Media Thread - 2021/22

[coolcity]

This means more. I like that, it's catchy.

I prefer "Not in my lifetime", personally.

 

[NMB]

I notice that net spend over the last 4 years is City £221million, Liverpool £269 million. My guess is that rather than make the 5 year comparisons that the media do now, they will revert to “since the takeover total spend” next year when the Coutinhio effect drops off

 

[coolcity]

Another gripe I have is that whenever anyone is talking about teams like united and Chelsea becoming a force again, they almost without exception say (in this exact order) that they are years away from getting close to "Liverpool and City". Why is it always that order? One team has won 6 of the last 10 (and 4 of the last 5) Premier League titles and one has won one.

And united were 2nd last year.

 

[eastmanc]

I prefer "Not in my lifetime", personally.

Another cracker added to the collection.

 

[The perfect fumble]

I prefer "Not in my lifetime", personally.

"There’s little joy in life for me,
And little terror in the grave;
I‘ve lived the parting hour to see
Of one I would have died to save."

 

[coolcity]

Exactly this and it will be the American owned clubs that drive the switch to PPV on their own channels and it's coming soon. Why SKY can't see this is strange (or maybe they can and just don't know what to do about it?). If they became more neutral, fair, balanced and objective with their football coverage and made the subscription charges affordable then everyone would benefit. With SKY blowing smoke up the backsides of the American owned clubs and aggressively promoting them above all others it does seem like turkeys voting for Christmas.

The whole thing is a complete farce anyway. I can watch City v Brighton (for example) live if I live in Hong Kong but not if I live in England, if Sky, BT, Amazon or whoever else is in on the act don't have it on their list?

That's why I had to laugh at the FA supposedly getting behind the "people's game" stance when the Euro Super League was announced, yet all they've done is sell the game to the highest bidder, and the clubs - and fans - get little or no say in it. What's the difference?

Government are totally out of touch too, I remember some stupid cow from Ofcom raving about how great it was for fans that "we now have a choice" when they announced that BT were also going to show matches. totally oblivious to the fact that the choice was either pay for an extra platform (with still no guarantee that your match is going to be on); or miss out.

PPV for your own club makes far more sense whoever broadcasts it. Why would I want to pay for a service to watch some other random match when my own team is playing?

 

[mat]

The whole thing is a complete farce anyway. I can watch City v Brighton (for example) live if I live in Hong Kong but not if I live in England, if Sky, BT, Amazon or whoever else is in on the act don't have it on their list?

That's why I had to laugh at the FA supposedly getting behind the "people's game" stance when the Euro Super League was announced, yet all they've done is sell the game to the highest bidder, and the clubs - and fans - get little or no say in it. What's the difference?

Government are totally out of touch too, I remember some stupid cow from Ofcom raving about how great it was for fans that "we now have a choice" when they announced that BT were also going to show matches. totally oblivious to the fact that the choice was either pay for an extra platform (with still no guarantee that your match is going to be on); or miss out.

PPV for your own club makes far more sense whoever broadcasts it. Why would I want to pay for a service to watch some other random match when my own team is playing?

The issue with PPV is it will increase the income of the big boys.

 

[Moss Side's Finest]

hehe

Lol, it actually happened, the poor BBC have had to apologise

https://www.sportbible.com/football/bbc-apologise-after-manchester-united-are-rubbish-gaff-20220524

 

[mexico1970]

The whole thing is a complete farce anyway. I can watch City v Brighton (for example) live if I live in Hong Kong but not if I live in England, if Sky, BT, Amazon or whoever else is in on the act don't have it on their list?

That's why I had to laugh at the FA supposedly getting behind the "people's game" stance when the Euro Super League was announced, yet all they've done is sell the game to the highest bidder, and the clubs - and fans - get little or no say in it. What's the difference?

Government are totally out of touch too, I remember some stupid cow from Ofcom raving about how great it was for fans that "we now have a choice" when they announced that BT were also going to show matches. totally oblivious to the fact that the choice was either pay for an extra platform (with still no guarantee that your match is going to be on); or miss out.

PPV for your own club makes far more sense whoever broadcasts it. Why would I want to pay for a service to watch some other random match when my own team is playing?

PPV for your own club would in effect just support the clubs that are already big, it's why the media are suck cock suckers to the red tops right now.

The 3 o'clock kick offs should be shown and the money distributed evenly between PL clubs.

 

[coolcity]

The issue with PPV is it will increase the income of the big boys.

Of course! There's no such thing as a perfect system. But that's the same with any business, and it's one of the few sports where the smaller clubs get a financial cut of proceeds.

If it's "about the fans" why are we in a position where we have to pay at least two broadcasters for a chance to watch our team? That's not a better system. I know there are "alternatives" and I have my own, but that's not the point.