Jump to content


Photo

SKY :-) !!!!


  • Please log in to reply
106 replies to this topic

#1 Camshy

Camshy

    World Class

  • Moderator
  • 7,251 posts

Posted 13 April 2017 - 06:22 PM

I feel I have to write this as I see it cropping up here and there and tbh there are a lot of great talking points on the whole issue with Sky and the EPL T.V deal.

 

Now first I have to say and accept that I know the English game has always been a better standard of football and generally the big teams, Man U, and Liverpool mainly have been fine for money before the billions came rolling in.

Players here strived to better themselves and if a chance came to join one of the "big" clubs down south then it was not an easy choice but one most players would likely take but not all.

 

I have no problem with guys wanting to sign for other clubs or play in a different league, I also don't have a problem with a club who have a bigger support such as Man U being able to spend more than a West Ham for example in previous years. More fans means more money, that is not my issue.

I used to enjoy the English league prior to it all changing.

 

 

Since Sky we have seen the player numbers rapidly increasing with the English clubs along with wages being INSANE due to the money they get, flip side of this due to Sky pushing the English game is more money again via sponsors and the growing T.V audience due to their excellent marketing of the league.

Some of these teams buy players up like there is no tomorrow and give them wages most clubs outwith the cash rich league cant afford, even the fringe players with no hope of getting first team action for the parent club.

 

Look at Patrick Roberts for example, Man City pay £12 million, MAN CITY who prior to the Shieks and Sky were absolute no bodies. Celtic get this young guy on loan and its quite clear who could be doing a job for a club somewhere, as in actually signing for a club where he will play.

Celtic could maybe afford him, who knows but its a rather big outlay and he will likely be on loads of money.

 

 

So many players bought and a small amount actually make a mark on the parent team, the other issue is the money some of these teams recoup via the loan system. Chelsea for example had 35 plpayers, yes 35 players out on loan...............that is fucking ridiculous, especially when they still had access to another 50/60 players, its just wrong and that situation would not be there if Sky had not of turned the tables.

 

 

The other issue for me is losing home grown fans, Ireland and N Ireland for example have always supported clubs outwith their own country. For what reason I don't know but its pretty common.

When I was at School not one single person in Primary or Secondary supported a English club. Sure people would say, Everton, Liverpool etc are my English team but we all knew like 1 or 2 players, few if any knew 4 or 5 or more.

Today young Scottish kids know more about the English game than the Scottish game, some actually support an English team over a Scottish one and that was exceptionally rare prior to Sky.

 

The league down south was and always has been better but we supported our own teams despite this...............right now young people are turning to the English game and that is due to Sky, not because the EPL is better as it always has been but because it is rammed down your throat and now our game struggles to attract 2nd division players from down south.

That was never the case before..............Sky has a lot to answer for and it has transformed the game not only in England for the better but Scotland as well in the other direction. Also read a piece recently from Richard Keyes where he says the big wig in charge at the time wanted to "Kill" Scottish football and stop talking about it on Sky during the failed TV deal back in the late 90s or whenever it was.

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry for the wall of text but though a few good talking points.................sensible ones now Dug. I know I have a hard on for Sky and yeah I might be totally jealous of the money they get but it does have a huge effect on our game.



#2 black dog

black dog

    Sooty is watching YOU!

  • Members (over 1000 posts)
  • 69,409 posts

Posted 13 April 2017 - 06:43 PM

I feel I have to write this as I see it cropping up here and there and tbh there are a lot of great talking points on the whole issue with Sky and the EPL T.V deal.

 

Now first I have to say and accept that I know the English game has always been a better standard of football and generally the big teams, Man U, and Liverpool mainly have been fine for money before the billions came rolling in.

Players here strived to better themselves and if a chance came to join one of the "big" clubs down south then it was not an easy choice but one most players would likely take but not all.

 

I have no problem with guys wanting to sign for other clubs or play in a different league, I also don't have a problem with a club who have a bigger support such as Man U being able to spend more than a West Ham for example in previous years. More fans means more money, that is not my issue.

I used to enjoy the English league prior to it all changing.

 

 

Since Sky we have seen the player numbers rapidly increasing with the English clubs along with wages being INSANE due to the money they get, flip side of this due to Sky pushing the English game is more money again via sponsors and the growing T.V audience due to their excellent marketing of the league.

Some of these teams buy players up like there is no tomorrow and give them wages most clubs outwith the cash rich league cant afford, even the fringe players with no hope of getting first team action for the parent club.

 

Look at Patrick Roberts for example, Man City pay £12 million, MAN CITY who prior to the Shieks and Sky were absolute no bodies. Celtic get this young guy on loan and its quite clear who could be doing a job for a club somewhere, as in actually signing for a club where he will play.

Celtic could maybe afford him, who knows but its a rather big outlay and he will likely be on loads of money.

 

 

So many players bought and a small amount actually make a mark on the parent team, the other issue is the money some of these teams recoup via the loan system. Chelsea for example had 35 plpayers, yes 35 players out on loan...............that is fucking ridiculous, especially when they still had access to another 50/60 players, its just wrong and that situation would not be there if Sky had not of turned the tables.

 

 

The other issue for me is losing home grown fans, Ireland and N Ireland for example have always supported clubs outwith their own country. For what reason I don't know but its pretty common.

When I was at School not one single person in Primary or Secondary supported a English club. Sure people would say, Everton, Liverpool etc are my English team but we all knew like 1 or 2 players, few if any knew 4 or 5 or more.

Today young Scottish kids know more about the English game than the Scottish game, some actually support an English team over a Scottish one and that was exceptionally rare prior to Sky.

 

The league down south was and always has been better but we supported our own teams despite this...............right now young people are turning to the English game and that is due to Sky, not because the EPL is better as it always has been but because it is rammed down your throat and now our game struggles to attract 2nd division players from down south.

That was never the case before..............Sky has a lot to answer for and it has transformed the game not only in England for the better but Scotland as well in the other direction. Also read a piece recently from Richard Keyes where he says the big wig in charge at the time wanted to "Kill" Scottish football and stop talking about it on Sky during the failed TV deal back in the late 90s or whenever it was.

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry for the wall of text but though a few good talking points.................sensible ones now Dug. I know I have a hard on for Sky and yeah I might be totally jealous of the money they get but it does have a huge effect on our game.

 

You mean what you have been bleating about previously is nonsense ?...... :lol:

 

Anyway Cam....I've had a drink so I'm not going to even contemplate replying at the moment mate. There's a full English programme tomorrow (apart from the EPL) so I shall plenty time to do fuck all (my chores were taken care of today) and get back to you after re-studying your post....Hasta manana..... ;)


tumblr_n3bgrvEUK91rerzc4o1_400.gif

Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind!


#3 cmon norn iron

cmon norn iron

    A living legend

  • Members (over 1000 posts)
  • 18,614 posts

Posted 13 April 2017 - 07:02 PM

The big bubble will burst some day,hopefully the working class fan is able to afford to go back to see his team

GettyImages-539573328.jpg

British Champions......33 years and counting Manchester Utd........20 times and counting


#4 Camshy

Camshy

    World Class

  • Moderator
  • 7,251 posts

Posted 13 April 2017 - 08:29 PM

Actually dug its the exact thing I have been saying all along, you just couldn't understand what I meant :-D



#5 sployal

sployal

    Veteran

  • Members (over 1000 posts)
  • 1,303 posts

Posted 13 April 2017 - 10:11 PM

I feel I have to write this as I see it cropping up here and there and tbh there are a lot of great talking points on the whole issue with Sky and the EPL T.V deal.

 

Now first I have to say and accept that I know the English game has always been a better standard of football and generally the big teams, Man U, and Liverpool mainly have been fine for money before the billions came rolling in.

Players here strived to better themselves and if a chance came to join one of the "big" clubs down south then it was not an easy choice but one most players would likely take but not all.

 

I have no problem with guys wanting to sign for other clubs or play in a different league, I also don't have a problem with a club who have a bigger support such as Man U being able to spend more than a West Ham for example in previous years. More fans means more money, that is not my issue.

I used to enjoy the English league prior to it all changing.

 

 

Since Sky we have seen the player numbers rapidly increasing with the English clubs along with wages being INSANE due to the money they get, flip side of this due to Sky pushing the English game is more money again via sponsors and the growing T.V audience due to their excellent marketing of the league.

Some of these teams buy players up like there is no tomorrow and give them wages most clubs outwith the cash rich league cant afford, even the fringe players with no hope of getting first team action for the parent club.

 

Look at Patrick Roberts for example, Man City pay £12 million, MAN CITY who prior to the Shieks and Sky were absolute no bodies. Celtic get this young guy on loan and its quite clear who could be doing a job for a club somewhere, as in actually signing for a club where he will play.

Celtic could maybe afford him, who knows but its a rather big outlay and he will likely be on loads of money.

 

 

So many players bought and a small amount actually make a mark on the parent team, the other issue is the money some of these teams recoup via the loan system. Chelsea for example had 35 plpayers, yes 35 players out on loan...............that is fucking ridiculous, especially when they still had access to another 50/60 players, its just wrong and that situation would not be there if Sky had not of turned the tables.

 

 

The other issue for me is losing home grown fans, Ireland and N Ireland for example have always supported clubs outwith their own country. For what reason I don't know but its pretty common.

When I was at School not one single person in Primary or Secondary supported a English club. Sure people would say, Everton, Liverpool etc are my English team but we all knew like 1 or 2 players, few if any knew 4 or 5 or more.

Today young Scottish kids know more about the English game than the Scottish game, some actually support an English team over a Scottish one and that was exceptionally rare prior to Sky.

 

The league down south was and always has been better but we supported our own teams despite this...............right now young people are turning to the English game and that is due to Sky, not because the EPL is better as it always has been but because it is rammed down your throat and now our game struggles to attract 2nd division players from down south.

That was never the case before..............Sky has a lot to answer for and it has transformed the game not only in England for the better but Scotland as well in the other direction. Also read a piece recently from Richard Keyes where he says the big wig in charge at the time wanted to "Kill" Scottish football and stop talking about it on Sky during the failed TV deal back in the late 90s or whenever it was.

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry for the wall of text but though a few good talking points.................sensible ones now Dug. I know I have a hard on for Sky and yeah I might be totally jealous of the money they get but it does have a huge effect on our game.

Sorry to sum up in a couple of lines your apparent disappointment with the success of SKY and the EPL TV deal as a worldwide success story (and as a decline of the standards of football in the other home nations and Ireland), but it all comes down to ;
Do you want this product? YES
Can you pay for it? YES
OK then we have it, it's yours.
It's a business deal in a business man's world, no rocket science needed to understand that it's killed off the rest but sadly that's the way it goes.
As for 'the big bubble will burst someday', been hearing that for years but more and more money keeps being piped in (the rule of offer and demand) so things are not ready to change.

And yes your right, other British fans outside England know more about the EPL and would rather watch a match down South than a match from Scotland or elsewhere.

SKY as a business has won.



#6 Camshy

Camshy

    World Class

  • Moderator
  • 7,251 posts

Posted 13 April 2017 - 10:23 PM

I don't want the product and never watch the games, occasionally I will see a wee snippet here or there but by and large I don't watch the EPL. Its the same with the CL for me as I feel the competition has been lost and I watch the same games every time. At least with the EPL I could sit and watch a game but the CL is a big turn off having seen Bayern v Real for the last 10 seasons or so and Barca v Juve or whatever.

 

I have also noticed on social media a lot of people saying similar things to the way I feel and it seems to be a more popular stance as the deals get bigger, Sky ruined football etc and quite a few from English fans. They are pissed about the huge prices to actually go and watch the games.

Also something that I hope tips the balance of wealth a little bit is live streaming, fire sticks, android boxes and illegal streams are now becoming the norm in a lot of households and the numbers of people who are cancelling their subscriptions seem to be on the rise, or at least so some people are saying on social media................could this be the undoing of the huge deals on offer as the quality of live streaming is improving all the time.



#7 cmon norn iron

cmon norn iron

    A living legend

  • Members (over 1000 posts)
  • 18,614 posts

Posted 14 April 2017 - 12:43 AM

https://www.theguard...ng-tv-audiences

I don't want the product and never watch the games, occasionally I will see a wee snippet here or there but by and large I don't watch the EPL. Its the same with the CL for me as I feel the competition has been lost and I watch the same games every time. At least with the EPL I could sit and watch a game but the CL is a big turn off having seen Bayern v Real for the last 10 seasons or so and Barca v Juve or whatever.
 
I have also noticed on social media a lot of people saying similar things to the way I feel and it seems to be a more popular stance as the deals get bigger, Sky ruined football etc and quite a few from English fans. They are pissed about the huge prices to actually go and watch the games.
Also something that I hope tips the balance of wealth a little bit is live streaming, fire sticks, android boxes and illegal streams are now becoming the norm in a lot of households and the numbers of people who are cancelling their subscriptions seem to be on the rise, or at least so some people are saying on social media................could this be the undoing of the huge deals on offer as the quality of live streaming is improving all the time.


GettyImages-539573328.jpg

British Champions......33 years and counting Manchester Utd........20 times and counting


#8 Travis Bickle

Travis Bickle

    Football Legend

  • Members (over 1000 posts)
  • 5,296 posts

Posted 14 April 2017 - 01:33 AM

 

 

Look at Patrick Roberts for example, Man City pay £12 million, MAN CITY who prior to the Shieks and Sky were absolute no bodies. Celtic get this young guy on loan and its quite clear who could be doing a job for a club somewhere, as in actually signing for a club where he will play.

Celtic could maybe afford him, who knows but its a rather big outlay and he will likely be on loads of money.

 

Man City did not pay that for Roberts. Nearer half that amount and the rest was made up of add ons that obviously wont be triggered. 

 

As for being 'absolute nobodies'. Look at the attendance figures City were getting in the lower leagues and you will see they were always a 'sleeping giant'. They won a European Trophy prior to the Sky / Sheiks money!!

 

He cannot even get a regular game at Celtic and will be moved on if he doesn't show up exceptionally well in pre season.


wheresoeverwhensoever and howsoever we are called upon to make our exit. We shall do so as free men.


#9 Camshy

Camshy

    World Class

  • Moderator
  • 7,251 posts

Posted 14 April 2017 - 07:48 AM

https://www.theguard...ng-tv-audiences


Yeah I read that but they have one chance to impose the restrictions and that is no chance.
All the android boxes and what they offer are not actually illegal and thank god for that.

I cant see them winning that fight and even if they do the smart tech people are always a step ahead.

Live streaming is here to stay, think its more likely to see them invest on the streaming side of it than get rid.

#10 Travis Bickle

Travis Bickle

    Football Legend

  • Members (over 1000 posts)
  • 5,296 posts

Posted 14 April 2017 - 11:17 AM

Yeah I read that but they have one chance to impose the restrictions and that is no chance.
All the android boxes and what they offer are not actually illegal and thank god for that.

I cant see them winning that fight and even if they do the smart tech people are always a step ahead.

Live streaming is here to stay, think its more likely to see them invest on the streaming side of it than get rid.

 

The pub outside your favourite English clubs ground use live streaming. I watched Arsenal v City in Portugal in a pub via live streaming. As you say there is no way that is ever going to go away. 

 

Sky TV will keep pumping the money into the English game as long as it makes them a return. 

 

At least in England the money is shared out fairly evenly compared to other nations. Did the Spanish clubs not have the rights to their own games? This meant Real and Barca were miles ahead of everyone else.


wheresoeverwhensoever and howsoever we are called upon to make our exit. We shall do so as free men.


#11 Camshy

Camshy

    World Class

  • Moderator
  • 7,251 posts

Posted 14 April 2017 - 11:29 AM

The pub outside your favourite English clubs ground use live streaming. I watched Arsenal v City in Portugal in a pub via live streaming. As you say there is no way that is ever going to go away. 
 
Sky TV will keep pumping the money into the English game as long as it makes them a return. 
 
At least in England the money is shared out fairly evenly compared to other nations. Did the Spanish clubs not have the rights to their own games? This meant Real and Barca were miles ahead of everyone else.


Trav incase you hadnt realised, I support one club and one club only.......I care this much for teams in England . .

#12 black dog

black dog

    Sooty is watching YOU!

  • Members (over 1000 posts)
  • 69,409 posts

Posted 14 April 2017 - 11:31 AM

I feel I have to write this as I see it cropping up here and there and tbh there are a lot of great talking points on the whole issue with Sky and the EPL T.V deal.

 

Now first I have to say and accept that I know the English game has always been a better standard of football and generally the big teams, Man U, and Liverpool mainly have been fine for money before the billions came rolling in.

Players here strived to better themselves and if a chance came to join one of the "big" clubs down south then it was not an easy choice but one most players would likely take but not all.

 

I have no problem with guys wanting to sign for other clubs or play in a different league, I also don't have a problem with a club who have a bigger support such as Man U being able to spend more than a West Ham for example in previous years. More fans means more money, that is not my issue.

I used to enjoy the English league prior to it all changing.

 

 

Since Sky we have seen the player numbers rapidly increasing with the English clubs along with wages being INSANE due to the money they get, flip side of this due to Sky pushing the English game is more money again via sponsors and the growing T.V audience due to their excellent marketing of the league.

Some of these teams buy players up like there is no tomorrow and give them wages most clubs outwith the cash rich league cant afford, even the fringe players with no hope of getting first team action for the parent club.

 

Look at Patrick Roberts for example, Man City pay £12 million, MAN CITY who prior to the Shieks and Sky were absolute no bodies. Celtic get this young guy on loan and its quite clear who could be doing a job for a club somewhere, as in actually signing for a club where he will play.

Celtic could maybe afford him, who knows but its a rather big outlay and he will likely be on loads of money.

 

 

So many players bought and a small amount actually make a mark on the parent team, the other issue is the money some of these teams recoup via the loan system. Chelsea for example had 35 plpayers, yes 35 players out on loan...............that is fucking ridiculous, especially when they still had access to another 50/60 players, its just wrong and that situation would not be there if Sky had not of turned the tables.

 

 

The other issue for me is losing home grown fans, Ireland and N Ireland for example have always supported clubs outwith their own country. For what reason I don't know but its pretty common.

When I was at School not one single person in Primary or Secondary supported a English club. Sure people would say, Everton, Liverpool etc are my English team but we all knew like 1 or 2 players, few if any knew 4 or 5 or more.

Today young Scottish kids know more about the English game than the Scottish game, some actually support an English team over a Scottish one and that was exceptionally rare prior to Sky.

 

The league down south was and always has been better but we supported our own teams despite this...............right now young people are turning to the English game and that is due to Sky, not because the EPL is better as it always has been but because it is rammed down your throat and now our game struggles to attract 2nd division players from down south.

That was never the case before..............Sky has a lot to answer for and it has transformed the game not only in England for the better but Scotland as well in the other direction. Also read a piece recently from Richard Keyes where he says the big wig in charge at the time wanted to "Kill" Scottish football and stop talking about it on Sky during the failed TV deal back in the late 90s or whenever it was.

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry for the wall of text but though a few good talking points.................sensible ones now Dug. I know I have a hard on for Sky and yeah I might be totally jealous of the money they get but it does have a huge effect on our game.

 

Okey dokey....Bottom line is....it is called progress Cam. Some like it, some don't, some are indifferent. Take another industry for example...the car industry. Used to be the vast majority of cars (the product) used/bought in the UK were manufactured in the UK. As time went on more and more 'foreign' cars started to appear in the British market, more advertising for cars manufactured outwith this country and over the years prices increased for all vehicles and the majority of cars sold in the UK now are 'foreign' ones. British punters went for this because they started off cheaper than UK vehicles but as they got more and more popular with UK residents deserting UK cars the price went up...sound familiar. It is called imo supply and demand.

 

Losing players because of the high salaries down south ? Most of these players, especially the younger ones, know that they are doing it for the money and not to develop themselves as first team regulars. Not Sky's fault.

 

You also cannot blame Sky for what you perceive to be a loss of fans because they broadcast English games. There are Scottish games on every week also. Do you want English games banned from broadcast in Scotland ? Sounds like an SNP policy to me! Every individual has a choice and they can take it. Whether it suits you or me is irrespective and we cannot tell anyone what to do.

 

As for you 'rammed down our throats' comments, well that is laughable mate. It is advertising & showing due to contract its product Cam, that is all. You simply do not like the product hence the strong emotive description but imo, laughable.

 

You mention what Richard Keys said about a Sky boss's attitude towards Scottish Football. I don't know if you deliberately ignored what was also said or if you truly were not aware but......when that occurred back in the day...it was the bold Roger Mitchell who was Scottish Football negotiator for tv deals.....according to Keys, Sky offered around £60 mill for the deal but Mitchell turned it down. You reap what you sow Cam. I've said before if the authorities in Scotland want a better deal for our 'product' it is up to them to refuse what they believe paltry offers but to turn down £60 mill 15 or 16 years ago ?


tumblr_n3bgrvEUK91rerzc4o1_400.gif

Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind!


#13 Camshy

Camshy

    World Class

  • Moderator
  • 7,251 posts

Posted 14 April 2017 - 11:32 AM

Oh and forgot to add

@ Trav, the money was not always distributed evenly.
Man U, Liverpool, Arsenal and Spurs had a monopoly over the early money from Sky and recieved a far higher amount than all the other teams in the league.....coincides with Utds most succesful period and the dodgy unfair deal they and the other 3 had over the rest.

#14 Travis Bickle

Travis Bickle

    Football Legend

  • Members (over 1000 posts)
  • 5,296 posts

Posted 14 April 2017 - 11:32 AM

Trav incase you hadnt realised, I support one club and one club only.......I care this much for teams in England . .

 

It  was a joke . Mary Ds outside the Etihad stream all their live games


wheresoeverwhensoever and howsoever we are called upon to make our exit. We shall do so as free men.


#15 Travis Bickle

Travis Bickle

    Football Legend

  • Members (over 1000 posts)
  • 5,296 posts

Posted 14 April 2017 - 11:39 AM

Oh and forgot to add

@ Trav, the money was not always distributed evenly.
Man U, Liverpool, Arsenal and Spurs had a monopoly over the early money from Sky and recieved a far higher amount than all the other teams in the league.....coincides with Utds most succesful period and the dodgy unfair deal they and the other 3 had over the rest.

 

How did that work Cam? Was it based on league position or games shown involving these clubs?


wheresoeverwhensoever and howsoever we are called upon to make our exit. We shall do so as free men.


#16 Travis Bickle

Travis Bickle

    Football Legend

  • Members (over 1000 posts)
  • 5,296 posts

Posted 14 April 2017 - 11:43 AM

Found this while looking for that Cam.

 

The Premier League TV money distribution is among the most balanced in the world with every club receiving a £52.2m basic payment with the rest of the £1.56billion pot being shared based on final league position and TV appearances.

But the system means the top clubs do not receive as much money as they could, as was the case last season when Manchester City, Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal, Tottenham and Manchester United were all at least £29m worse off.

Fulham were the team to profit the most from the Premier League's distribution system. The west London club received £63.3m last season but would have only collected £26m, a difference of over £37m, if the money was based on their UK viewers.


Read more: http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz4eDt6kNiS 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

article-2641451-1E43BD3800000578-422_634

 

Using todays system it means the top clubs are losing tens of millions a season but the money they generate is helping the clubs lower down the league. Maybe if Scottish football adopted something similar it would help level the playing field.


wheresoeverwhensoever and howsoever we are called upon to make our exit. We shall do so as free men.


#17 cmon norn iron

cmon norn iron

    A living legend

  • Members (over 1000 posts)
  • 18,614 posts

Posted 14 April 2017 - 11:43 AM

Oh and forgot to add
@ Trav, the money was not always distributed evenly.
Man U, Liverpool, Arsenal and Spurs had a monopoly over the early money from Sky and recieved a far higher amount than all the other teams in the league.....coincides with Utds most succesful period and the dodgy unfair deal they and the other 3 had over the rest.


Im not sure thats true,is there a link?

Before sky took over in the 1992-93 season,Utd won the FA cup,league cup,cup winners cup and the super cup between May 1990 to May 1992 so the untold success had already started regardless of Sky tv

GettyImages-539573328.jpg

British Champions......33 years and counting Manchester Utd........20 times and counting


#18 Camshy

Camshy

    World Class

  • Moderator
  • 7,251 posts

Posted 14 April 2017 - 11:45 AM

Okey dokey....Bottom line is....it is called progress Cam. Some like it, some don't, some are indifferent. Take another industry for example...the car industry. Used to be the vast majority of cars (the product) used/bought in the UK were manufactured in the UK. As time went on more and more 'foreign' cars started to appear in the British market, more advertising for cars manufactured outwith this country and over the years prices increased for all vehicles and the majority of cars sold in the UK now are 'foreign' ones. British punters went for this because they started off cheaper than UK vehicles but as they got more and more popular with UK residents deserting UK cars the price went up...sound familiar. It is called imo supply and demand.
 
Losing players because of the high salaries down south ? Most of these players, especially the younger ones, know that they are doing it for the money and not to develop themselves as first team regulars. Not Sky's fault.
 
You also cannot blame Sky for what you perceive to be a loss of fans because they broadcast English games. There are Scottish games on every week also. Do you want English games banned from broadcast in Scotland ? Sounds like an SNP policy to me! Every individual has a choice and they can take it. Whether it suits you or me is irrespective and we cannot tell anyone what to do.
 
As for you 'rammed down our throats' comments, well that is laughable mate. It is advertising & showing due to contract its product Cam, that is all. You simply do not like the product hence the strong emotive description but imo, laughable.
 
You mention what Richard Keys said about a Sky boss's attitude towards Scottish Football. I don't know if you deliberately ignored what was also said or if you truly were not aware but......when that occurred back in the day...it was the bold Roger Mitchell who was Scottish Football negotiator for tv deals.....according to Keys, Sky offered around £60 mill for the deal but Mitchell turned it down. You reap what you sow Cam. I've said before if the authorities in Scotland want a better deal for our 'product' it is up to them to refuse what they believe paltry offers but to turn down £60 mill 15 or 16 years ago ?


Progress yes BUT it is all because of Sky and Sky only Dug ffs how can you not see that.
We can call it the greatest league in the workd if that makes you happy the fact is Sky has created the situation football is facing.

Scottish clubs struggling to keep afloat and English clubs even the chamlionship which is the 4th most lucrative league in the world ffs.
You cant tell me that is value for money.

I can accept I dislike the whole situation but it only exists because of Sky. The coverage of games with Scottish teams is pish.....thats what I mean by shoved down your throat.

Sky has created new fan base for these teams, go online to Skys forum page and its full of Africans and eastern Europeans with Man U or some other EPL teams badge.

Im not asking for their games to be banned, you taking what Im saying and just waffling.
Stop being stubborn and admit Sky has totally transformed the English game and its not for the better, well not for the fans who actually go and spend their money.

#19 Camshy

Camshy

    World Class

  • Moderator
  • 7,251 posts

Posted 14 April 2017 - 11:48 AM

Im not sure thats true,is there a link?
Before sky took over in the 1992-93 season,Utd won the FA cup,league cup,cup winners cup and the super cup between May 1990 to May 1992 so the untold success had already started regardless of Sky tv


It is true, i read an article a number of years back detailing the figures where those 4 clubs basically held the others to ransom.....until the rest stood up and demanded it changed around 99/00

#20 Travis Bickle

Travis Bickle

    Football Legend

  • Members (over 1000 posts)
  • 5,296 posts

Posted 14 April 2017 - 11:48 AM

Im not sure thats true,is there a link?

Before sky took over in the 1992-93 season,Utd won the FA cup,league cup,cup winners cup and the super cup between May 1990 to May 1992 so the untold success had already started regardless of Sky tv

 

If anything the Sky / Abramovich money maybe held United back as it allowed Chelsea and others to compete with them. 

 

Uniteds success was down to an unbelievable manager and a group of outstanding kids breaking into the team at the one time. Not really given this much thought but has there ever been a time when such a group of talented youngsters have come through at the one team in that way. Beckham,Giggs,Scholes, Butt, The Nevilles and Lee Sharp


wheresoeverwhensoever and howsoever we are called upon to make our exit. We shall do so as free men.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users