Non-televised games

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

and still better than the Leeds Utd legal one.
 



YES Blade said:
I'm sure the majority on here are aware of the many options for watching an illegal stream, however I'd gladly pay to watch our matches on a legal service. There is no comparison between watching a match on a dodgy stream with watching a match legally on Sky, BT or Amazon.
Click to expand...

And don't we lose every time we are on Amazon? I think we've had 1 draw but never seen us win.
 
Arsenal fans back in their ground for our visit in October it seems.
 
kevreedy said:
Sky and Bt Amazon etc are bastards.
They are doing clubs out of money. why can,t every premier club be allowed to show their game live.when not picked by Sky etc.
while this lockdown is ongoing.i will be happy to pay a tenner to watch on Blades streaming site.
Click to expand...
Well they still paid us £120m or whatever despite the fucked up schedule.
They'll be paying the same next season. The £10 a match or whatever on ppv would be a drop in the ocean.
They should work with clubs to find a way to broadcast or stream everything legit though I agree.
 
Every club should just be allowed to stream their own games. £5 home games and £10 away games with a cut going to the away club. Offer some form of streaming half season ticket up until Christmas and if fans aren’t still allowed in stadiums offer another half and give a small discounted price for the STs. Fuck Sky they're ruining the game.
 
For every game not chosen for coverage, let the home side stream the game via their own website for an agreed, set price that is the same for all 20 PL clubs. Call it a tenner. And make it a simple, instant payment process.

So for example, United v Wolves; Blades fans go to our website and pay the tenner (each club can subsidise ST holders or members at their discretion). But Wolves fans wanting to watch also go to our website to pay and watch it. Then in the reverse fixture, we go on their website and pay to watch the game.

It will even itself out- say 30k Blades and £30k Wolves order the game at the Lane- United bank the money. Then for the game at Molineux, Wolves get the money. Its only like selling away tickets.

Same with, say Liverpool. The game at the Lane will probably get the 30k Blades fans buying- but will also probably get a few hundred thousand Liverpool fans buying. In the reverse at Anfield, Liverpool get their big number, and also the 30k from Blades fans.

It would probably be more lucrative, at least in the short term.

Sky, BT etc arent affected as they still pick the games they want. And Sky Sports/BT subscribers dont lose out becase theyre still getting the games they are paying for.
 
YES Blade said:
I'm sure the majority on here are aware of the many options for watching an illegal stream, however I'd gladly pay to watch our matches on a legal service. There is no comparison between watching a match on a dodgy stream with watching a match legally on Sky, BT or Amazon.
Click to expand...
If you use the right streaming service and are prepared to pay a minimal amount of £8 a month there's very very little difference
 
WincobankBlade said:
Other than the legality of it
Click to expand...

and the ethics of it.

If you were to come on here and show off about how you got into the ground for free, or bought some imported cloned Chinese kits, or asked for a refund for games you couldn't attend, you'd get slaughtered for "ripping the club off".

Premier League clubs make more from TV deals than any other revenue stream, but for some reason watching 'an illegal stream' is something to be celebrated. It says everything that some people on here started charging for streams of our games for no other reason than personal profit whilst simultaneously denying the club revenue, and they were celebrated on here and on social media for doing so. It would be interesting to see the reaction if someone was offering dodgy printed tickets on here at a discount!

I'm not going to lie; I'm guilty of watching them myself. I've watched the odd steam when I can't view it elsewhere. I'm not incriminating anyone. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of it all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Birley Blade said:
Every club should just be allowed to stream their own games. £5 home games and £10 away games with a cut going to the away club. Offer some form of streaming half season ticket up until Christmas and if fans aren’t still allowed in stadiums offer another half and give a small discounted price for the STs. Fuck Sky they're ruining the game.
Click to expand...
Spot on for me, I will be paying a fiver through the club's website to watch the Preston game on Friday, if the club's could reach some agreement with sky, bt and Amazon for the games fans can' t see, say £20 to view your team's PL game that day and everyone gets a cut, also make it the same price for the away fans to view as well, but they have to provide their own bottles of piss to chuck at the telly.
Then once fans are allowed back in then it goes back to normal TV coverage.
 
I propose a total boycott of watching any games until we can watch them all (across the prem league, not just blades) They'd soon give us what we want if we did that.
 
Flawed said:
and the ethics of it.

If you were to come on here and show off about how you got into the ground for free, or bought some imported cloned Chinese kits, or asked for a refund for games you couldn't attend, you'd get slaughtered for "ripping the club off".

Premier League clubs make more from TV deals than any other revenue stream, but for some reason watching 'an illegal stream' is something to be celebrated. It says everything that some people on here started charging for streams of our games for no other reason than personal profit whilst simultaneously denying the club revenue, and they were celebrated on here and on social media for doing so. It would be interesting to see the reaction if someone was offering dodgy printed tickets on here at a discount!

I'm not going to lie; I'm guilty of watching them myself. I've watched the odd steam when I can't view it elsewhere. I'm not incriminating anyone. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of it all.
Click to expand...

And they are probably the same people who think we should pay higher wages to players we are looking to sign.
 



KoppedOff said:
For every game not chosen for coverage, let the home side stream the game via their own website for an agreed, set price that is the same for all 20 PL clubs. Call it a tenner. And make it a simple, instant payment process.

So for example, United v Wolves; Blades fans go to our website and pay the tenner (each club can subsidise ST holders or members at their discretion). But Wolves fans wanting to watch also go to our website to pay and watch it. Then in the reverse fixture, we go on their website and pay to watch the game.

It will even itself out- say 30k Blades and £30k Wolves order the game at the Lane- United bank the money. Then for the game at Molineux, Wolves get the money. Its only like selling away tickets.

Same with, say Liverpool. The game at the Lane will probably get the 30k Blades fans buying- but will also probably get a few hundred thousand Liverpool fans buying. In the reverse at Anfield, Liverpool get their big number, and also the 30k from Blades fans.

It would probably be more lucrative, at least in the short term.

Sky, BT etc arent affected as they still pick the games they want. And Sky Sports/BT subscribers dont lose out becase theyre still getting the games they are paying for.
Click to expand...


No chance the clubs website is a joke countless people have not been able to even register and watch the pre season friendlies because of errors with the registration process.

It is a complete waste of time because there is no on available to help if it doesn't work.
At least if you have an issue with sky they try and get it sorted as quick as possible.
 
Flatulent_Bob said:
Really? They paid £5 billion for these rights, but you think they should just rip those contracts up?
Why should they allow the clubs to make revenues outside of themselves when they've paid a huge price for the exclusivity of their products?
I think fans are just looking at this through the lenses of them wanting to see all games and bollocks to what that means.

Would you be supportive if the broadcasters agreed but then only wanted to pay a fraction of the £5bn?
You are also advocating individual clubs opening up their own PPV channel, so no more collective bargaining which ensures the wealth is spread. That would mean a much lower broadcasting deal from the TV companies due to the loss of exclusivity and the big clubs making even more money with which we have to compete.
There is also the 3pm blackout as well which will be removed entirely by this and would be unlikely to be reintroduced.

If we are going to go down this all games screened route then I think something should be in the new TV which another poster (apologies) mentioned which mirrors what they have in the US, and the revenues are still split. However you can't do that within the structure of the current deal which doesn't expire for another 2 years, so unless you get across the board agreements from all broadcasters to amend their current deals, it would appear a none-starter.
Click to expand...
Maybe I'm missing something, but, couldn't all the broadcasters who have paid for coverage be given extra games to cover ones not currently covered. For the sake of an argument, lets say 200 games have been sold and that Sky have 160 of these (80% share) couldn't the additional games be split to maintain the same percentage share? This solution would give the individual broadcasters the same market share as they currently have, whilst allowing them to show more games (additional advertising revenue and subscriptions) and giving fans a legal option to continue watching their teams games. I'm honestly struggling to see the down side to this from the broadcaster and fans point of view.
The alternative is that more people will move towards illegal streams to prevent them from missing games, they may be impressed with the streams, ditch other subscriptions and continue to watch for free!
 
United's Arab Emirate said:
Maybe I'm missing something, but, couldn't all the broadcasters who have paid for coverage be given extra games to cover ones not currently covered. For the sake of an argument, lets say 200 games have been sold and that Sky have 160 of these (80% share) couldn't the additional games be split to maintain the same percentage share? This solution would give the individual broadcasters the same market share as they currently have, whilst allowing them to show more games (additional advertising revenue and subscriptions) and giving fans a legal option to continue watching their teams games. I'm honestly struggling to see the down side to this from the broadcaster and fans point of view.
The alternative is that more people will move towards illegal streams to prevent them from missing games, they may be impressed with the streams, ditch other subscriptions and continue to watch for free!
Click to expand...
As I've mentioned previously, that actually makes BT/Amazon more appealing to the casual fan who doesn't support a team in the PL because they get more games without having to shell out the big money for SKY. Those that buy SKY now for the maximum number of games will continue, however some of the casuals may move from Sky to BT/Amazon for better value for money for what they actually want.
Illegal streams aren't a huge problem for them as there's not huge numbers involved and they don't tend to stop people subscribing. IPTV is something slightly different but on similar lines which I think they have more of a problem with but it's more the PL who I think get upset with them.
They are also setting themselves up for criticism for charging for it, so if I were them I'd just provide the content on their platforms at a cost per game and retain advertising revenues, and get the clubs/PL to re-coup that charge from the fans/subscribers. Low risk, revenue increase and no negative publicity.
 
OrderOfStGeorge said:
No chance the clubs website is a joke countless people have not been able to even register and watch the pre season friendlies because of errors with the registration process.

It is a complete waste of time because there is no on available to help if it doesn't work.
At least if you have an issue with sky they try and get it sorted as quick as possible.
Click to expand...
What's the problem with the website I'm not really computor savvy but got the pre - season games booked no problem.
 
finlaytheblade said:
What's the problem with the website I'm not really computor savvy but got the pre - season games booked no problem.
Click to expand...


People who have tried to register to watch the friendlies have not been able to do so it kept saying invalid mail addresses even though they were correct email addresses.
 
pudseyblade said:
Something will happen, just wait out. If the SPL and EFL can sort private broadcasts of all home team games by club, the EPL are hardly likely to miss out.
Click to expand...

Something has to be done. Professional competitive sport shouldn't be played without independent witnesses.
 
Not just Pl games. As many leagues as possible, alright down to conference/vanarama level.
ST holder myself but would definitely pay for Blades matches I couldn't get to.
Don't want Sky, haven't that money to throw around. Have bt although they seem biased towards showing London clubs.
A club channel where your teams games can be viewed on telly can't be impossible. May even ignite interest for all teams, some may decide to go to games again or for first time.
 
United's Arab Emirate said:
Maybe I'm missing something, but, couldn't all the broadcasters who have paid for coverage be given extra games to cover ones not currently covered. For the sake of an argument, lets say 200 games have been sold and that Sky have 160 of these (80% share) couldn't the additional games be split to maintain the same percentage share? This solution would give the individual broadcasters the same market share as they currently have, whilst allowing them to show more games (additional advertising revenue and subscriptions) and giving fans a legal option to continue watching their teams games. I'm honestly struggling to see the down side to this from the broadcaster and fans point of view.
The alternative is that more people will move towards illegal streams to prevent them from missing games, they may be impressed with the streams, ditch other subscriptions and continue to watch for free!
Click to expand...

That's what I can't get my head round, it's a temporary short term solution to matches being played behind closed doors.

If our match against Wolves isn't shown legally on TV, do Sky honestly think we're all going to watch Brighton vs Chelsea instead? Of course we aren't, we're all just going to find an alternative way to watch our match.
 
I don't understand the point of the games if no fans can watch them. The league and clubs are only making money by fans watching the games either in person or on TV/stream. I thought the whole point that 3pm games can't be televised is because it encourages people to attend the matches, if people can't attend surely there should be an alternative.
 
Clubs should be selling season tickets as normal with discounts applied - the season ticket should allow you to watch all games via stream for free, Away games at a cost.

Clubs therefore get their season ticket income, fans watch the matches and the PL gets money from charging for away games.
 
This is essentially what the SPL and EFL have done. Which is why I believe a similar solution will be incoming
 



HeCanDoMagic said:
Clubs should be selling season tickets as normal with discounts applied - the season ticket should allow you to watch all games via stream for free, Away games at a cost.

Clubs therefore get their season ticket income, fans watch the matches and the PL gets money from charging for away games.
Click to expand...

What about if a match has already been chosen to be broadcast by Sky or BT? For example, a large percentage of Liverpool's matches will be on TV anyway, so what's the point of their fans paying for a season ticket as well?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Foxy
  • Sticky
S24SU Predictions League & Survivor (Last Man Standing) Games 2026/27
Replies
0
Views
1K
Foxy
Foxy
SUFCScorecard
Pathway to the Playoffs
9 10 11
Replies
323
Views
30K
SwitchBLADE Smiles
SwitchBLADE Smiles
Deadbat
Swansea 0 United 0 - thoughts/ratings
2
Replies
53
Views
4K
coaxingstar71
coaxingstar71
Bergen Blade
Players you wanted to see fail before they left
2
Replies
51
Views
4K
Balham
Balham
Deadbat
2025/26 SUFC SEASON REVIEW / SCHOOL REPORT - Part 6: Attack
Replies
7
Views
1K
Shawy24
S

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom