Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2020 21:20:50 GMT
Unless you subscribe to this on line 'paper', you can't read the full article anyway... Maybe one one of our left-leaning, pro-EU, anti-Tory posters could copy and paste it for us? Thanks in advance comrades. Am I missing some deliberate irony, or are you the last person in the country to realise that it's the only 'quality' free broadsheet nowadays? No, they don't like words of more than one syllable. |
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,109 
|
Post by eppinggas on May 27, 2020 8:38:05 GMT
Unless you subscribe to this on line 'paper', you can't read the full article anyway... Maybe one one of our left-leaning, pro-EU, anti-Tory posters could copy and paste it for us? Thanks in advance comrades. Am I missing some deliberate irony, or are you the last person in the country to realise that it's the only 'quality' free broadsheet nowadays? No. As I said - you have to subscribe to read the full article. I do not wish to subscribe to the guardian. Not that hard to understand is it? As for it being 'free'. You get what you pay for. So if you, Oldie or Citizen Smith would care to do the honours... I'll give it a read. Power to the People. |
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on May 27, 2020 9:20:37 GMT
Am I missing some deliberate irony, or are you the last person in the country to realise that it's the only 'quality' free broadsheet nowadays? No. As I said - you have to subscribe to read the full article. I do not wish to subscribe to the guardian. Not that hard to understand is it? As for it being 'free'. You get what you pay for. So if you, Oldie or Citizen Smith would care to do the honours... I'll give it a read. Power to the People. so when I tell you that it's the only 'quality' free broadsheet you respond, content in your knowledge, that you have to subscribe to read the article you could always try a walk on the wild left side and click on the Guardian website. And try again to process what you have been told - because at the moment I'm thinking that you are still the only person in the country thinking that you have to subscribe to read it a very high number of it's readers read it because it is free, and does not require a subscription. The 'price' that they pay is exposure to some thinking that they might not see in other papers. Some worry that it might, over time, start to influence them. But that requires them to process what's in front of them, which will probably mean immunity for some.... |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2020 10:34:51 GMT
No. As I said - you have to subscribe to read the full article. I do not wish to subscribe to the guardian. Not that hard to understand is it? As for it being 'free'. You get what you pay for. So if you, Oldie or Citizen Smith would care to do the honours... I'll give it a read. Power to the People. so when I tell you that it's the only 'quality' free broadsheet you respond, content in your knowledge, that you have to subscribe to read the article you could always try a walk on the wild left side and click on the Guardian website. And try again to process what you have been told - because at the moment I'm thinking that you are still the only person in the country thinking that you have to subscribe to read it a very high number of it's readers read it because it is free, and does not require a subscription. The 'price' that they pay is exposure to some thinking that they might not see in other papers. Some worry that it might, over time, start to influence them. But that requires them to process what's in front of them, which will probably mean immunity for some.... Christ AMPG, Brilliantly put. |
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on May 30, 2020 1:08:27 GMT
There is something in this because there is an aspect to the sports rights model where company's develop monopolys and then sit on the rights. Cricket is the most egregious example of this. Sky has a monopoly on domestic TV cricket rights and never show County Championship games. Now people might say 'so what-it's not popular anyway' but there is actually a decent sized market for it and it's a good schedule filler. Something similar happens with lower league football which is arguably under served relative to the audience it gets. However, the problem with football has always been that outside the top teams no one watches games that don't feature their team. We'd watch Rovers games but would we watch Peterborough vs Southend? Probably not.
|
|
GasMacc1
Les Bradd
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,423
|
Post by GasMacc1 on Jun 6, 2020 15:48:26 GMT
The article is by David Conn. I used to enjoy reading his articles in the Independent.
Even before football was plunged into crisis by the Covid-19 pandemic, influential people in the game were discussing the need for the Premier League’s improbable fortunes to be shared more equally. As historic, stalwart lower-division and semi-professional clubs stare at ruin, and promised investment could drain from the grassroots, the argument is finally beyond credible dispute.
However the Premier League resolves its struggle to finish this season so that it can clutch the remainder of the TV money, it will still be a huge draw for broadcast billions when normal life finally returns. The pre-pandemic position, that the big clubs keep 93% of the current, 2019-22, £8.65bn TV deals, handing most of it to players in wages while trickling drops down for good works, does not look sustainable following the crisis.
Some sceptics raised eyebrows when the EFL chairman, Rick Parry, made his forthright arguments that football’s finances need a reset and described Premier League parachute payments as an “evil that must be eradicated”. Football people who are getting on a bit recall Parry as the energetic first Premier League chief executive, engineering its breakaway with the Football League’s First Division clubs, and the introduction, in 1992, of parachute payments for relegated clubs.
But Parry’s advocacy for financial reform, much more urgent and necessary now, is not a case of amnesia from the work he did earlier in his career. When he was headhunted by the EFL last year, in what seemed a turbulent period but now seems like a lost utopia, Parry is understood to have reminded people that he has long advocated closer union, and more distribution, between the leagues.
As early as 1995, with the 72 clubs in the Football League’s three divisions still seething at the breakaway of the top division teams from sharing 50% of the TV money, Parry offered to repair some of the breach. Looking to the second round of TV deals beginning in 1997, he secured agreement from the Premier League’s clubs to sell the rights jointly with the Football League, and share the proceeds 80-20.
The Football League’s response caused a huge internal row at the time, since filed away with all the other huge football rows, because the board rejected the offer. Larger clubs in what is now the Championship were furious at that missed opportunity for more sharing with the Premier League and it led to reforms, including Richard Scudamore’s appointment as the Football League’s chief executive in 1997.
Scudamore was highly rated as an operator and was promptly snapped up by the Premier League, where he came to personify its resounding worldwide growth in popularity and unfeasible broadcast fortunes. Scudamore was also an unforgiving fighter for its independence and supremacy, beating back the FA’s influence as the governing body, and cementing and widening the gap with the EFL.
Tested by government or MPs’ inquiries into the game’s divisions and commercial casualties, Scudamore also became expert at gaming political battles and doing enough to resist talk of regulation. He did prompt the Premier League into good works it is never slow to trumpet in front of governments: the community programmes, funding for grassroots facilities, and money to the EFL, touchingly described as “solidarity”. As the figures are scrutinised in these straitened times, and discounting the £273m parachute payments the Premier League likes to present as money for the EFL, the total distribution has been clarified as 6.8%.
Before the crisis hit, the discussion about more sharing was not just limited to the EFL. Some Premier League clubs, for whom relegation is a possibility, were beginning to argue for change too. Surprisingly, there is said to be some support even among the top clubs for the longstanding traditions of distributing money, genuine solidarity and strength in depth.
The argument against sharing, that the top clubs need to keep more of the money to attract players who can compete in Europe, has been rendered redundant by the Premier League’s success. Its TV deals are more than double those of the next richest European league, the Bundesliga, so the clubs can easily share more than 20% now and still be utterly dominant.
League Two clubs have decided to curtail their season, League One clubs are considering the same, and many are wondering how their futures can be sustained. These clubs say there is no point borrowing from the government’s crisis scheme, because loans will need to be repaid and they may still have paltry income next season if crowds remain prohibited. But if they know that from 2022 they will receive significant funding from joint Premier League and EFL selling of TV rights, they could borrow against that and plot a survival plan.
Before the general election, the FA was given the very surprising promise from the Conservative party of £730m for grassroots investment over the next 10 years, but that must now be in doubt. However, the need to have decent sports facilities for people to maintain and rebuild their physical and psychological fitness will be more compelling than ever in the period of national recovery to come.
The grim, greedy insistence that a few clubs must keep so much of football’s money has been damaging for years and now, in this terrible crisis, the game faces a compelling case to put itself back together again.
|
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on Jun 7, 2020 10:08:52 GMT
The reality is that one way or another the Premier League 'revolution' has never been completed. What we have is a kind of fudge that no one has ever been sufficiently motivated to address as the model has generally made those at the top very rich and also had a reasonable trickle down effect that has kept people lower down the scale grumbling but relatively satisfied.
They have never properly settled what the relationship between the Premier League and the rest of the game should be, what it owes the grassroots, what role it should play within the wider English game etc. They just sought of largely left it alone as it was when created and allowed the Premier League to slowly accrue more and more power. There always had to be some kind of reckoning one day and it was always going to happen at the point the Premier League itself hit some kind of crisis or faced much stiffer competition from somewhere. It is interesting if the current crisis is sufficient andf it remains to be seen whether any change would have benefit for Football League clubs. If change is led by the Premier League that seems unlikely to say the least.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2020 11:17:51 GMT
No. As I said - you have to subscribe to read the full article. I do not wish to subscribe to the guardian. Not that hard to understand is it? As for it being 'free'. You get what you pay for. So if you, Oldie or Citizen Smith would care to do the honours... I'll give it a read. Power to the People. so when I tell you that it's the only 'quality' free broadsheet you respond, content in your knowledge, that you have to subscribe to read the article you could always try a walk on the wild left side and click on the Guardian website. And try again to process what you have been told - because at the moment I'm thinking that you are still the only person in the country thinking that you have to subscribe to read it a very high number of it's readers read it because it is free, and does not require a subscription. The 'price' that they pay is exposure to some thinking that they might not see in other papers. Some worry that it might, over time, start to influence them. But that requires them to process what's in front of them, which will probably mean immunity for some.... We'll have to check the definition of 'quality' but I agree, it's always worth scanning their website to know how the left are planning to lose the next election. But don't worry if you haven't the time to do that, just turn on The BBC, they are The Guardian's biggest customer. Maybe that goes some way to explaining how far to the left it's drifted and how out of touch with public opinion it is. Ref the football side of things. Looks like Scotland are about to agree a new League structure with top clubs having their 'B' teams in the lower divisions. This is an erosion of our culture in pursuit of money in my eyes. Nobody can say that they weren't warned. A club like Rovers could easily succumb and be replaced by a training and development facility for a PL club's youngsters. |
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,109
|
Post by eppinggas on Jun 7, 2020 12:33:20 GMT
The reality is that one way or another the Premier League 'revolution' has never been completed. What we have is a kind of fudge that no one has ever been sufficiently motivated to address as the model has generally made those at the top very rich and also had a reasonable trickle down effect that has kept people lower down the scale grumbling but relatively satisfied.
They have never properly settled what the relationship between the Premier League and the rest of the game should be, what it owes the grassroots, what role it should play within the wider English game etc. They just sought of largely left it alone as it was when created and allowed the Premier League to slowly accrue more and more power. There always had to be some kind of reckoning one day and it was always going to happen at the point the Premier League itself hit some kind of crisis or faced much stiffer competition from somewhere. It is interesting if the current crisis is sufficient andf it remains to be seen whether any change would have benefit for Football League clubs. If change is led by the Premier League that seems unlikely to say the least.
Good points Irish. I think we will see a change in the relationship between the PL and the EFL. Effectively there isn't any regulation of the football industry. I don't think the PL don't have any obligation to give that "solidarity payment". So from a free-market perspective - makes no sense for the PL to pay to prop up dozens of inefficient unsustainable lower league Clubs. When the top 4 leagues were under the same governing body - there was less money about, but it was 'fair'. Now there's unbelievable greed and self interest at the top. Covid 19 will exacerbate this, and I can only see it getting worse. It is, what it is. (Crikey - that all comes across as very negative. Someone tell me I'm wrong). |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2020 12:41:06 GMT
The reality is that one way or another the Premier League 'revolution' has never been completed. What we have is a kind of fudge that no one has ever been sufficiently motivated to address as the model has generally made those at the top very rich and also had a reasonable trickle down effect that has kept people lower down the scale grumbling but relatively satisfied.
They have never properly settled what the relationship between the Premier League and the rest of the game should be, what it owes the grassroots, what role it should play within the wider English game etc. They just sought of largely left it alone as it was when created and allowed the Premier League to slowly accrue more and more power. There always had to be some kind of reckoning one day and it was always going to happen at the point the Premier League itself hit some kind of crisis or faced much stiffer competition from somewhere. It is interesting if the current crisis is sufficient andf it remains to be seen whether any change would have benefit for Football League clubs. If change is led by the Premier League that seems unlikely to say the least.
Good points Irish. I think we will see a change in the relationship between the PL and the EFL. Effectively there isn't any regulation of the football industry. I don't think the PL don't have any obligation to give that "solidarity payment". So from a free-market perspective - makes no sense for the PL to pay to prop up dozens of inefficient unsustainable lower league Clubs. When the top 4 leagues were under the same governing body - there was less money about, but it was 'fair'. Now there's unbelievable greed and self interest at the top. Covid 19 will exacerbate this, and I can only see it getting worse. It is, what it is. (Crikey - that all comes across as very negative. Someone tell me I'm wrong). No You are spot on |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2020 13:13:34 GMT
The reality is that one way or another the Premier League 'revolution' has never been completed. What we have is a kind of fudge that no one has ever been sufficiently motivated to address as the model has generally made those at the top very rich and also had a reasonable trickle down effect that has kept people lower down the scale grumbling but relatively satisfied.
They have never properly settled what the relationship between the Premier League and the rest of the game should be, what it owes the grassroots, what role it should play within the wider English game etc. They just sought of largely left it alone as it was when created and allowed the Premier League to slowly accrue more and more power. There always had to be some kind of reckoning one day and it was always going to happen at the point the Premier League itself hit some kind of crisis or faced much stiffer competition from somewhere. It is interesting if the current crisis is sufficient andf it remains to be seen whether any change would have benefit for Football League clubs. If change is led by the Premier League that seems unlikely to say the least.
Good points Irish. I think we will see a change in the relationship between the PL and the EFL. Effectively there isn't any regulation of the football industry. I don't think the PL don't have any obligation to give that "solidarity payment". So from a free-market perspective - makes no sense for the PL to pay to prop up dozens of inefficient unsustainable lower league Clubs. When the top 4 leagues were under the same governing body - there was less money about, but it was 'fair'. Now there's unbelievable greed and self interest at the top. Covid 19 will exacerbate this, and I can only see it getting worse. It is, what it is. (Crikey - that all comes across as very negative. Someone tell me I'm wrong). First 'Free to air' PL games announced, no doubt the broadcasts will be laden with suggestions that you may like to look at the available package options to continue watching their tawdry product, for a fee. |
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on Jun 7, 2020 18:31:45 GMT
The reality is that one way or another the Premier League 'revolution' has never been completed. What we have is a kind of fudge that no one has ever been sufficiently motivated to address as the model has generally made those at the top very rich and also had a reasonable trickle down effect that has kept people lower down the scale grumbling but relatively satisfied.
They have never properly settled what the relationship between the Premier League and the rest of the game should be, what it owes the grassroots, what role it should play within the wider English game etc. They just sought of largely left it alone as it was when created and allowed the Premier League to slowly accrue more and more power. There always had to be some kind of reckoning one day and it was always going to happen at the point the Premier League itself hit some kind of crisis or faced much stiffer competition from somewhere. It is interesting if the current crisis is sufficient andf it remains to be seen whether any change would have benefit for Football League clubs. If change is led by the Premier League that seems unlikely to say the least.
Good points Irish. I think we will see a change in the relationship between the PL and the EFL. Effectively there isn't any regulation of the football industry. I don't think the PL don't have any obligation to give that "solidarity payment". So from a free-market perspective - makes no sense for the PL to pay to prop up dozens of inefficient unsustainable lower league Clubs. When the top 4 leagues were under the same governing body - there was less money about, but it was 'fair'. Now there's unbelievable greed and self interest at the top. Covid 19 will exacerbate this, and I can only see it getting worse. It is, what it is. (Crikey - that all comes across as very negative. Someone tell me I'm wrong). Yes - this is how I think it will go as well unfortunately. |
|
|
|
Post by canberragas on Jun 10, 2020 9:20:06 GMT
The reality is that one way or another the Premier League 'revolution' has never been completed. What we have is a kind of fudge that no one has ever been sufficiently motivated to address as the model has generally made those at the top very rich and also had a reasonable trickle down effect that has kept people lower down the scale grumbling but relatively satisfied.
They have never properly settled what the relationship between the Premier League and the rest of the game should be, what it owes the grassroots, what role it should play within the wider English game etc. They just sought of largely left it alone as it was when created and allowed the Premier League to slowly accrue more and more power. There always had to be some kind of reckoning one day and it was always going to happen at the point the Premier League itself hit some kind of crisis or faced much stiffer competition from somewhere. It is interesting if the current crisis is sufficient andf it remains to be seen whether any change would have benefit for Football League clubs. If change is led by the Premier League that seems unlikely to say the least.
Good points Irish. I think we will see a change in the relationship between the PL and the EFL. Effectively there isn't any regulation of the football industry. I don't think the PL don't have any obligation to give that "solidarity payment". So from a free-market perspective - makes no sense for the PL to pay to prop up dozens of inefficient unsustainable lower league Clubs. When the top 4 leagues were under the same governing body - there was less money about, but it was 'fair'. Now there's unbelievable greed and self interest at the top. Covid 19 will exacerbate this, and I can only see it getting worse. It is, what it is. (Crikey - that all comes across as very negative. Someone tell me I'm wrong). |
|
|
|
Post by canberragas on Jun 10, 2020 9:21:58 GMT
so when I tell you that it's the only 'quality' free broadsheet you respond, content in your knowledge, that you have to subscribe to read the article you could always try a walk on the wild left side and click on the Guardian website. And try again to process what you have been told - because at the moment I'm thinking that you are still the only person in the country thinking that you have to subscribe to read it a very high number of it's readers read it because it is free, and does not require a subscription. The 'price' that they pay is exposure to some thinking that they might not see in other papers. Some worry that it might, over time, start to influence them. But that requires them to process what's in front of them, which will probably mean immunity for some.... We'll have to check the definition of 'quality' but I agree, it's always worth scanning their website to know how the left are planning to lose the next election. But don't worry if you haven't the time to do that, just turn on The BBC, they are The Guardian's biggest customer. Maybe that goes some way to explaining how far to the left it's drifted and how out of touch with public opinion it is. Ref the football side of things. Looks like Scotland are about to agree a new League structure with top clubs having their 'B' teams in the lower divisions. This is an erosion of our culture in pursuit of money in my eyes. Nobody can say that they weren't warned. A club like Rovers could easily succumb and be replaced by a training and development facility for a PL club's youngsters. |
|
|
|
Post by canberragas on Jun 10, 2020 9:22:48 GMT
Can we please have a thumbs down button
|
|
