Newcastle new date,Tuesday 25 March

[Coach]

They would just make us play and let Arsenal postpone - it's a nap.

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

Still not released ticket info yet

Cutting it a bit fine

 

[royalblue66]

Remy said they are going to win all their remaining games after winning their last two, getting a bit carried away IMO

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

They're going to have to release ticket details soon, otherwise they'll be no time to post the tickets out

 

[SerenityNigh]

It's because, i'd imagine that those fans of the little teams in the league, and in the non league, well their fans would stay in and watch the premier league, even if 100-200 were shaved off the gate each week, over the course of 23 home games that's potentially 4,600 people, which for some teams, is a full fixture of revenue, or in some cases, 2 games. It'd cripple the football pyramid.

Edit: As for Premier League teams, teams like Fulham already take rubbish followings, that'd get even worse and even Everton would lose a good couple of thousand each week imo, Everton Vs. Stoke, where's the appeal in paying £40 when it's on the box for free?

This is quite backwards thinking, at least by my reasoning. You've got the best product in the world in the (E)PL, except that thing that happens every 4 years or so. If you have a good product, export it and you'll do better. Why should someone in America, Thailand, Australia, or Sweden want to see Fulham? I have no idea. But Fulham lose far more viewers on TV for each game that is not televised than they gain in ticket-buying attendees.

TV most helps the teams with the biggest support, but at the top level, there aren't any teams that don't gain from being on TV. If you want to blackout local viewers (and force them to attend the game), that's an option (popular for the NFL), but you may find that TV revenue from local games is still far greater than gate receipts (or is so with the NFL).

 

[SerenityNigh]

Every Premier league game is televised live. In Australia

Which means someone will send it down river

 

[Allezfan]

This is quite backwards thinking, at least by my reasoning. You've got the best product in the world in the (E)PL, except that thing that happens every 4 years or so. If you have a good product, export it and you'll do better. Why should someone in America, Thailand, Australia, or Sweden want to see Fulham? I have no idea. But Fulham lose far more viewers on TV for each game that is not televised than they gain in ticket-buying attendees.

TV most helps the teams with the biggest support, but at the top level, there aren't any teams that don't gain from being on TV. If you want to blackout local viewers (and force them to attend the game), that's an option (popular for the NFL), but you may find that TV revenue from local games is still far greater than gate receipts (or is so with the NFL).

Nah, you're wrong.

If the tv money is not there, then the top teams earn 8 million and the smaller teams 2, if it is the top teams earn 200 and the smaller teams 50. The latter is more damaging to the smaller teams.

 

[SerenityNigh]

Nah, you're wrong.

If the tv money is not there, then the top teams earn 8 million and the smaller teams 2, if it is the top teams earn 200 and the smaller teams 50. The latter is more damaging to the smaller teams.

I'm not arguing whether all-TV is better than no-TV (although I might take that position), but instead that all-TV is better than some-TV. If United were to play that Tuesday it would be on TV. Why not a Newcastle home game? All their fans out punching horses? The PL, in its current form, is an all-TV league. Why should any game not be televised?

 

[Allezfan]

I'm not arguing whether all-TV is better than no-TV (although I might take that position), but instead that all-TV is better than some-TV. If United were to play that Tuesday it would be on TV. Why not a Newcastle home game? All their fans out punching horses? The PL, in its current form, is an all-TV league. Why should any game not be televised?

It shouldn't be. The tv money is what the league is for.

Live fans are a tiny part of most clubs income in comparison.

I think that that truth has led to a league with unfortunate priorities but yeah no you're right.

 

[N.S.N.O.]

don't see why sky aren't televising the game, gonna cost both clubs over £600,000 is tv money....

 

[Seamus Colemole]

don't see why sky aren't televising the game, gonna cost both clubs over £600,000 is tv money....

Because the Manchester derby is being televised that night.

 

[N.S.N.O.]

Because the Manchester derby is being televised that night.

stick it on sky sports 2....when city are 4-0 up after 20 mins, neutrals will want to watch a proper game...

 

[barneygumble]

This is quite backwards thinking, at least by my reasoning. You've got the best product in the world in the (E)PL, except that thing that happens every 4 years or so. If you have a good product, export it and you'll do better. Why should someone in America, Thailand, Australia, or Sweden want to see Fulham? I have no idea. But Fulham lose far more viewers on TV for each game that is not televised than they gain in ticket-buying attendees.

TV most helps the teams with the biggest support, but at the top level, there aren't any teams that don't gain from being on TV. If you want to blackout local viewers (and force them to attend the game), that's an option (popular for the NFL), but you may find that TV revenue from local games is still far greater than gate receipts (or is so with the NFL).

But the fact of the matter is, it will hamper clubs Alot more, if it is. For example, if every game is televised, where's the demand? I'm still talking about the main reason, the actual reason why anyway, cause i'll pick a random place in the UK here, Lets say Hereford. Hereford isn't a hotbed of football, but when the nearest 'big' team is 60 miles away, they can pull a decent crowd come Saturday 3pm, whilst you do say an excellent point, the fact is, that there are so many 'Glory hunting' fans in most towns (Excl. where teams are big), and if given the choice to go to Edgar St to watch Hereford Vs. Braintree, or the luxury of watching their chosen team e.g. Manchester United on the tv for whats included in your sports package, you'll find the majority will choose the latter, and therefore, team loses finance, team goes bust. Simple. If they ever agree to televising games at 3pm, the games dead for me.

 

[bicycleheader]

But the fact of the matter is, it will hamper clubs Alot more, if it is. For example, if every game is televised, where's the demand? I'm still talking about the main reason, the actual reason why anyway, cause i'll pick a random place in the UK here, Lets say Hereford. Hereford isn't a hotbed of football, but when the nearest 'big' team is 60 miles away, they can pull a decent crowd come Saturday 3pm, whilst you do say an excellent point, the fact is, that there are so many 'Glory hunting' fans in most towns (Excl. where teams are big), and if given the choice to go to Edgar St to watch Hereford Vs. Braintree, or the luxury of watching their chosen team e.g. Manchester United on the tv for whats included in your sports package, you'll find the majority will choose the latter, and therefore, team loses finance, team goes bust. Simple. If they ever agree to televising games at 3pm, the games dead for me.

Maybe its not as commonly done as I thought but you can watch any 3pm kickoff online now anyway and even hook it up to your tv when the qualitys good enough.

Id imagine if your dedicated enough to your football to go watch hereford v braintree, you are also well up enough to know how to find your chosen PL game online when its only a couple clicks away.

So basically the scenario you mentions already in place more or less I would say.

 

[BoysInBlue]

Every Premier league game is televised live. In Australia

And America.

The top game is shown on the NBC Sport Channel, and every other game is shown on the NBC Sports Extra Time channels.