What's new

Premier League 2016-17 payments

Everlasting Seconds

Well-Known Member
Jan 9, 2014
14,914
26,616
Its terrible that its that low, to be honest. Its crazy to think England doesnt have all English Premier League games televised/available to stream but the USA do. I think there was only 1 game I had to get through the streaming app because it wasnt on cable.

This.

It's arguably a bit of a joke that we have to struggle so much to be able to see our team live every week when you consider that in the US, EVERY game for every team across every single sport is televised (NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL). My mate is a big NFL fan (as am I) but he's not much of a footy fan and he simply can't understand why I don't get to watch every single game that Spurs play each week.
It's simply because it is unlikely that a high ratio of broadcasted matches in the US will influence the actual number that chooses to attend matches in person in PL. Here, fewer matches are televised because that leads to more people actually going to the match. I'm sure there are similar mechanisms within the US for domestic sports broadcasts.
 

nicdic

Official SC Padre
Admin
May 8, 2005
41,857
25,920
It's simply because it is unlikely that a high ratio of broadcasted matches in the US will influence the actual number that chooses to attend matches in person in PL. Here, fewer matches are televised because that leads to more people actually going to the match. I'm sure there are similar mechanisms within the US for domestic sports broadcasts.
Yet Germany broadcast all games don't they?

The model here is wrong. Fewer people are watching football on Sky and BT, and are streaming. Not sure it necessarily affects attendances.

Ticket prices need to come down, and all games should be televised. Would lead to higher attendances.
 

viktorviktor

Well-Known Member
Nov 25, 2014
398
1,827
It's simply because it is unlikely that a high ratio of broadcasted matches in the US will influence the actual number that chooses to attend matches in person in PL. Here, fewer matches are televised because that leads to more people actually going to the match.

In Denmark, PL-games are under the same restrictions as in the UK, which makes no sense at all.
 

yankspurs

Enic Out
Aug 22, 2013
41,934
71,349
It's simply because it is unlikely that a high ratio of broadcasted matches in the US will influence the actual number that chooses to attend matches in person in PL. Here, fewer matches are televised because that leads to more people actually going to the match. I'm sure there are similar mechanisms within the US for domestic sports broadcasts.
No we do not have anything like that at all. Every game in every sport is broadcast on the teams regional networks(either contracted out or owned by the team) and some games are picked up nationally. If your out of region for your team, the leagues have streaming/ppv packages you could buy for the games. The point is you always have a legal avenue available to you to watch a game. Not only do we have that for the sports here, we also now have that ability for the PL, Bundesliga, CL, EL, Euros, WC. And much of La Liga, Serie A and Ligue 1 are available to watch/stream as well.

I'd reckon all the current rules in England do is give way to a huge influx of traffic to illegal streaming sites
 

rabbikeane

Well-Known Member
Mar 29, 2005
6,916
12,744
It's as backwards as the fight against mp3 music and pirate bay.
Just have no restrictions and give as good legal product as it's possible to make
 

Riandor

COB Founder
May 26, 2004
9,418
11,626
Sky lost the rights in Germany to show EPL games, but DAZN a streaming service (legal, costs 9.99 a month) shows them all, sometimes with a delay until the match has finished, but I watched most of the Spurs games this way and live.

Now yes, I live abroad, so it's my only real option, but I seriously think the UK model is outdated. People will go to the matches regardless, especially if it drives down ticket priced (compensated by increase in tv/internet revenue).
 

Gb160

Well done boys. Good process
Jun 20, 2012
23,662
93,369
Yet Germany broadcast all games don't they?

The model here is wrong. Fewer people are watching football on Sky and BT, and are streaming. Not sure it necessarily affects attendances.

Ticket prices need to come down, and all games should be televised. Would lead to higher attendances.
This is where it gets a bit complicated though, i can definitely see a case for televising all PL games, but the argument is it would hit lower league clubs hard in their attendances, and their match day revenue is essentially what keeps these clubs running, as they get buggar all from TV rights.

I don't buy this personally, but apparently a lot of people go and see lower league clubs as a their second team when their first team is playing away.
It makes even less sense with all the 'iffy' methods of streaming now available, if someone wants to watch every game their team plays, its really not that hard.

Something needs to change thats for sure...maybe just pump a bit more money from the TV deal to these lower league teams that will take the hit? i don't know, but its a very special situation we have in this country of having 96 professional clubs, and im pretty sure that this is a big factor in why only certain games are shown live.
 

Everlasting Seconds

Well-Known Member
Jan 9, 2014
14,914
26,616
To put the record straight, I'm far from agreeing with the UK broadcasting model. There are several sustainable ways for utilising modern technology to make available far more matches for broadcasts.
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
This.

It's arguably a bit of a joke that we have to struggle so much to be able to see our team live every week when you consider that in the US, EVERY game for every team across every single sport is televised (NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL). My mate is a big NFL fan (as am I) but he's not much of a footy fan and he simply can't understand why I don't get to watch every single game that Spurs play each week.

Firstly we cannot watch 15:00 saturday games because they want to protect the smaller teams. They worry that people will not go and watch barnet if arsenal v spurs is on tv.
Secondly we can't watch all our games because the premier league is a shared tv deal. How long would that last if the majority of viewers were watching the big teams and not the smaller teams? Man utd, liverpool would demand a bigger slice of the cake. Look at spain. Also sponsors might hold back money if only a few thousand were watching boro v soton and everyone else were watching the other matches.
 

yankspurs

Enic Out
Aug 22, 2013
41,934
71,349
Firstly we cannot watch 15:00 saturday games because they want to protect the smaller teams. They worry that people will not go and watch barnet if arsenal v spurs is on tv.
Secondly we can't watch all our games because the premier league is a shared tv deal. How long would that last if the majority of viewers were watching the big teams and not the smaller teams? Man utd, liverpool would demand a bigger slice of the cake. Look at spain. Also sponsors might hold back money if only a few thousand were watching boro v soton and everyone else were watching the other matches.
That is precisely what is happening anyway? No matter which way you do it, some clubs will get screwed either because of the inherent bias of the media or the larger fan base. But it will be way more fair for the fans to show all the games, and even though it might lead to the same discrepency in payments, every side could get more money.

The Premier League could just create a pay monthly or annually streaming service for the UK and show all the games on it, but black out those that get picked for tv. Fair for the fans as they could then get to see their club play, more money for the clubs. Win/win.
 
Last edited:

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
That is precisely what is happening anyway? No matter which way you do it, some clubs will get screwed either because of the inherent bias of the media or the larger fan base. But it will be way more fair for the fans to show all the games, and even though it might lead to the same discrepency in payments, every side could get more money.

The Premier League could just create a pay monthly or annually streaming service for the UK and show all the games on it, but black out those that get picked for tv. Fair for the fans as they could then get to see their club play, more money for the clubs. Win/win.

It probably will happen. I know virgin are trying to go court over the 15:00 games.
 

al_pacino

woo
Feb 2, 2005
4,572
4,112
As someone who goes watch to their local non-league team I see the difference in crowds when the local PL team is at home or away, I think televising all the 3 o'clock games could have a similar impact and would cause a lot of clubs in trouble.
 

Lighty64

I believe
Aug 24, 2010
10,400
12,476
Yet Germany broadcast all games don't they?

The model here is wrong. Fewer people are watching football on Sky and BT, and are streaming. Not sure it necessarily affects attendances.

Ticket prices need to come down, and all games should be televised. Would lead to higher attendances.

i can't even do that in the way i was hoping when I moved. thought with a better internet speed I'd finally be able to use my firestick, but using the broadband service I chose, looks like it's got a block on streaming.

tried to watch Hull game, but it went down big time.

if they showed every premier match via bt or sky, it would have an effect, but more so on lower league teams that go to their local team even though they support a PL team
 

canadacelt

Well-Known Member
May 1, 2006
442
465
No we do not have anything like that at all. Every game in every sport is broadcast on the teams regional networks(either contracted out or owned by the team) and some games are picked up nationally. If your out of region for your team, the leagues have streaming/ppv packages you could buy for the games. The point is you always have a legal avenue available to you to watch a game. Not only do we have that for the sports here, we also now have that ability for the PL, Bundesliga, CL, EL, Euros, WC. And much of La Liga, Serie A and Ligue 1 are available to watch/stream as well.

I'd reckon all the current rules in England do is give way to a huge influx of traffic to illegal streaming sites


Incorrect:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackout_(broadcasting)

And it's the right thing to do, maintaining crowd volume at a game is more important than being to watch on TV, I'm a lucky benefactor as I'm so far away from where Spurs play on the other hand offset by the fact it's an expensive proposition to travel to The Lane. Would prefer being able to attend and miss a few games on TV
 
Last edited:

Shea

Well-Known Member
Apr 5, 2013
7,711
10,930
It's simply because it is unlikely that a high ratio of broadcasted matches in the US will influence the actual number that chooses to attend matches in person in PL. Here, fewer matches are televised because that leads to more people actually going to the match. I'm sure there are similar mechanisms within the US for domestic sports broadcasts.
That was disproved when Sky first started televising matches

Teams were compensated by Sky in anticipation of the decrease in live match day attendance due to the increased coverage of matches, but in actual fact attendances went up

Us not being able to watch all games live on tv has nothing to do with the potential for match attendance to go down

It's purely down to tv rights - the EPL sells packages to competing broadcasters like BT and SKy and no one has the right to show all matches so packages aren't sold for any one broadcaster to be able to show all games live on demand like in the US (or how sky do with the highlights and the red button match select)

I suppose at least it levels the playing field somewhat - if all games were shown live eventually the bigger/more watched teams would start demanding more money or the rights to broadcast (or at least have a share in the direct revenue from the broadcast) of their matches as a unique entity from the over all EPL package
 

RichieS

Well-Known Member
Dec 23, 2004
11,916
16,436
That was disproved when Sky first started televising matches

Teams were compensated by Sky in anticipation of the decrease in live match day attendance due to the increased coverage of matches, but in actual fact attendances went up

Us not being able to watch all games live on tv has nothing to do with the potential for match attendance to go down

It's purely down to tv rights - the EPL sells packages to competing broadcasters like BT and SKy and no one has the right to show all matches so packages aren't sold for any one broadcaster to be able to show all games live on demand like in the US (or how sky do with the highlights and the red button match select)

I suppose at least it levels the playing field somewhat - if all games were shown live eventually the bigger/more watched teams would start demanding more money or the rights to broadcast (or at least have a share in the direct revenue from the broadcast) of their matches as a unique entity from the over all EPL package
Across the entire football pyramid? I think the argument outlined above is that if Spurs are on the telly when away then fewer people rock up to Barnet or Enfield Town which is a serious issue for those clubs.
 
Top