won't be long till the day comes when there won't by a 3pm kick off on a full weekend of premier league fixtures

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/e...rem/6980091.stm

Sky has ruined football.

Sky has ruined football.

 

bollocks

bollocks

How any football supporter that actually goes to matches can argue is beyond me.

its has changed football undoubtedly, some good, some bad but in no way has sky ruined football!

 

without sky, bwfc would be languishing in the lower reaches of english football, we would never have signed djorkaeff, okocha or anelka. nor would we ever have made it into europe.

 

and im pretty sure that without sky money, once west ham were relegated, it would be MUCH more difficult for them to get back in the premier league.

Edited September 5, 200718 yr by HomerJay

its has changed football undoubtedly, some good, some bad but in no way has sky ruined football!

 

without sky, bwfc would be languishing in the lower reaches of english football, we would never have signed djorkaeff, okocha or anelka. nor would we ever have made it into europe.

 

and im pretty sure that without sky money, once west ham were relegated, it would be MUCH more difficult for them to get back in the premier league.

Which highlights exactly the difference between you and I and why we go to football matches. You obviously go to watch Bolton win games. I don't watch West Ham to win games.

 

If you're happy travelling down from Lancashire to London for a 12 o'clock kick off on a Sunday (as Sunderland fans will be when they go to Arsenal) then Sky is good...

Edited September 5, 200718 yr by Yossi

and im pretty sure that without sky money, once west ham were relegated, it would be MUCH more difficult for them to get back in the premier league.

 

not strictly true

 

the premier league wouldn't be the place it is without sky money

 

so without sky i doubt it'd be that hard to get back into a league that gets all it's money from sky etc

 

you can't have one without the other I don't think

 

the top 4 are the top 4 because they're the ones that generally always get in the champs league etc

1. Which highlights exactly the difference between you and I and why we go to football matches. You obviously go to watch Bolton win games. I don't watch West Ham to win games.

 

2. If you're happy travelling down from Lancashire for a 12 o'clock kick off on a Sunday (as Sunderland fans will be when they go to Arsenal) then Sky is good...

 

1. please refer to my earlier 'bollocks' statement. i have no idea of you history of match attendance and you do not know mine.

 

2. i know this topic was about 3pm ko's and yes i agree, all games should be 3pm on sat, but sky has brought so much more to the game than that! and the advantages far outway this SINGLE disadvantage.

1. please refer to my earlier 'bollocks' statement. i have no idea of you history of match attendance and you do not know mine.

 

2. i know this topic was about 3pm ko's and yes i agree, all games should be 3pm on sat, but sky has brought so much more to the game than that! and the advantages far outway this SINGLE disadvantage.

1. I wasn't knocking your attendance record. The only reason you gave for Sky being good for the game was that Bolton had got better because of it...

 

2. SINGLE disadvantage??? My word. What about huge the astronomical increase in ticket prices, footballers being celebrity millionaires, football being fashionable to the middle classes now, clubs not giving a shit about their fans anymore (not that they ever did but in days gone by they needed them unlike now) etc etc etc.

 

I can't name any advanatges.

not strictly true

 

the premier league wouldn't be the place it is without sky money

 

so without sky i doubt it'd be that hard to get back into a league that gets all it's money from sky etc

 

you can't have one without the other I don't think

 

the top 4 are the top 4 because they're the ones that generally always get in the champs league etc

 

imo if west ham (or any team) were relegated from the top division, they would not have the players and parachute payments to push them through the 'would-be 2nd division'. i reckon it would take a lot more effort for relegated teams to be promoted again.

 

i know the whole argument is pretty useless because nobody knows were football would be without sky money.

 

but i'd rather it was here than wasnt.

 

give me the reebok stadium and nicolas anelka over burnden park and julian derby every day of the week.

1. I wasn't knocking your attendance record. The only reason you gave for Sky being good for the game was that Bolton had got better because of it...

 

2. SINGLE disadvantage??? My word. What about huge the astronomical increase in ticket prices, footballers being celebrity millionaires, football being fashionable to the middle classes now, clubs not giving a shit about their fans anymore (not that they ever did but in days gone by they needed them unlike now) etc etc etc.

 

I can't name any advanatges.

 

so your argument is that money is ruining the game not sky?

 

blame jimmy hill not sky.

imo if west ham (or any team) were relegated from the top division, they would not have the players and parachute payments to push them through the 'would-be 2nd division'. i reckon it would take a lot more effort for relegated teams to be promoted again.

 

Piffle. It used to be a lot easier to get promotion because the playing field was much more level. The reason why the gulf is so huge now is down to money. The rich clubs in the top flight are far richer now than ever before, and the poor clubs in the '2nd division' are much poorer now in comparison.

 

Why is this?

 

Because of Sky!

 

give me the reebok stadium and nicolas anelka over burnden park and julian derby every day of the week.

 

I'd much rather Burnden Park than The Reebok. I'd much rather The Baseball Ground over Pride Park. I'd much rather Highbury over...

1. I wasn't knocking your attendance record. The only reason you gave for Sky being good for the game was that Bolton had got better because of it...

 

2. SINGLE disadvantage??? My word. What about huge the astronomical increase in ticket prices, footballers being celebrity millionaires, football being fashionable to the middle classes now, clubs not giving a shit about their fans anymore (not that they ever did but in days gone by they needed them unlike now) etc etc etc.

 

I can't name any advanatges.

 

two years before the bradford fire - ie pre sky - they were paying 70% of income on player wages, but couldn't afford the cash involved to clear the waste paper n stuff frrtom under the stand

 

directors have ruined football

 

closely followed by footballs administrators fooking caving in to the 'big boys'

 

not sky

Edited September 5, 200718 yr by Casino

Piffle. It used to be a lot easier to get promotion because the playing field was much more level. The reason why the gulf is so huge now is down to money. The rich clubs in the top flight are far richer now than ever before, and the poor clubs in the '2nd division' are much poorer now in comparison.

 

Why is this?

 

Because of Sky!

I'd much rather Burnden Park than The Reebok. I'd much rather The Baseball Ground over Pride Park. I'd much rather Highbury over...

 

nah, onward and upward i say.

Edited September 5, 200718 yr by HomerJay

I'd much rather Burnden Park than The Reebok. I'd much rather The Baseball Ground over Pride Park. I'd much rather Highbury over...

 

That is what has made football less enjoyable now compared to what it was 15 years ago for me.

 

But the Scousers were the culprits,not Sky.

Becasue of Sky we now have WAGS taking over football tournaments (media wise anyway) and with their own telly shows now - defo a negative that one!

funnily enough, a guy in my office just chirped up about the same 3pm ko story.

 

he said, "i dont care what time they ko as long as theyre on telly"

 

says it all really, the armchair fans probably outweigh the attending fan 100,000 to 1.

 

so nothing's going to change for the 'better', so you and me have to live with it.

funnily enough, a guy in my office just chirped up about the same 3pm ko story.

 

he said, "i dont care what time they ko as long as theyre on telly"

 

says it all really, the armchair fans probably outweigh the attending fan 100,000 to 1.

 

so nothing's going to change for the 'better', so you and me have to live with it.

I don't think so. The bubble is soon to burst I think - certainly the peak seems to have hit in terms of attendances.

 

I doubt the armchair fan in your office will pay to watch matches on the television which are played in half empty stadiums.

I'd much rather Burnden Park than The Reebok. I'd much rather The Baseball Ground over Pride Park. I'd much rather Highbury over...

 

 

Yeah I agree, I'd much rather have Normid superstore taking up one of the best terraces in the UK, and I'd rather have the tripping up on the cracks in the Burnden terrace, and Warburtons, oh and the leaky stands....the only thing I miss from Burnden is this atmosphere, and that will never return until they allow terracing again.

I don't think so. The bubble is soon to burst I think - certainly the peak seems to have hit in terms of attendances.

 

I doubt the armchair fan in your office will pay to watch matches on the television which are played in half empty stadiums.

 

i think the problem is, he would. as would too many 'fans'.

 

as casino said, its more to do with greed with in the game rather than sky imo.

 

plus the single 3pm game at the top of the thread is much to do with the success of english teams in europe as anything else.

All these arguments are doing nowt. The Sly money will soon go. Setanta will no doubt regret buying the overpriced TV rights and when that happens the floor falls out. THEN and ONLY THEN will they want fans through the turnstiles again.

 

But what can we do? We see games pushed around from Noon saturday to 8Pm Monday and anywhere in between. Our cash is a small %age of the revenue and from a business perspective they don't need us. But they will........ "You dont know what youve got 'til its gone"

 

Rant over.

Which highlights exactly the difference between you and I and why we go to football matches. You obviously go to watch Bolton win games. I don't watch West Ham to win games.

 

If you're happy travelling down from Lancashire to London for a 12 o'clock kick off on a Sunday (as Sunderland fans will be when they go to Arsenal) then Sky is good...

Point of order. Sunderland , although north of watford gap, is not, never has been, and never will be part of lancashire!!!!!!!!!

Point of order. Sunderland , although north of watford gap, is not, never has been, and never will be part of lancashire!!!!!!!!!

 

True, but they might be going via Lancs if they take the scenic route.

True, but they might be going via Lancs if they take travel advice from Squidgy.

I don't think so. The bubble is soon to burst I think - certainly the peak seems to have hit in terms of attendances.

 

Spot on.

The peak has been and gone in terms of attendances, barringthe bigger clubs of course

Point of order. Sunderland , although north of watford gap, is not, never has been, and never will be part of lancashire!!!!!!!!!

Ah, the post wasn't worded very well. I meant if Bolton fans are happy coming down to London from Lancashire for a 12 o'clock kick off on a Sunday (as Sunderland are having to make a similar trip from County Durham very soon) then Sky is good...