Why do you make up fluff I never said, then correct it as if your assumptions some how create ignorance in me?

I never said (or implied) that Europe was a country. I'm certainly aware that there isn't an overarching public broadcast channel (that's why I used the plural form in referring to "networks").

It's not like it takes a lot of research to demonstrate my point though, just read the fluffing wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/...sh_football_on_television

BBC (a public network) started broadcasting matches in 1937. As the popularity of television increased, and the technology to do it became more feasible -- they started broadcasting more matches. Everything there fits into my narrative pretty well.

I'm not going to go through every country in Europe for you, but the situation is even more pronounced in Italy. RAI has been the largest broadcaster there since the 1920s. It became an entirely public network in 1954. The same day that this happened, they also launched La Domenica Sportiva -- a football show.


Again, complete bullfluff.

My claim was that traditional money streams are problematic with football, but that such issues would be less important to a public broadcaster.

I never made any statements as to whether or not specific networks (or all networks at a specific time) lost money by broadcasting football.

-Fooglmog
Guy with no clue.