TV-RIGHTS: EDDIE MCGUIRE

[James2]

Earlier this year, Eddie McGuire was one of the leaders in a campaign aimed at downgrading Ron Evans's role as Chairman of the AFL Commission.

The basis for this, was that Ron Evans had a conflict of interest- which he did and still does.

People who supported Evans, asserted that McGuire, himself, had a conflict of interest regarding a company he has shares in, designing the Collingwood website. Eddie protested his innocence, informing the public that he stood aside, while the negotiations were taking place.

You may wonder where this is going to..

I quote from the front-page story in the Herald-Sun regarding the TV-Rights War:

"Newman's colleague MCGUIRE IS A KEY PLAYER IN THE RIGHTS NEGOTIATIONS, which also involve corporate giants Telstra and News Ltd..."

Quite obviously he (McGuire) was going to have a conflict of interest over the TV rights issue. Yet he has "allowed" himself to become a key player in the negotiations.

This may seem a futile question, but why is he doing exactly what he crucified Evans for earlier this year????

If Eddie Inc were a public company, I've no doubt that channel nine being awarded the rights to broadcast the AFL, would set of a red light in the offices of the ASIC.

 

[lioness]

As far as I'm concerned, Eddie McGuire hosting the Footy Show is a conflict of interest even. And it's nothing personal or against Collingwood or anything, I would feel the same if it was any club president. Look at how much airtime the Pies get on that show now, at the expense of other important footy stories, or teams. And it's always positive, like if someone leaves the Pies, they are never mentioned again. And to do the same to Ron Evans, like you said, James2, is wrong. Very wrong.

 

[Crow54]

Funny letter in our local paper today saying: "The best thing about 9 getting the footy tv rights is that we'll lose Bruce McAveney. The worst thing is we'll get Eddie Maguire!"

I agree with the 2nd sentence, but I've always quite liked Bruce, and will miss him if 9 does get the rights. Eddie's head will get so big, he won't be able to fit in the commentary box.

 

[Pessimistic]

I quite like Eddie except when he's 'Mr Collingwood' when he becomes repetitive.

But since he became Mr Collingwood he has consistantly defended anyone with a conflict of interest (eg the Richard Coless in sydney) - almost like he thinks it makes his own position better. I'm not sure if he actually did attack ron evans, probably reported it, as he would have to.

 

[CJH]

It is no surprise that Bruce McAveney is not being courted by Channel 9 despite being the doyen of AFL TV commentators.

The reason for this is obvious enough - If Bruce went to Channel 9 he would automatically be the senior personality and commentator which would not please Eddie one little bit.

This town ain't big enough for the both of us!

------------------
This is a hallucination and these faces are in a dream. A computer generated environment; a fantasy island you can do anything and not have to face the consequences.

 

[Arch]

james- in what capacity is Eddie a "key player" in the negotiations ?????

Is it on behalf of channel 9, or sportsview (or collingwood) ???

Coz 'ed has his ugly little beak in so many troughs its a definite worry.

A.

 

[James2]

Pess,

You're right. Eddie didn't "attack" Ron Evans; he did however, actively support the campaign to downgrade his role on the commission, on the basis that he had/has a conflict of interest. In my opinion, this deminishes his credibility, regardless of his position on other conflicts of interest.

Arch,

In the Hun today, Eddie the spindoctor was out in force.

Quoting from the story on page 5:

"He said he had continued program discussions with Nine executives, but wasn't involved in dealings with the AFL.
He also denied his roles at Collingwood and Nine and his shareholding in Sportsview put him in conflict with the TV rights and Internet battle."

Firslty, you can read into the statement "he has had continued program discussions with Nine executives," to mean that he is involved with the nine/ten/foxtel bid in some way. His contention that because he is not negotiating directly with the AFL, makes his involvement in the nine bid acceptable, is rubbish.

He is also the President of the Collingwood Football Club. At the latest meeting between the AFL and the club presidents, where TV rights were discussed, did Ed excuse himself? Unlikely. He claimed there was no conflict of interest because the AFL was acting on behalf of all clubs, therefore all clubs would benefit. Unfotunately, Ed forgot to mention, that nine getting the rights would materialy benefit HIM in the form of a FATTER contract, allowing him to add three stories to his house in Toorak. Not to mention the indirect benefit to the Collingwood Football Club.

Further, the fact that he is answering questions regarding the issue, adds to the perception that he has a conflict of interest. He should have no answers, because he should know nothing, because he should not be involved in the issue whatever!!!

 

[Shinboners]

More conflicts of interest....today's article in the Herald-Sun by Mike Sheahan. He was defending the rights of channel 7. Which would be fine except that Channel 7 is one of his employers. From the opening line which reads, "A media heavyweight confided earlier this year...."....where are the names Mike? Where at the numbers to support your argument Mike? Where is your business background to support your hypothesis Mike? And where is the statement at the end of your article stating that you are employed by Channel 7, Mike? Any journalistic independence Mike? Or just another sell out like the hatchet job you did on Fitzroy, hey Mike?

 

[CJH]

Yep Shinners,

I read that article this morning, but could not take it seriously because of the bias that would come from Seven being his employer.

Ultimately, whatever he writes is irrelevant as the AFL won't be looking at him as a source of consultation. The TV rights will ulitmately be decided with who has the best offer and not what Uncle Mike writes!

------------------
This is a hallucination and these faces are in a dream. A computer generated environment; a fantasy island you can do anything and not have to face the consequences.

 

[fighting fury]

I agree with lioness22. If Eddie Mcquire had his way, his whole show would be based on Collingwood. I got sick of the rubbish from the Footy Show. Eddie's wabbling head annoyed me. Who needs that!

------------------
Welcome to the jungle

 

[Same Old's]

At least if 9 got the rights we wouldn't have to listen to Dipper trying to speak English.

 

[ptw]

I agree with the TV rights issue and Eddie's conflict of interest.

I disagree that he has a conflict of interest on the footy show. The footy show is a commercial entity, they can have as many conflicts of interests as they like. They only plug sponsors products even though they might be crap, which if you are the ABC is wrong, if you are Nine it is business.

If the footy show becomes (or has become) the Collingwood show then no-one else will watch and it will fail, either way it is their show, it is their call.

Its only when when we assume commercial organisations will 7 & 9 to act impartially that we get disappointed. They will do what they have to do to make a buck. Personally I am comfortable with that, it is why they are there...anyway I prefer the ABC !!

p.s. If 9 get the rights then they get Dwane (?) Russell. I like him. I still remember his quote in the 1998 GF:

"North runner struts out to Peter Bell...."hey....you....get off of McLoed"

ptw

 

[lioness]

ptw, in a way I agree with you about the Footy Show, they can do what they like, but it IS called the FOOTY show not 'Eddie's Collingwood rants' you know??? Anyway I think it's crap, I prefer the one on seven

hehehehe

[This message has been edited by lioness22 (edited 16 November 2000).]

 

[Same Old's]

Originally posted by ptw:
I disagree that he has a conflict of interest on the footy show. The footy show is a commercial entity, they can have as many conflicts of interests as they like. They only plug sponsors products even though they might be crap, which if you are the ABC is wrong, if you are Nine it is business.
ptw

To further what you say, When your listing to "Triple M Eddie" plugs Ford. Then when he is on the "Footy Show" he plugs Holden.

I always laugh when that happens.

[This message has been edited by Same Old's (edited 17 November 2000).]

 

[teddy3]

I cannot stand Eddie Maguire, he is the lowest form of scum and I am sick to death of seeing his head everybloodywhere!!!!!

 

[bruce rules]

Crow54 whoever wrote that nickname is an ABSOLUTE DISGRACE! Bruce McAveney is a king. Eddie McGuire is the crappiest commentator going around (except possibly for Drew Mrophett- and Sandy when he always says 'What a grand player such and such is!' He did that about 20 times in his Anzac Day commentary.
ANwyay if the rights go to channel 9 it'll be a massive waste of a genuine talent. Bruce infuses his own excitement and passion for footy, and for sport in general, in a way that no one else can, especially no-one at channel nine. Who the hell would od the commentary if 9 got it by the way? Ray Warren? Or the great fat chin himself? Kicking BRuce of AFL commentating would be in the same league as kicking Souths out of the NRL (well maybe not, but close)

 

[bruce rules]

oh yeah Crows54 I meant whoever wrote that letter
I kinda like your nickname

 

[Crow54]

Thank you Bruce, I must admit I read your first post twice, wondering what you were going on about....then I saw your second message

)

Everyone here in Adelaide is dreading the thought of Nine getting the rights, we can't stand the thought of Eddie's big head appearing more than it does now. At least if the games are shown live we will be able to turn down the volume and listen to 5AA.

 

[CJH]

Gee Crows54 I don't know what would be worse, listening to Eddie on the telly or 5AA.

On the few times I've listened to them when relayed through 3AW they have been biabolical. The don't commentate as much as barrack.

------------------
This is a hallucination and these faces are in a dream. A computer generated environment; a fantasy island you can do anything and not have to face the consequences.

 

[Frodo]

Eddie is great on 'who wants to be a milionaire' and should stay there.
Bruce is a politician and politely biased commentator that is terrible but is far better than Sandy and Dennis Confetti.

When, oh when will we see a little box telling us who is coming on and off. Not hi tech just CAREY OFF BELL ON

 

[Crow54]

CJH, wouldn't say they were biabolical, he he. Except when they commentate Port Power games. Then I can't listen to them. When they call Crows games I prefer to hear their commentary compared to the biased Vic callers on TV.

 

[Max Power]

Not sure what it all meant, but Today Tonight on 7 got stuck into Eddie last week for some reason.

Maybe they already know they've lost the AFL rights and are trying the old Frontline tactic if things don't go your way attack the winner.

Was a strange call to run a story like that either way.

------------------

Want to rant off about the AFL? Feature writers needed for a Internet startup site. No experience necessary. Open to BigFooty contributors only for a limited time.
http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/Forum6/HTML/000038.html

 

[Denno]

I agree teddy3.

 

[Joel]

Some of the exaggerations from people on this board are pathetic. Get a life already! Does it really matter that Bruce has an orgasm over footy players, or if someone else is commentating? Just watch the football and STOP whinging. Its a free country and Eddie is free to do what he pleases. If what he does on the footy show annoys you then DON'T watch and I don't even think it is that bad...I think the culprit is Sam Newman, (closet supporter). Oh and I HATE it when seven gets jealous, they start running all their smear campaigns during shows like Yesterday and Always the same. -ie. calling nine cheque book journos and all that stuff.