SPL are a joke.
A do hate espn Burley talks like a world cup winner
ESPN look like a second rate ITV, I'd rather we cut that part of the deal off but it probably won't happen...
Cap'n,I'd bin my ESPN to get HD but you always get at least a coupla decent games (Hearts away,Aberdeen away). TBH I'm not sure which one I could do without the least
Why should we take a pittance for the coverage, the only reason we running back to SKY was because of the others outwith the OF and Aberdeen taking the Setantas imaginary money.
The SPL is in a far healthier state now than it was then and the viewing figures show that accounts for 8% of Sky Sports total audience, so asking for 125m for two years is spot on.
The SPL have got definite cause to ask for an increase in revenue as other broadcasters could financially match it and SPL football has increased their viewing numbers, however slight the increase, it's still an increase but in turn the SPL is much better promoted on Sky (starting to feel like a frickin' advertising executive now! arrgh!! ) and that's not a cue to start banging on about last years debacle!
The current TV deal is only helping to increase the gap between the English game and the Scottish one. ESPN and Sky are only interested in getting our live coverage on the cheap. The way they carved up the rights the last time so SPL fans had to pay through the nose to get full coverage while throwing a miserly sum at the clubs actually led me to cancelling Sky. I don't care about Cricket or Golf or even giving more money to the bloated monster that is the EPL anymore.
I think it's good news that the SPL are looking into starting their own TV channel. It's actually the only way forward as far as I can see.
imo sky would be better off funding a 10 team spl with mega money (market it world wide) than trying to fund a 20 team epl just my opinion
My main fear is that an SPL run TV station will end up like a TV version of "Fishwife FM" on BBC Radio Scotland every Saturday from 2pm!
Let's be honest, the money Sky Sports are paying to broadcast the SPL is to show the four Old Firm games every year. Hence, every other SPL game is on Sky Sports 4, whereas the Old Firm games are on Sky Sports 1 or Sky Sports2.
I actually liked Setanta, it should never have tried to compete with Sky Sports though for English Football.
At least with Sky Sports the Old Firm game will attract viewers from across the United Kingdom. But an SPL TV won't. The English pay for English football and will watch the Old Firm game just because they have it on their subscription.
At least with Sky Sports the Old Firm game will attract viewers from across the United Kingdom. But an SPL TV won't. The English pay for English football and will watch the Old Firm game just because they have it on their subscription.
-----------------------
The thing is, this benefits Sky not the SPL. OF games could attract the highest audience figures on Sky, but it would make no difference to the clubs financially. What Scottish football needs is more money from pay TV if it has any chance of improving at all.
Let's be honest...SKY is generally a good thing for the SPL. But the clubs are not benefitting to their full potentil. There are lot of ex-pts like me who cannot legitimtely get SKY overseas. They're missing trick here. Sky really ought to look into ensuring they are mximising their audience. Hving said that Rangers TV on the internet hs been excellent for watching live games. But I would much rather watch it on the box than on a pc...Would an SPL tv be able to scale itself to provide a global service ? Not sure they are upto that....but SKY certainly could ...
Did you watch some of the games last season, particularly the ones on ESPN?
Hamilton v St Mirren, Kilmarnock v ICT, St Johnstone v Motherwell etc.
At times it looked like there were more people on the pitch than there were in the stands! It's an embarrassment. Not to mention the state of some of the pitches and the 'quality' of the football on offer.
I'm all for getting the best for Scottish football but is it any wonder Sky is only interested in showing games involving Celtic and Rangers?
Nice one Harry. But that ain't sky's fault. That is the fault of the clubs and the SPL in general for a dire product. Only interested in themselves. U only have took at the fiasco of trying to force a 10 team SPL on us again. The fans have said over and over 14 or 16 teams but they ain't listening. So it comes as no surprise crowds are dwindling. Add the economic circumstances to the mix then clubs gave to be more creative in how they get pol thru the turnstiles. Better value is required
Did you watch some of the games last season, particularly the ones on ESPN?
Hamilton v St Mirren, Kilmarnock v ICT, St Johnstone v Motherwell etc.
At times it looked like there were more people on the pitch than there were in the stands! It's an embarrassment. Not to mention the state of some of the pitches and the 'quality' of the football on offer.
I'm all for getting the best for Scottish football but is it any wonder Sky is only interested in showing games involving Celtic and Rangers?
------------------------------
I don't blame them but if things keep going the way they are then there will be even less people watching an even lower standard of football.
An SPL channel that also includes SFL coverage for around a fiver a month sounds great to me rather than having to subscribe to Sky/ESPN for channels filled with stuff like cricket and other sports I have no interest in. It could also take off on Freeview meaning it would be affordable to folk not interested in the costs of getting satellite and cable.
I'm not saying it will work, but it's worth looking into.
Harvey, esctosh, you make some really valid points,
Don't know if Rangers TV on the net is similar to Channel 67 where you can only see the matches live if you're outwith the UK, personally i'd be quite happy to watch the coverage on my clubs own channel, pundits trying to be impartial is utterly hopeless as there are too many football fans horrendously over-read into comments and opinions by pundits
If Sky keep the rights they'd be the best ones to package the SPL as it is, but an SPL TV would need a whole restructuring of the SPL as things like teams playing each other 4 times a month and midday kick-offs are helping to kill the game just as much as the stupid media nonsense last season
Celtic and to a lesser extent Rangers, should do what the Milan clubs, barca and Madrid do and fight to get their own contracts, even with the hmaga bucks in the epl, the top 5 or 6 are desperate to do their own deals as they know the whole 20/22 club bubble will eventually burst
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
Where exactly?!
Page 1 of 1
posted on 3/7/11
SPL are a joke.
A do hate espn Burley talks like a world cup winner
posted on 3/7/11
ESPN look like a second rate ITV, I'd rather we cut that part of the deal off but it probably won't happen...
posted on 3/7/11
Cap'n,I'd bin my ESPN to get HD but you always get at least a coupla decent games (Hearts away,Aberdeen away). TBH I'm not sure which one I could do without the least
posted on 3/7/11
Why should we take a pittance for the coverage, the only reason we running back to SKY was because of the others outwith the OF and Aberdeen taking the Setantas imaginary money.
The SPL is in a far healthier state now than it was then and the viewing figures show that accounts for 8% of Sky Sports total audience, so asking for 125m for two years is spot on.
posted on 3/7/11
The SPL have got definite cause to ask for an increase in revenue as other broadcasters could financially match it and SPL football has increased their viewing numbers, however slight the increase, it's still an increase but in turn the SPL is much better promoted on Sky (starting to feel like a frickin' advertising executive now! arrgh!! ) and that's not a cue to start banging on about last years debacle!
posted on 3/7/11
The current TV deal is only helping to increase the gap between the English game and the Scottish one. ESPN and Sky are only interested in getting our live coverage on the cheap. The way they carved up the rights the last time so SPL fans had to pay through the nose to get full coverage while throwing a miserly sum at the clubs actually led me to cancelling Sky. I don't care about Cricket or Golf or even giving more money to the bloated monster that is the EPL anymore.
I think it's good news that the SPL are looking into starting their own TV channel. It's actually the only way forward as far as I can see.
posted on 3/7/11
imo sky would be better off funding a 10 team spl with mega money (market it world wide) than trying to fund a 20 team epl just my opinion
posted on 3/7/11
My main fear is that an SPL run TV station will end up like a TV version of "Fishwife FM" on BBC Radio Scotland every Saturday from 2pm!
posted on 3/7/11
Let's be honest, the money Sky Sports are paying to broadcast the SPL is to show the four Old Firm games every year. Hence, every other SPL game is on Sky Sports 4, whereas the Old Firm games are on Sky Sports 1 or Sky Sports2.
I actually liked Setanta, it should never have tried to compete with Sky Sports though for English Football.
At least with Sky Sports the Old Firm game will attract viewers from across the United Kingdom. But an SPL TV won't. The English pay for English football and will watch the Old Firm game just because they have it on their subscription.
posted on 3/7/11
At least with Sky Sports the Old Firm game will attract viewers from across the United Kingdom. But an SPL TV won't. The English pay for English football and will watch the Old Firm game just because they have it on their subscription.
-----------------------
The thing is, this benefits Sky not the SPL. OF games could attract the highest audience figures on Sky, but it would make no difference to the clubs financially. What Scottish football needs is more money from pay TV if it has any chance of improving at all.
posted on 3/7/11
Let's be honest...SKY is generally a good thing for the SPL. But the clubs are not benefitting to their full potentil. There are lot of ex-pts like me who cannot legitimtely get SKY overseas. They're missing trick here. Sky really ought to look into ensuring they are mximising their audience. Hving said that Rangers TV on the internet hs been excellent for watching live games. But I would much rather watch it on the box than on a pc...Would an SPL tv be able to scale itself to provide a global service ? Not sure they are upto that....but SKY certainly could ...
posted on 3/7/11
Did you watch some of the games last season, particularly the ones on ESPN?
Hamilton v St Mirren, Kilmarnock v ICT, St Johnstone v Motherwell etc.
At times it looked like there were more people on the pitch than there were in the stands! It's an embarrassment. Not to mention the state of some of the pitches and the 'quality' of the football on offer.
I'm all for getting the best for Scottish football but is it any wonder Sky is only interested in showing games involving Celtic and Rangers?
posted on 3/7/11
Nice one Harry. But that ain't sky's fault. That is the fault of the clubs and the SPL in general for a dire product. Only interested in themselves. U only have took at the fiasco of trying to force a 10 team SPL on us again. The fans have said over and over 14 or 16 teams but they ain't listening. So it comes as no surprise crowds are dwindling. Add the economic circumstances to the mix then clubs gave to be more creative in how they get pol thru the turnstiles. Better value is required
posted on 3/7/11
Did you watch some of the games last season, particularly the ones on ESPN?
Hamilton v St Mirren, Kilmarnock v ICT, St Johnstone v Motherwell etc.
At times it looked like there were more people on the pitch than there were in the stands! It's an embarrassment. Not to mention the state of some of the pitches and the 'quality' of the football on offer.
I'm all for getting the best for Scottish football but is it any wonder Sky is only interested in showing games involving Celtic and Rangers?
------------------------------
I don't blame them but if things keep going the way they are then there will be even less people watching an even lower standard of football.
An SPL channel that also includes SFL coverage for around a fiver a month sounds great to me rather than having to subscribe to Sky/ESPN for channels filled with stuff like cricket and other sports I have no interest in. It could also take off on Freeview meaning it would be affordable to folk not interested in the costs of getting satellite and cable.
I'm not saying it will work, but it's worth looking into.
posted on 3/7/11
Harvey, esctosh, you make some really valid points,
Don't know if Rangers TV on the net is similar to Channel 67 where you can only see the matches live if you're outwith the UK, personally i'd be quite happy to watch the coverage on my clubs own channel, pundits trying to be impartial is utterly hopeless as there are too many football fans horrendously over-read into comments and opinions by pundits
If Sky keep the rights they'd be the best ones to package the SPL as it is, but an SPL TV would need a whole restructuring of the SPL as things like teams playing each other 4 times a month and midday kick-offs are helping to kill the game just as much as the stupid media nonsense last season
posted on 4/7/11
Celtic and to a lesser extent Rangers, should do what the Milan clubs, barca and Madrid do and fight to get their own contracts, even with the hmaga bucks in the epl, the top 5 or 6 are desperate to do their own deals as they know the whole 20/22 club bubble will eventually burst
Page 1 of 1