  
  "Finally, I find the original source of this criticism (the owner of this blog) to be a bit dubious, since every other week or so, he'll write an editorial about the wonders of Sentanta who are the chief (only?) sponsor of the site and then link to their site. It’s one thing to be beholden to a sponsor, but I t cheapens the value of this site for the reader when he has go at the competition in this manner.
  
  
  
  There is nothing wrong with constructive criticism, but the way this blog in general and this thread in particular is having a go at FSC isn’t constructive and isn’t going to lead to anything good. For one, while Sentanta has a competitor, they will strive to make their programming better and keep it affordable. If FSC folds, you can bet they’ll become more expensive and their service will get worse."
  
  
  
  Setanta is not a sponsor/advertiser of this site. As explained previously, I have an affiliate marketing relationship with ITVN only.
  
  
  
  I, by no means, am intent on bashing Fox at any given opportunity. Instead, I offer fair criticism, and I've been knowm to criticize Setanta on this blog when they make mistakes.
  
  
  
  For a positive FSC blog posting, read this posting about two fantastic matches that are coming soon to Fox.
  
  
  
  Cheers,
  
  The Gaffer
  
  reply