An official complaint to the BBC regarding Match of the Day 2

Let it be known I have nothing against these brave Fulham fans.

Let it be known I have absolutely nothing against these brave Fulham fans.

I’m not usually one to complain (at least not officially), but regarding the BBC’s coverage of yesterday’s Wigan-Fulham match I thought “why the heck not?” It couldn’t hurt, could it? Well, at least I’ve never heard of anybody being tracked down and beaten by Huw Edwards with a leather belt as a result of a complaint.

After reading a piece over at VitalLatics by Worbo, my grumbling juices began to flow and I guess you could say it was that article that pushed me over the edge and compelled me to vent my spleen here at JWAW. I wasn’t gonna, but, y’know, it seemed a good idea at the time.

This ‘rant’, if you will, is almost entirely prompted by the aforementioned. The following ‘moaning old codger’-style attack is the result of twenty minutes’ spare time and a grudge against a general top-four bias in the modern media.

I thought it turned out alright for a poorly proofread spur-of-the-moment gripefest, so I decided to kill two Alan Hansens with one Alan Shearer and turn it into a proper complaint as well as a blog entry. As with most of my posts, please don’t take the whole thing entirely seriously, as although I make one or two good points I’ve embellished them with hyperbole just a touch.

Category: Factual error or inaccuracy (bordering on Bias)

Summary of complaint: Misleading editing regarding attendance at Wigan-Fulham match

Full detail:

During Sunday’s broadcast of MOTD2, a commentator made the point that the Wigan v Fulham match had the lowest attendance of the current Premier League season whilst panning across the Fulham (away) end of the ground, completely failing to notice the other three (home) ends which were almost full.

This editing implied Wigan Athletic have poor support when in actual fact the attendance was very good for a match held on not just a Sunday, but Remembrance Sunday at a time that clashed with Sky’s coverage of the Chelsea-Man United top-of-the-table match. This is a complete discredit to the club who are doing everything in their power to promote Wigan Athletic and have introduced some excellent ticket promotions, spending an awful lot of money revamping their marketing effort this season.

A simple ‘this is the Fulham end’ or ’150 hardy souls braved the cold to make the 200-mile trip north’ would have avoided this situation, but I am sad to say sensationalism won out in this instance. If this was not meant then I apologise, but there is no escaping the fact the club was portrayed in a negative light.

Furthermore it is my wish for MOTD to, in future, order games by how entertaining they are and not by how many people watch the individual clubs, which effectively amounts to bias. I understand this complaint is unlikely to have any effect on your broadcasting whatsoever and am aware that satisfying a fan base is important, but the fact still remains that sides such as Wigan have played some very entertaining football this season but have always, without fail, been relegated to the last and second last game on the broadcast.

I, for one, am a lot more interested in the bottom of the table clashes that finish 3-2 than some boring non-contest in which Man United beat Tottenham 4-0 yet again.

No matter what club you support, if you share any of these views, then I urge you to complain by clicking here. Or not, if you don’t really feel like it – it’s up to you.

Once again, apologies for the clumsy grammar, which I have rectified somewhat in this reproduction of the original complaint.

Share with friends.... and enemies ;)
Comments
  1. Ken Harvey |
  2. Adam |
  3. hindleyite |
  4. karen thompson |
  5. hindleyite |
  6. mrBlueUnion |

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Are you a tin of salty branded luncheon meat? *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>