The football-loving public evidently felt cheated by decisions made by Melita and PBS that meant many missed the match between Germany and England on their television screens. But that was not the only instance when fans of the beautiful game could show the yellow card.

A debate started by Nationalist MP David Agius about TV football coverage and now before the Social Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives raises many issues that need to be addressed and decided upon logically and fairly in the best interest of both consumers and service providers. Ironically, a rare bipartisan stand to protect viewers' rights to watch their favourite sports without having to incur unnecessary expenses contrasts sharply with the diametrically opposed stand adopted by Melita and Go.

Mr Agius is arguing that football fans should not have to pay two subscriptions to be able to watch all Italian and English football. He insists the consumer should have the right to choose and that the decision should be based on such factors as service and reliability.

That argument can hardly be faulted. The consumer ought to reign supreme but, this being a commercial venture, the rules of the game must be allowed to prevail. Service providers invest in infrastructure, resources and rights in order to be able to compete and attract customers. The laggards and/or those who wait in the wings hoping to ride piggy-back, now or in the future, on successful business cannot be rewarded.

These are essential aspects of the matter the Social Affairs Committee will surely take into account when it meets again to continue discussing the issue.

It needs to bear in mind whether it is suitable to insist on changing the rules of the games when certain commitments have already been made, what will be the consequences of the wholesale and sharing of rights on the bidding stage, whether, after football, claims to share in other features, like, say, films or other sport disciplines, could also be made.

If there are fears of the service providers acting as a cartel - committee chairman Edward Vassallo accused Melita and Go of being "a cartel undefined" - then the regulator should be brought in to investigate and take all the necessary remedial action it is empowered to take by law.

It would not be unwise for the committee to keep insisting that both service providers reach a settlement that would enable viewers to have access to all important football matches without incurring extra expenses. There is no harm in the committee keeping tabs on developments and expose inflexibility and sheer arrogance. Both service providers have a lot to answer for in terms of poor customer service. While it is understandable that the Malta Communications Authority, as the regulator of these private businesses, would not want to interfere in commercial decisions, in a small market like Malta the common interest of consumers cannot be ignored because of the intransigence of operators.

There is a delicate balance to strike: the profitability of the businesses involved and viewers' rights. This must happen on a level playing field, within the rules of the games and without shifting the goal posts or stretching the goal line.