muttonhumper Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 I read it as 50 SPL games PLUS 15 SFL games. Aye. Believe so. Sky 30 SPL, 5 SFL. ESPN20 SPL, 10 SFL Link to comment
RabidGiraffe Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Aye. Believe so. Sky 30 SPL, 5 SFL. ESPN20 SPL, 10 SFL Sky: LIVE MATCHES - 30 live matches a season, including five live Rangers fixtures from the Scottish Football League. I read that as being 25 SPL and 5 SFL And I misread your post about ESPN, so aye 20 SPL and 10 SFL Even taking the higher figures it still means about 25% of the games will probably be Sevco. Not that I object to the SFL getting the exposure, I just think it's a bit warped that there will probably be 15 SFL3 games, all of 1 club, showing the poorest football in the country, no SFL1 or SFL2 games (unless the contract states otherwise) and most of the SPL clubs (the top league) will only be shown a couple of times. Makes this TV deal look even more biased towards the clubs formerly known as the old firm than the last and doesn't show Scottish football in a very good light, even if the distribution of the money does end up being more balanced. Link to comment
muttonhumper Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Sky: LIVE MATCHES - 30 live matches a season, including five live Rangers fixtures from the Scottish Football League. I read that as being 25 SPL and 5 SFL And I misread your post about ESPN, so aye 20 SPL and 10 SFL Even taking the higher figures it still means about 25% of the games will probably be Sevco. Not that I object to the SFL getting the exposure, I just think it's a bit warped that there will probably be 15 SFL3 games, all of 1 club, showing the poorest football in the country, no SFL1 or SFL2 games (unless the contract states otherwise) and most of the SPL clubs (the top league) will only be shown a couple of times. Makes this TV deal look even more biased towards the clubs formerly known as the old firm than the last and doesn't show Scottish football in a very good light, even if the distribution of the money does end up being more balanced.Oh aye. Right enough. As for the rest of your post. Spot on.It's a fucking ludicrous set-up. Link to comment
NorthernLights24 Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Tonights challenge - go to http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/ and see how obvious it is that Motherwell are playing a Champions League qualifier tonight... Link to comment
muttonhumper Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 SPLstats @SPLstatsLast season's deal earned 10 non-OF clubs Link to comment
caledonia Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 SPLstats @SPLstatsLast season's deal earned 10 non-OF clubs Link to comment
caledonia Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Anybody else who is pissed off by this get yer complaints in here feedback@afc.co.uk Link to comment
NorthernLights24 Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 SPLstats @SPLstatsLast season's deal earned 10 non-OF clubs Link to comment
MightyDons Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Anybody else who is pissed off by this get yer complaints in here feedback@afc.co.uk Steady. It is just pointing out a pointless stat. The split of SPL money is the same as it always has been unless the clubs vote for change to the structure. I'd be very surprised if this isn't proposed in the months ahead. Link to comment
caledonia Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Then why was there not anyone from any other club there when the talks on a new deal were taking place except celtic of courseBelieve me there is a carve-up going on here that will let celtic keep the biggest share of the money. I don't have anything against the winner of the league getting more but the % they were on along with the deadhuns ruined Scottish football Link to comment
vanderark14 Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 To set the fans of other clubs minds at ease, I'd like to see them making a move on this voting structure and change the distribution of the money ASAP. Its very worrying that it seems nothing is really changing with regards to coverage of the game and once the huns get back to the top flight the status quo will return. Link to comment
tup Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 You sound surprised The money has always been distributed in a way to favour the two teams finishing 1st and 2nd. Go to page 36 -> http://www.scotprem.com/content/mediaassets/doc/RULES%20EFFECTIVE%201%20JULY%202012.pdf Those figures by SPL Stats will be back of a fag packet calculations. Distribution of money I assume will be one of the things the SPL clubs will look at soon. Any changes need an 11-1 vote to pass and that'll certainly be easier without a certain club from Glasgow. Aye but 'it was ever thus' is such a poor argument for continuing with it. It's fundamentally wrong. It's the main issue with Scottish football. It's the main issue with football per se. Why should the top two get more is the question we should be asking? The answer is there is no answer. There is no justifiable reasoning for it. So why the fuck do we persist with it? It's like the blind leading the blind in Scotland, hapless fools running our game into the ground, fools who genuinely seem to have no inkling of what they're doing wrong, because they never pay anything but lip service to the fundamentals, the core issues which make our game the utter dross it undoubtedly is and shall remain. 1 Link to comment
tup Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Hopefully a push for changes to the voting structure are made at the meeting on Friday. If they do not then you have to at some stage concede that we have the league we deserve. i.e. a shit one, run by cretins, for cretins. Link to comment
Tord31 Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 To set the fans of other clubs minds at ease, I'd like to see them making a move on this voting structure and change the distribution of the money ASAP. Its very worrying that it seems nothing is really changing with regards to coverage of the game and once the huns get back to the top flight the status quo will return. They can vote through a fairer distribution of money in the SPL using the 11-1 voting structure. I think the Aberdeen/Dundee United/Hibs coallition should probably hang on to the voting structure for another 6-12 months to avoid some idiotic restructuring that we dont agree to be quickly voted through. We could be screwed out in a 8-4 or 7-5 voting structure. Link to comment
Dynamo Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Why is anyone surprised hun games are going to be on the box? Other side of the coin, pleased for the wee 3rd division teams who will gain a bit of exposure and money. Link to comment
vanderark14 Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 The coverage of the game doesn't bother me per se, less AFC games on the box mean more folk through the turnstiles hopefully, but it's a mere symptom of a wider problem. Hopefully a push for changes to the voting structure are made at the meeting on Friday. I disagree, by having nothing but huns and tims on the box, the younger football fans are exposed to them more and they are told that there's only two teams in Scotland. You do have a point about TV being a problem for getting fans through the turnstiles thoug. At the moment TV is part of football and always will be so the clubs should be looking at utilising it to their collective advantage and not just as way to make the two cuntish bastard teams from glasgow stronger as we feed off scraps. If they do not then you have to at some stage concede that we have the league we deserve. i.e. a shit one, run by cretins, for cretins. Correct 1 Link to comment
vanderark14 Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Why is anyone surprised hun games are going to be on the box? Other side of the coin, pleased for the wee 3rd division teams who will gain a bit of exposure and money. the 5 minutes in the lime light they get will be forgotten by the following week when the next hun wank fest starts. The money will be good for their short term survival and nothing more. Just the way those bastards from glasgow like it. Link to comment
Dynamo Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 the 5 minutes in the lime light they get will be forgotten by the following week when the next hun wank fest starts. The money will be good for their short term survival and nothing more. Just the way those bastards from glasgow like it. And another positive, the huns who were creaming themselves about Saturday 3pm away days on terraces, will now have to settle for Sunday lunchtimes Link to comment
tup Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 However, the reasoning given for showing all the hun away games is that it will ease the potential for trouble in small towns from the hordes of terrorists who follow them. Link to comment
K-9 Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 To set the fans of other clubs minds at ease, I'd like to see them making a move on this voting structure and change the distribution of the money ASAP. Its very worrying that it seems nothing is really changing with regards to coverage of the game and once the huns get back to the top flight the status quo will return.Doubt this will happen as going to change everything anyway with reconstruction talks. Link to comment
vanderark14 Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Doubt this will happen as going to change everything anyway with reconstruction talks. I'm still 50-50 on whether the other 11 in the SPL have the balls to really make changes simply because I was amazed they voted in such higher number against the hun filth walking right back in to the SPL. Mon Wiggy - Its your move Link to comment
tup Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 If all the other clubs are dead against this duopoly persisting, and it's clear their supporters are even if the chairmen are not, then it's clearly the case that we need to continue to stand up to the two bullying clubs who caused all the problems in the first place. A failure to do so will leave Scottish football in an even worse position than it was prior to this crisis. On the basis that prior to the crisis the problems with widespread corruption were not in the public glare, now they are, and yet we seem to almost wish to continue as before, as if nothing's happened. Which renders the whole point of having a crisis meaningless. I'm of the opinion that alcohol causes many of the issues we have in Scottish football, from boardroom to dressing room to supporters function room, as long as the drink keeps flowing we can pretend the problems don't exist. When the drink does not flow, we don't have the necessary character to address them. 1 1 Link to comment
vanderark14 Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/top-football-stories/sky-agree-new-five-year-spl-deal-and-will-show-rangers-1-2443198 Barney Francis, managing director of Sky Sports, said: “We’ve supported Scottish football since we started, over 20 years ago, and have always wanted to continue that commitment. “Our viewers will see the SPL for five more years and our schedule includes the opening league match for Celtic. “We will also follow Rangers as they plot their way back to Scottish football’s top flight. “Clubs now have certainty over their income and exposure across the UK and Ireland and we look forward to the new season.” Barney - you are full of shit and you have a shite name. Are you a camp purple dinosaur? Link to comment
tup Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 The problem is that Sky Sports have tapped into a market of armchair fans who previously did not even like football. They like the presentation and the faux-drama. It's the same mentality as women who slavishly watch soaps which contain nothing but well presented drivel. Take them to a Highland League game and they'd be bored in less than 5 minutes, and would leave thinking it was a shit experience. 1 1 Link to comment
vanderark14 Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 I think the concept of a father sitting their loons in front of the TV and bringing them up on a diet of Sky Sports rather than taking them to the game is the problem here. Bairns shouldn't be brought up thinking watching a game on TV counts as supporting the team, the bigger clubs will always be on TV more (happens in every country) and it's a matter of parents to take their loon to Pittodrie rather than latch onto Celtic or Rangers or the equally vile Man United and think supporting them via the armchair means they're a loyal football fan. To think that parents should just tell their kids not to watch sky sports and go to pittodrie instead is naive IMO. Whether we like it or not, TV is now king in football and nothing is changing that. What should be happening is the SPL clubs using it to their collective advantage with the right share of money and exposure. 1 Link to comment
vanderark14 Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 The problem is that Sky Sports have tapped into a market of armchair fans who previously did not even like football. They like the presentation and the faux-drama. It's the same mentality as women who slavishly watch soaps which contain nothing but well presented drivel. Take them to a Highland League game and they'd be bored in less than 5 minutes, and would leave thinking it was a shit experience. correct What do you think will have more of an impact on a young loon, watching Rangers on TV on the Sunday or being taken to the Dons game by your Dad on the Saturday? I know which I remember most vividly from my youth. I know which had a bigger impact on me and you but times have completely changed. Link to comment
Tord31 Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Exactly. Maybe real football fans are a dying breed. 100%. Plenty folk who clock up 200 TV games a year dont even get along to more than 1 or 2 live football matches a season. Folk that think they 'support' a team by following them on Soccer Saturday and don't even know their star striker is injured or has been transferred. Does my nut in. Link to comment
tup Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 I know which had a bigger impact on me and you but times have completely changed. Loons still enjoy going to the football. It's all down to the parents. You either do it or you don't do it. The Sky herd have full subscriptions, HD the lot, but have never attended a game in their lives. It's convenience, or laziness. Link to comment
BrianFaePerth Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Loons still enjoy going to the football. It's all down to the parents. You either do it or you don't do it. The Sky herd have full subscriptions, HD the lot, but have never attended a game in their lives. It's convenience, or laziness. Eh sit in an office where there is only one person who doesnae support Brann (he is a cunt but that is a different story). All the same, there's only me, the foreigner, with a season ticket. They all profess fantastic knowledge of the team, but every single one of them sits on their erse in front of the tv to watch the games, and laugh at me coz eh sit there freezing my balls off in howling wind and rain, and that's just in July. Is it me that's the fool? maybe, but there's no excuse for no turning out to yer team's home games when ye live 10 mins away. Link to comment
vanderark14 Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Why though? Going to a game now would still have more impact on a young loon now surely? The majority of people will always chose the easy option in life. In this instance its sitting back and being fed the bull shit from sky as opposed to taking their kids to a fitba game. When we started going or definitely when I did, I'm think at most you got the saturday night highlights. A generation later and its 3 or 4 live games on a Saturday alone. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now