iFollow Thread

[Mattyblue]

Live coverage of matches between 3-5pm is off limits in the UK, to promote matchgoing.

[Stuart]

Just now, Mattyblue said:

Live coverage of matches between 3-5pm is off limits in the UK, to promote matchgoing.

Old hat thinking. If the football authorities really wanted to promote matchgoing they'd cap ticket prices.

[Mattyblue]

With you there.

I remember a Brian Clough quote from the 90s in which he said something like

'The way TV deals are going in the top flight, you'll soon be able to let fans in for free'

[perthblue02]

Sign up is now available for ifollow, LINK nice to see no extra Australia tax added on  to the subscription cost. Matches will be steamed in HD

Android and the fruit company apps not yet ready, but will be in time for the first games of the season apparently. 

Looks like none of the clubs that are opted out are in League 1, so can expect all 46 Rovers matches obviously apart from those that will be chosen by overseas broadcaster to show live. Think I can count on one hand the League 1 games apart from play offs that were shown last season, so looking good.

 

 

Edited June 17, 2017 by perthblue02

[DanielMB]

Is it not possible to purchase access to single games?

Edited June 17, 2017 by DanielMB

[AllRoverAsia]

You can register with them under 'Free Pass' on the Rovers site and ask questions.

Just a minute ago I got a reply from efl re the android app.

I am not subscribing until the app is issued and tested. Certainly not until nearer the start of the season.

Edited June 17, 2017 by AllRoverAsia

[USABlue]

One drawback for me, my work hours mean I won't be able to watch midweek games.  Not being so technically savvy is there a way to record such broadcasts.

[Dunnfc]

20 hours ago, perthblue02 said:

Sign up is now available for ifollow, LINK nice to see no extra Australia tax added on  to the subscription cost. Matches will be steamed in HD

Android and the fruit company apps not yet ready, but will be in time for the first games of the season apparently. 

Looks like none of the clubs that are opted out are in League 1, so can expect all 46 Rovers matches obviously apart from those that will be chosen by overseas broadcaster to show live. Think I can count on one hand the League 1 games apart from play offs that were shown last season, so looking good.

 

 

Wonder if you can cast it from abroad on one of these links

[AllRoverAsia]

45 minutes ago, USABlue said:

One drawback for me, my work hours mean I won't be able to watch midweek games.  Not being so technically savvy is there a way to record such broadcasts.

Rovers Player always hosted a full match recording within a day.

Ifollow should too. Something to check/confirm.

[AmericanRover12]

1 hour ago, AllRoverAsia said:

Rovers Player always hosted a full match recording within a day.

Ifollow should too. Something to check/confirm.

yes would be surprised if theres no on demand option

[AllRoverAsia]

14 hours ago, USABlue said:

One drawback for me, my work hours mean I won't be able to watch midweek games.  Not being so technically savvy is there a way to record such broadcasts.

Email from EFL:

"Full match footage and highlights will be available on iFollow from midday (GMT) the day after a regular season EFL league match"

They referred me to:

https://www.efl.com/iFollow/international-fans/

I must say they are helpful and quick to respond.

From what I have found out so far the iFollow international package gives everything that Rovers Player did plus up to 46 live league games a season.

If a league game is on international tv it will not be on iFollow.

Games from Carabao Cup, Checkatrade Trophy and the Sky Bet Play-Offs will not be available via iFollow.

I think that you are limited to watching your own selected team's matches as entry to iFollow is via your own Clubs new website portal.

I mention that only because RP gave audio access to any game using that system and under iFollow most EFL games will be in that system.

Edited June 19, 2017 by AllRoverAsia

[AllRoverAsia]

Some interesting comments on iFollow from Wolves fans in the UK:

http://www.molineuxmix.co.uk/index.php?threads/ifollow.195797/

[Oldgregg86]

Didn't rovers player show u23 games as well ? Does this new I follow have them. 

[AllRoverAsia]

Just now, Oldgregg86 said:

Didn't rovers player show u23 games as well ? Does this new I follow have them. 

I believe it did.

I think it will. You get everything that the uk version gets plus live league games. So all the club videos, interviews, full live replay and highlights should be available.

[Biddy]

I'm tempted to sign up.  It's 130 Euros but I'm wondering if they check the billing address...

Looks like it's £45 without going through the VPN which will give you pretty much what RoversPlayer did.

[perthblue02]

1 hour ago, Biddy said:

I'm tempted to sign up.  It's 130 Euros but I'm wondering if they check the billing address...

Looks like it's £45 without going through the VPN which will give you pretty much what RoversPlayer did.

Looks like you do not get the full match replays on the 45 quid UK version, which you did last season

Edit : scratch that was looking at the free version

Edited June 19, 2017 by perthblue02

[joey_big_nose]

It will be interesting what happens as the service provider and clubs must know a huge number of fans in the UK will vpn it, plus a flurry of websites will start up and mirror the streams for free.

Ultimately they must have decided that its worth the risk. To be honest for circa £10 a month even fans who go to all the home games will probably pay this on top.

[Biddy]

Just now, joey_big_nose said:

 

Ultimately they must have decided that its worth the risk. To be honest for circa £10 a month even fans who go to all the home games will probably pay this on top.

Definitely,  worth it just for the away games.  

I'm hoping they let the VPN issue slide as this is the best move to actually engage fans would like to see their team and its rare (unless you are Leeds) to be on in the Championship let alone League 1 and 2.

[joey_big_nose]

Just now, Biddy said:

Definitely,  worth it just for the away games.  

I'm hoping they let the VPN issue slide as this is the best move to actually engage fans would like to see their team and its rare (unless you are Leeds) to be on in the Championship let alone League 1 and 2.

I can't see how they can do anything about the VPN issue. The Chinese government can't do anything effective to stop citizens using VPN, so I think the EFL/club is not going to have much hope.

[joey_big_nose]

On 5/5/2017 at 14:01, DE. said:

We're already facing a restricted internet with certain websites being blocked by our ISPs through Government order. It's not a stretch imo to think that eventually this will lead to an entirely regulated internet experience in the not too distant future.

If I understand it correctly it is virtually impossible to counter a VPN without a total register of all IP addresses.

For example - say the government made Wikipedia illegal. They could ask all ISPs to block wikipedia. But the ISPs would not know you were connecting to wikipedia if you are on VPN as the only address the ISP would see is the VPN IP address, not the end website (wikipedia) IP address. Even if they did manage to work a way around that, immediately - due to demand - someone would quickly mirror wikipedia at a new IP address not blocked by the ISPs. Then the government would need to find that new address and block it. Continue ad infinitum.

The only effective way to lock it all down would be to somehow register, track and audit all IP addresses as we do - for example - with number plates and cars. The government does not have the resources to do that, and cannot do that for overseas sites, and it would be a huge productivity drain for all businesses and individuals to constantly register websites with the government and sign off on content.

In my opinion the government, if it could, would have closed down Torrents, Hate Speech sites, extreme pornography etc years ago. It isn't a lack of will to do it. It's just that it isn't technologically  feasible.

I recognise you are more technically able than myself, so look forward to being corrected, but that is as I understand it above.

[AllRoverAsia]

Governments time and cash (your cash!) would be better spent upgrading their IT and indeed hardware!

Unless Governments legislate against open source their hands are somewhat tied.

What they can do is legislate and seek to prosecute. Enforcement is a completely different issue.

Mind you if people keep buying IT 'boxes' for their living and working environments you are damm near tracked already.

 

[DE.]

8 hours ago, joey_big_nose said:

If I understand it correctly it is virtually impossible to counter a VPN without a total register of all IP addresses.

For example - say the government made Wikipedia illegal. They could ask all ISPs to block wikipedia. But the ISPs would not know you were connecting to wikipedia if you are on VPN as the only address the ISP would see is the VPN IP address, not the end website (wikipedia) IP address. Even if they did manage to work a way around that, immediately - due to demand - someone would quickly mirror wikipedia at a new IP address not blocked by the ISPs. Then the government would need to find that new address and block it. Continue ad infinitum.

The only effective way to lock it all down would be to somehow register, track and audit all IP addresses as we do - for example - with number plates and cars. The government does not have the resources to do that, and cannot do that for overseas sites, and it would be a huge productivity drain for all businesses and individuals to constantly register websites with the government and sign off on content.

In my opinion the government, if it could, would have closed down Torrents, Hate Speech sites, extreme pornography etc years ago. It isn't a lack of will to do it. It's just that it isn't technologically  feasible.

I recognise you are more technically able than myself, so look forward to being corrected, but that is as I understand it above.

You're not wrong in suggesting VPN's are very difficult if not impossible to regulate. But what if you didn't have easy access to VPN software? What if the internet was regulated to the extent that you only paid for access to certain websites (much like you do with a Sky subscription) as opposed to being able to type in whatever you please into the address bar and be taken there?

You'd basically be looking at something similar to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiered_Internet_service

Do I think this is likely? No. Not so much for reasons of technological feasibility, but more due to the severe reaction I think it would provoke. With Corbyn and Labour on the rise this kind of thing should be pushed firmly into the background - but that's why there needs to be a strong opposition to keep the Tories on their toes. Otherwise they waste time working out ways to erode what's left of our privacy with disgusting legislature like the Snoopers Charter. 

[joey_big_nose]

8 minutes ago, DE. said:

You're not wrong in suggesting VPN's are very difficult if not impossible to regulate. But what if you didn't have easy access to VPN software? What if the internet was regulated to the extent that you only paid for access to certain websites (much like you do with a Sky subscription) as opposed to being able to type in whatever you please into the address bar and be taken there?

You'd basically be looking at something similar to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiered_Internet_service

Do I think this is likely? No. Not so much for reasons of technological feasibility, but more due to the severe reaction I think it would provoke. With Corbyn and Labour on the rise this kind of thing should be pushed firmly into the background - but that's why there needs to be a strong opposition to keep the Tories on their toes. Otherwise they waste time working out ways to erode what's left of our privacy with disgusting legislature like the Snoopers Charter. 

I sympathise with your point of view, but to limit the internet in the way Tiering suggest would entail effective locking down the technology easily available to people and accepting a massive productivity impact on individuals and businesses.

I can't see that happening. The internet is the most radically decentralised network ever created. Any effective regulation of it is doomed to failure. May will have some success in getting Google and Facebook to moderate content, but she we will get nowhere in terms of blanket denial of access.

[tonyoz]

I like the sound of it. Can anyone tell me if RoversPlayer is dead. I have a rolling direct debit for this and my password no longer works. It's hard to find any info!

Thanks.

[AllRoverAsia]

Just now, tonyoz said:

I like the sound of it. Can anyone tell me if RoversPlayer is dead. I have a rolling direct debit for this and my password no longer works. It's hard to find any info!

Thanks.

You should as an existing RP subscriber have been contacted already.

If you were paying annually there would be a refund due from RP. If paying monthly by DD maybe not.

RP is now closed and it is my understanding that you have to re-register with IFollow.

You can create a 'free pass' account initially and subscribe when more comfortable with it...in my case when the app is issued, works and the season starts!

There is a link to iFollow in an earlier post and the link has an international viewer fact sheet and iFollow efl contact details.

I would contact iFollow at EFL for confirmation of your account. They respond quickly to email.

Edited June 20, 2017 by AllRoverAsia