Project "Big Picture"

[Ewood Ace]

1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

You can have Sky Sports £21 per month. That's is affordable in my opinion

If your paying £21 a month Chaddy you should ring them up and tell them that you are leaving. Then they will give you an offer cheaper than that, last time I did it I got Sky Sports down to £15 a month. Which just show how ridiculous charging £15 for one game is. I’m paying for a months worth of sport what they are charging to watch West Brom V Fulham.

1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

No your point doesnt stand about Murdoch as he doesnt owned Sky anymore. 

£250 per year for all that sport coverage.and able to watch it all. If you feel that is being ripped off and exploited, God knows what planet you are on. Watch 128 PL games, EFL games, every England cricket game, golf coverage of 2 tours if I want to watch them regular, 4 or 5 live NBA games a week. Value for money me and a bargain. 

The standard coverage and quantity of sport on Sky is on the decline though. No Champions League or la liga anymore. No tennis at all, European club rugby gone. It’s cricket coverage is declining dramatically both in terms of quantity and standard. No snooker or speedway at all anymore. Fights only involving Matchroom fighters. Good shows like Sunday Supplement axed. It seems that all Sky are worried about these days is Premiership football which they massively overpaid for.

[chaddyrovers]

Just now, Ewood Ace said:

If your paying £21 a month Chaddy you should ring them up and tell them that you are leaving. Then they will give you an offer cheaper than that, last time I did it I got Sky Sports down to £15 a month. Which just show how ridiculous charging £15 for one game is. I’m paying for a months worth of sport what they are charging to watch West Brom V Fulham.

The standard coverage and quantity of sport on Sky is on the decline though. No Champions League or la liga anymore. No tennis at all, European club rugby gone. It’s cricket coverage is declining dramatically both in terms of quantity and standard. No snooker or speedway at all anymore. Fights only involving Matchroom fighters. Good shows like Sunday Supplement axed. It seems that all Sky are worried about these days is Premiership football which they massively overpaid for.

Not assed about 6 pounds tbh. Considering the discount they gave for overall package. 

Not bothered about Champions league coverage anymore. 

No interested in snooker, speedway or boxing. Never watched it and never will. 

Excellent Football, cricket, F1, NBA, Golf coverage. What more do I need Sport wise. 

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

10 minutes ago, 47er said:

I'm already off it. Used to watch every game on tele that I could get my hands on. Now watch highlights  of Premier League but not always even them. Rarely watch England except in World Cup.

Sole interest is Rovers really.

Me too now. I used to be football daft until the last ten years. The Chicken Chokers have to be partly to blame for that but there are plenty of other reasons why I've lost interest massively.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

7 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Not assed about 6 pounds tbh. Considering the discount they gave for overall package. 

Not bothered about Champions league coverage anymore. 

No interested in snooker, speedway or boxing. Never watched it and never will. 

Excellent Football, cricket, F1, NBA, Golf coverage. What more do I need Sport wise. 

More hours in the day ?

[Blue blood]

My project restart (which wouldn't be called that, operation sort out the crap is more apt)  would be. 

Champions League for winning your league only plus last year's winners. 

2nd, 3rd and League cup in Europa League 

FA Cup winners go into the reinstated Cup Winners Cup. 

Limited squad sizes so big clubs cannot hoard all the players. 

U23 teams cannot play in league trophy tournament (thereby defeating the tournaments purpose.) 

Agents paid by players not by clubs. 

Agents cannot have any mixed interests, for example "advisory" roles in running clubs. 

Fit and proper test to be revamped to actually do some good. 

FA Cup games to be shown on normal TV. 

Limited KO times, no 6 pm on a Sunday nonsense. 

 

As an aside I find Arsenal paying 45 mill for a player whilst laying off 55 (I think) staff is disgusting. I'd look for rules to prevent this sort of thing too. 

 

[SoldierMo]

25 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Not assed about 6 pounds tbh. Considering the discount they gave for overall package. 

Not bothered about Champions league coverage anymore. 

No interested in snooker, speedway or boxing. Never watched it and never will. 

Excellent Football, cricket, F1, NBA, Golf coverage. What more do I need Sport wise. 

But you cried and complained for a refund from our beloved Rovers after one of the game streams was not perfect....you hypocrite

[AllRoverAsia]

What I cannot understand is someone who lauds, and in my view quite correctly, the wealth of live sport on Sky also cannot watch Rovers on iFollow, not because of cost but because its a stream.

Anyone bothered can explain the transmission techniques used by the various formats. I certainly cant be arsed and want to spare my head and wall.

[Mattyblue]

Amuses (bemuses?) me that folk literally can’t stay off social media for 45 minutes (so hearing about a goal before the stream shows it) to actually just watch a game.

[philipl]

This is the David Conn article which has made me look at the proposal with fresh eyes:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2020/oct/11/plan-to-mend-the-great-crack-in-football-pyramid-should-not-be-swept-off-the-table?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

The good-

reunification of PL and EFL

financial support for the lower levels

The bad- 

voting powers proposal

scrapping the League Cup with nothing to replace it. 

Neutral-

Reducing the top level to 18 clubs

 

In short I think there is a basis here to work from. if the bad is addressed.

How about a League Cup without clubs which are Europe qualified?

One way they are proposing to get the other PL clubs on board is by extending enhanced votes to the longest serving PL members so including Everton, West Ham and Southampton.

How would we feel if they extended that further to include all Premier League winners in the merged PL/EFL set-up?

[Mattyblue]

Personally think the 9 club voting rights part of it has been in there purely as a bargaining chip.
 

Howls of outrage, so they ‘back down’ whilst getting everything else they want - smaller league, competitions scrapped allowing more free time for lucrative pre seasons and CL fixtures etc.

[philipl]

24 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

Personally think the 9 club voting rights part of it has been in there purely as a bargaining chip.
 

Howls of outrage, so they ‘back down’ whilst getting everything else they want - smaller league, competitions scrapped allowing more free time for lucrative pre seasons and CL fixtures etc.

I would take that deal.

Remember Rick Parry of the EFL was tasked by EFL members to get a rescue package from the PL so he has already been involved in negotiations.

A huge question is when is this going to be implemented if at all.

Remember also even if Covid is sorted by then, 22/23 is a total mess because of the Qatar World Cup.

Edited October 12, 2020 by philipl

[chaddyrovers]

7 hours ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

More hours in the day ?

No ?

50 minutes ago, AllRoverAsia said:

What I cannot understand is someone who lauds, and in my view quite correctly, the wealth of live sport on Sky also cannot watch Rovers on iFollow, not because of cost but because its a stream.

Anyone bothered can explain the transmission techniques used by the various formats. I certainly cant be arsed and want to spare my head and wall.

Streaming game has a time delay. Plus poor coverage. Watching Rovers on a stream isnt for me. 

[philipl]

2 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

No ?

Streaming game has a time delay. Plus poor coverage. Watching Rovers on a stream isnt for me. 

OK don't watch it chaddy.

Doesn't affect me either way.

You are missing the big picture in every conceivable sense. Project Big Picture proposals are not directly linked to PL PPV.

As it is, Rovers fans are paying more for iFollow live streaming as a portion of cost to go to Ewood than fans of PL teams will be paying on average for their live streams. 

The key here is division of revenue with iFollow having a much more equitable approach as I understand it.

Edited October 12, 2020 by philipl

[chaddyrovers]

52 minutes ago, philipl said:

OK don't watch it chaddy.

Doesn't affect me either way.

You are missing the big picture in every conceivable sense. Project Big Picture proposals are not directly linked to PL PPV.

As it is, Rovers fans are paying more for iFollow live streaming as a portion of cost to go to Ewood than fans of PL teams will be paying on average for their live streams. 

The key here is division of revenue with iFollow having a much more equitable approach as I understand it.

I wont being so. 

Never said it affect you Philipl. 

I already posted my thoughts on project big picture and it wont get 14 votes in my opinion. 

 

[Herbie6590]

1 hour ago, philipl said:

This is the David Conn article which has made me look at the proposal with fresh eyes:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2020/oct/11/plan-to-mend-the-great-crack-in-football-pyramid-should-not-be-swept-off-the-table?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

The good-

reunification of PL and EFL

financial support for the lower levels

The bad- 

voting powers proposal

scrapping the League Cup with nothing to replace it. 

Neutral-

Reducing the top level to 18 clubs

 

In short I think there is a basis here to work from. if the bad is addressed.

How about a League Cup without clubs which are Europe qualified?

One way they are proposing to get the other PL clubs on board is by extending enhanced votes to the longest serving PL members so including Everton, West Ham and Southampton.

How would we feel if they extended that further to include all Premier League winners in the merged PL/EFL set-up?

The issue that causes me most concern is that this is a Trojan Horse. Once voting rights have been surrendered there is no going back. Rafa Honigstein on Twitter refers to this (perhaps tongue in cheek) as football’s version of the Enabling Act.

[Boroblue]

main sponsors of the scheme Utd and Liverpool now there’s a surprise. Two American owned clubs how long before they vote for an American franchise system allowing them to choose the owners of other clubs to generate more money for themselves. No relegation or promotion just the same clubs rebranded.

i never watch premier league football and the sooner the big six disappears into a super league the better for the English game.

l be interested to see how much interest that generates but they know that. It’s better financially for them to hang around and sponge of the rest of the leagues to generate interest. Horrible clubs horrible owners with endlessly self serving ideas. Through them out by vote and let’s see how long they last.

[Parsonblue]

1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

No ?

Streaming game has a time delay. Plus poor coverage. Watching Rovers on a stream isnt for me. 

Personally, the coverage is pretty decent in terms of picture quality.  I'd much prefer to be at games, I'd much prefer to be travelling up and down the country to away games but I can't so I have to make do with what is available.  The likelihood is that we will not get back into Ewood Park again this season so streaming is likely to be the only way to watch Blackburn Rovers until next season. 

[chaddyrovers]

24 minutes ago, Parsonblue said:

Personally, the coverage is pretty decent in terms of picture quality.  I'd much prefer to be at games, I'd much prefer to be travelling up and down the country to away games but I can't so I have to make do with what is available.  The likelihood is that we will not get back into Ewood Park again this season so streaming is likely to be the only way to watch Blackburn Rovers until next season. 

Yes I would prefer to be at the games watching Rovers live in stadiums. watching Rovers on a stream just isn't normal or natural. I accepted it for last 9 games last season but not the same as being there. 

Yes it doesn't look like we won't enter this season from the sounds of it. 

[chaddyrovers]

 

 

[Ewood Ace]

2 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Yes I would prefer to be at the games watching Rovers live in stadiums. watching Rovers on a stream just isn't normal or natural. I accepted it for last 9 games last season but not the same as being there. 

You evidently watch a lot of sport on Sky. So could I ask what do you find is the difference between watching Rovers on Ifollow and watching a Championship game of football on Sky? Personally I don't think there is any difference.

Edited October 12, 2020 by Ewood Ace

[Mattyblue]

Because he‘a painted himself into a corner. 

He made a big thing of how he didn’t like it when he thought it would only be for a dozen games or so and we’d all be back in grounds by now with our vaccines.

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

2 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Yes it doesn't look like we won't enter this season from the sounds of it. 

So we will enter?

[chaddyrovers]

50 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

You evidently watch a lot of sport on Sky. So could I ask what do you find is the difference between watching Rovers on Ifollow and watching a Championship game of football on Sky? Personally I don't think there is any difference.

Yes I do watch Sports plus films, tv shows and politics. 

Picture quality on Sky coverage of sport is miles better than Ifollow. Ifollow time delay is another problem

 If you happy with Ifollow quality then fair enough but I ain't. So I will leave it there. 

[Lancs Rover]

12 hours ago, Herbie6590 said:

The issue that causes me most concern is that this is a Trojan Horse. Once voting rights have been surrendered there is no going back. Rafa Honigstein on Twitter refers to this (perhaps tongue in cheek) as football’s version of the Enabling Act.

Can't find the Tweet though I can understand if he's deleted it.

Pretty incendiary stuff from a renowned journalist with contacts to maintain. 

'Jokes' by Germans about the Enabling Act don't slip out very often - for a good reason. 

[Kie_BRFC]

2 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Yes I do watch Sports plus films, tv shows and politics. 

Picture quality on Sky coverage of sport is miles better than Ifollow. Ifollow time delay is another problem

 If you happy with Ifollow quality then fair enough but I ain't. So I will leave it there. 

Think you need better internet if your picture quality is bad for ifollow. How is a 30 second max delay a problem if your team are playing? Sky Sports has a time delay compared to watching it live in a ground