Fair enough

I expected Friday night games to eventually be added to the packages anyway, although didn't expect it to happen quite so soon. I thought that the PL would probably stick with the packages they had previously given that they were already a money-spinner, and would wait until such a time that the value of the rights was plateauing before introducing a new timeslot. Obviously adjusting the packages to suit the new landscape has helped make them even more money in the most recent auction.

I can see Fri night games becoming prominent at some point, but it could be a while off yet. It wouldn't be good for rugby (as per Gray77's post), it wouldn't be good for matchgoing fans, and it wouldn't be good for the FL (as per Stevvy's post). But such games would hold some value, and therefore it's perfectly reasonable that the PL would want to introduce them sometime. And as you mention it also has the potential to benefit CL teams. I realise catering for the big business of the PL at the expense of the parties listed above may not be popular, but ultimately it's the purse that the PL are interested in, no matter what they try and say publicly.

On the flip side, as the number of live games increases more and more, the quality of the games being added deteriorates. If we see any more added then we're just looking at more fifth picks, and possibly even sixth picks. How valuable are such games? It's the old argument of quality vs quantity, and depends hugely upon how the PL chooses to distribute such games in the packages.

Yes, this is a very good point.

As already noted, the PL wouldn't be bothered about other sports but it's still a very interesting point in terms of the overall sports broadcasting landscape.

In particular, if we were to see many more live PL games filling many more different timeslots it could well have an impact on the value of other TV sports rights.

eg Hypothetically if Sky knew they had live PL football every Friday night would they be willing to pay so much for Super League? Probably not.

OK, we've not anywhere nearly reached that situation yet - this contract only has 14 more live TV games. But even so, the number is edging up and one could easily imagine it edging up further for 2019/22 - note that OFCOM still hasn't ruled on the VM complaint re the auction process - it's possible they could insist on more live games next time.

Fortunately super league agreed a contract to 2021!

Back to week three, I think it may be that hull v Manu is a bt second pick. Until we get boxing day and new year bank holiday picks, it will be impossible to be sure where man city game goes to as well, as that could be from bank hol pack

Personally I'm not a big fan of Friday night football, I think it should only be used as an overflow slot, but that's because I'll often be at rugby, or watching it

Remember though there will only be a total of 8 Friday night Prem games over the whole season

There are 28 Game in the Package

UP TO 10 can be on a Friday

I read that as 10 maximum and 0 minimum

8/10 fair enough no matter. My point being that throughout this thread some people getting upset/annoyed/unhappy about friday night games when in reality it's a very small number.

It wouldn't surprise me, though, if this contract is testing the water for Friday night being at least a semi-regular slot from 2019/20 onwards.

It's proven popular with fans in Scotland as an alternative to Sunday or early Saturday.

If it's 10 then it's ten out of 33 weekend rounds, 32 excluding final day. Close to one in three weekends

On a smaller scale alot of Rugby League clubs moved from Sunday afternoons to Friday evenings when Sky started scheduling games on that night. RL clubs get alot more corporate revenue on Friday nights, and it didn't take long for Friday night to become the norm. As a RL fan it become normal to go to the game on a Friday, have a few beers before and after the game and then know I still had my weekend ahead of me.

PL clubs have less issues regarding bringing in the corporate money and I also don't think clubs will ever wish to move their base kick off times (before TV changes) from Sat 3pm, but I'm pretty confident that ratings will be high for the Friday night games this season and there'll be alot more of them in the next deal. Pubs will love these games, the newspaper and other media industries will love having another day in which to cover PL games, and the PL will have another evening when it dominates the landscape.

As I said in an earlier post, I worry about what it will do to lesser sports who have purposefully moved away from the traditional Sat-Sun model to avoid competing with the PL. Wherever they go, the PL soon moves on to its turf.

Some thoughts:

1. I'm fairly confident that each week is picked sequentially (rather than 6 first picks, followed by 6 second picks and so on). First picks drive the value of the rights and forcing a broadcaster to make them with minimal information seems sub-optimal.

2. A key factor that guides the early season picks is Sky only being able to show one game featuring CL sides on weeks that precede a European round (group stage draw is August 26).

The Friday night option introduced this cycle hasn't helped at all so far this season as matchday 1 is preceded by international qualifiers (thus Sky lose Liverpool v Leicester after taking the Manchester Derby) and Man Utd v Leicester (PL6) couldn't be moved to Friday as matchday 2 means that Man Utd (Europa) have to play on Sunday the preceding week (PL5) which will mandate a Wednesday fixture in the League Cup.

3. This is part of the reason that Sky passed Arsenal v Chelsea (a marquee fixture for BT amongst an otherwise middling opening slate) rather than attempting an early season 'strangle'. The following few weeks dictate no real CL/EL restrictions so by sacrificing this game they avoid gifting BT an attractive match and have one less pass to make later on.

4. I'm fairly certain that Hull v Man Utd in week 3 is a BT first pick. Remember that Sky have to make 15 passes in 33 weekend rounds, BT needed a Man Utd game (missed 1 and 2, weren't getting 4) and we all know that Sky will likely be attempting a Tottenham squeeze (so wouldn't use a de facto 1st pick on their game versus Liverpool).

5. It would make sense for the picking protocols to have been tightened up. I think the only 'pick swapping' option may be to use a 4th pick as a 5th pick on weekends where no 5th pick is used (otherwise there would have to be 4 televised games on the final day). I'm guessing use of picks 1-3 is compulsory with packages F and G having restrictions on their weekend games (F's 2nds only available once per 'batch') in order to temper forced usage.

6. So by my count Sky have passed 3 times (2, 3, 6) and i'll predict that they will have marked in pencil to cede first pick control for the weekends falling on the following Saturdays; Oct 1st, Oct 29th, Nov 1st, Nov 26th, Dec 3rd, Dec 10th, Dec 17th, Jan 21st, Feb 4th, Feb 11th, Mar 4th, Mar 11th, Mar 18th, April 1st, April 8th, April 22nd (of those 16 they'll have to pass 12).

I've put the very likely passes (8) in italics meaning that 4 of the remaining 8 will be offered to BT based on results (with scheduling of other major events being a secondary factor).

I suppose the question is why shouldn't fans of top flight football teams be able to enjoy the same experience once in a while?

As others have said, it's not for the Premier League to try and keep other sports alive by not going up against them.

The "turf" belongs to nobody

The only concerns the PL have are their member clubs' best interests.

If other sports are affected by a single televised PL game then they need to get their own houses in order and look at better ways of attracting people to their live experience.

You're suggesting that Rugby League, a sport played in the main in medium sized towns in the North of England, with almost zero representation or support from a hostile London centric media, is capable of simply 'getting it's house in order' to fight off PL games.

I will await the 8 page RL pull outs in The Times and Guardian, the main headline on the BBC Sport website being about RL, etc, etc. Seriously, the PL tramples everything in it's path, including far bigger entities such as Test cricket.

I have no issue with the PL doing whatever it wants, but I'm also free to describe how that attitude will have a negative affect on other sports. I am also completely aware that someone sat in Ireland who doesn't care about other English sports doesn't see the issue, that's fine. I am a fan of American football and had no idea why high schools complained about NCAA putting college games on Friday nights. Had I lived there and seen the issues up close I would have altered my opinion.

Interesting post, thank you. Here are my thoughts:

1. The general consensus on here has been that first picks get declared before any picks get made. There have been a number of examples of this, but I still think the first set of picks in 2013-14 provides the best example. Here are Man Utd's opening nine fixtures of that season, along with what Sky and BT did:

1. Swansea v Man Utd - Sky first pick
2. Man Utd v Chelsea - Sky first pick
3. Liverpool v Man Utd - Sky first pick
4. Man Utd v Crystal Palace - BT first pick
5. Man City v Man Utd - Sky first pick
6. Man Utd v West Brom - BT first pick used on Spurs v Chelsea
7. Sunderland v Man Utd - Sky first pick
8. Man Utd v Southampton - BT first pick used on Newcastle v Liverpool
9. Man Utd v Stoke - not selected for TV

Sky were described as having implemented a "strangle at birth" approach to BT which included taking first pick in Week 1 to secure David Moyes's first game in charge of Man Utd. What was surprising, however, was Sky's decision to take first pick in Week 7 when there wasn't really a stand out game. The thinking is that this forced BT into using first pick in Week 4 on Man Utd v Crystal Palace rather than the better looking Everton v Chelsea, Stoke v Man City or Sunderland v Arsenal. Had BT not taken Man Utd in Week 4, they would not get them until Week 9 (26 October). It seems to me that it is eminently sensible to have Sky (and now BT) declare their pick options before selecting fixtures. What is not clear (and unlikely to ever be clear), is the order thereafter. Do they declare first picks then make them? Or do they declare first picks, second picks etc, then make them?

2. Your observation about Man Utd playing Sunday-Wednesday before Week 6 ruling out a Friday night clash with Leicester is a very good one. I had wondered if Sky might go for Middlesbrough v Spurs as a Friday night game in Week 6, and thus requiring both teams to play on the Tuesday in the League Cup (should Boro still be in it). That they didn't doesn't mean that they are averse to making such a selection, but it's certainly something to keep an eye on for the Week 10 picks.

3. Agreed - Week 6 was an obvious pass for Sky.

4. I suppose it depends on how early BT needed a Man Utd game. Given that Liverpool are not in Europe I'd have thought it was more pressing to show them early (though I have speculated that they new they'd get Liverpool v Leicester in Week 4 if Sky could not use the Friday slot following internationals). I think BT could have been confident of getting either Hull v Man Utd in Week 3 or Watford v Man Utd in Week 5. But even if they didn't, I think it's unlikely that Sky would have also shown Man Utd v Southampton in Week 2. I reckon if that had been available BT would have been well within in their right to take that in Package F and put in the Sunday 12:00 slot. I take the view that Sky would have planned to pass second pick to BT in either Week 2 or 3 safe in the knowledge that BT would take Man Utd. With the Watford v Man Utd game looking like a Package F game, the proof will probably come with the midweek picks. If BT don't pick Crystal Palace v Man Utd in Week 16, I think it's highly likely that BT have selected Man Utd in Package F twice.

5. I think we know that if a slot is available, then Sky or BT can fill it with a game from a package with games allocated to that slot even if the pick is made out of turn. It's why I think Man City v Sunderland is a third pick. If Sky had taken picks 1 to 4, if I were BT I would have gone for Everton v Spurs in Package F. That it would turn a fourth pick into a fifth picks doesn't really matter. In terms of restrictions on passing to Packages F and G, that's something to keep an eye on. If I was Sky or BT I would be passing to those packages as much as possible. I reckon BT can't pass third pick to Package G if Sky have taken first and second picks in Package D and C respectively and thus occupied the Sunday 13:30 and 16:00 slots (possibly applicable to Week 1). In my simulation I had Sky using five of their weekend third picks in Package G before Christmas. If Sky go into the Bank Holiday picks with a number of outstanding weekend Package G games, they may be forced into picking teams in both bank holiday rounds (not just Spurs) just to ensure that they get their fill of the big teams.

6. Interesting that you haven't suggested Liverpool v Man City on December 31 as a possible pass for Sky. I suppose it comes down to whether Sky want to claim Christmas as their's. If I had to make a prediction I'll go for the following weeks with the italics indicating Sky returning the pass: 7, 10, 11, 13, 15, 22, 25, 27, 28, 29, 32, 34. BT might consider ditching a Spurs game if they think it's worth having a Spurs game in reserve and/or they want first pick in Week 34.

Quite a lot of assumptions being made about me personally there...

Anyway, it appears you are free to express an opinion but others aren't?

As I said, if a single televised PL game impacts RL or any other sport so negatively then the issue is patently not with the PL.

The media - whereever they originate - will follow the stories that sells their papers.

.........

It's never really made sense to me that 1st picks would be made in blocks - it just seems far more logical to me that each week is done in full, in turn.

I appreciate all the detailed work done on here re explaining picks etc but my ultimate feeling on all of this is that there are just too many uncertainties - we'll never know absolutely for 100% sure whether the Sunderland v Man Utd game (discussed above) or the Stoke v Liverpool game (often also discussed as an unexpected 1st pick) really were 1st picks or not.

So I don't think those examples can be used to explain how the picking process works with any degree of certainty.

I would come back to first principles - it has always seemed to me that it's just far more simple and logical for the whole thing to be done week by week.

I think we do know that Sunderland v Man Utd was a first pick - BT said after the first set of picks:

"We have only used five of our top picks, which means that BT Sport will have another 13 throughout the remainder of the season."

And I believe those five first picks were:

Man Utd v Crystal Palace
Tottenham v Chelsea
Newcastle v Liverpool
Everton v Liverpool
Tottenham v Man Utd

And not Man City v Everton in Week 7. Perhaps BT took Man Utd v Crystal Palace just to get Man Utd asap - and in 2014-15 we think BT even took two of Man Utd's first three games in 2014-15 as there was a danger they might show just one of Man Utd's first 10 games (Week 1 v Swansea).

No offence was intended, and I don't recall ever stopping you from expressing your opinion, not that I'd have the power to do so anyway. I will admit I have made some.presumptions about you which I had no right to make, which on a forum is not cool. Point made.

Thank you for that, no offence taken

We have a reason why there is no 1230 game chosen on Sat Sep 17th

Sky have just selected Cardiff v Leeds to show in the EFL

I think they realised it was never going to be allowed to kick off on a Saturday night !!!

Also September 11, Villa v Forest at 1.15pm, which is the reason for a Single Super Sunday

That's no reason not to choose a Premier League match as well, Cardiff vs Leeds could happily have been played at noon on Sunday.