For those of you who didn't know this already, "Football" in England is soccer. Makes sense right? The players hit the ball with their actual feet. Why Americans thought to call a sport played primarily with hands "football" is beyond me.
This whole football confusion has made many Brits quite critical of our most televised sporting event of the year. They just don't like it like they do their own football or rugby, and this was made clear to me through the BBC's lack of coverage of the 2013 Super Bowl.
I was not surprised to find a picture of the Ravens running the ball on the BBC's home-screen slideshow, because they tend to be consistent with targeting their audience with worldwide news coverage. When I clicked the article though, I was disappointed by its central focus. It gave me a brief overview of the entire night – which included blurbs about Beyonce's performance and the power outage – but failed to go into detail about the happenings of the game. Seeing as I only watched the first half, I would have liked a little more detail to take me through the dramatical third quarter. There was no video coverage, no virtual scoreboard, and only two articles. One pre game article and one post. I wish the BBC would have provided more for their American audience, especially those living in the UK who could not watch the game live.
This whole football confusion has made many Brits quite critical of our most televised sporting event of the year. They just don't like it like they do their own football or rugby, and this was made clear to me through the BBC's lack of coverage of the 2013 Super Bowl.
I was not surprised to find a picture of the Ravens running the ball on the BBC's home-screen slideshow, because they tend to be consistent with targeting their audience with worldwide news coverage. When I clicked the article though, I was disappointed by its central focus. It gave me a brief overview of the entire night – which included blurbs about Beyonce's performance and the power outage – but failed to go into detail about the happenings of the game. Seeing as I only watched the first half, I would have liked a little more detail to take me through the dramatical third quarter. There was no video coverage, no virtual scoreboard, and only two articles. One pre game article and one post. I wish the BBC would have provided more for their American audience, especially those living in the UK who could not watch the game live.
Coverage of the Superbowl XVLII was easily accessible on the BBC's home-screen slideshow.
I later found that their coverage was done right by most British people, or at least those willing to speak out. I got a good laugh from angry media consumers who argued the BBC shouldn't bother with covering American sports. I guess they must still be bitter about the whole football vs. soccer argument. But again, they do make a good point. What is the reasoning behind calling the winning team World Champions?
Reader comments from the BBC's coverage of American football.
RSS Feed