Project "Big Picture"

[philipl]

33 minutes ago, darrenrover said:

2 of the 'big 6' (Chelsea and City) can only be classed as such thanks to their benefactor owners' clever manipulation of FFP.

 

Not entirely.

Both clubs take as much matchday income from a single Premier League home game as Rovers do in an entire season.

[Herbie6590]

2 hours ago, philipl said:

Rule of negotiations

If somebody gives you something good you weren't expecting.

You react by saying not enough

I bet West Ham wouldn’t be massively happy about a reduction to 18 clubs...too close for comfort.

Penny for the hedge fund expert Sean Dyche’s thoughts....

[bboy]

Not read the thread so I can give my unbiased view.

I almost like the idea apart from the 9 club special voting right. What gives them more rights?

Stick to a straight majority rule. 10 out of 18

[chaddyrovers]

EFL CEO resigns today. 

 

[AllRoverAsia]

11 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

No ?

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

I just switch off other media and app notifications so any small delay is irrelevant and score updates dont get through.

Its the same as watching live that makes no difference and its basically the same as watching TV these days.

Since I got Fibre at 100/100 out in the jungle ( and I mean that, I'm not in Bkk) iFollow is generally a very good service, unlike its early days, to watch Rovers on.

I think you had an early bad experience with iFollow that distorts the opinion.

 

[AllRoverAsia]

So, we have 2 fecked up Septics from Trumpland taking over English football 

Shit happens everyday

[RevidgeBlue]

On 11/10/2020 at 14:02, joey_big_nose said:

This looks absolutely horrendous.

Basically a bunch of short term bribes so essentially the top six clubs can control the game.

Transparently awful.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/10/11/world-exclusive-man-utd-liverpool-driving-project-big-picture/

Yes. Absolutely agree.

The notion that the big six Clubs could veto the takeover of another Club is particularly abhorrent. Don't want anyone upsetting the applecart even though its virtually impossible now to anyway thanks to FFP.

Not sure why anyone apart from the PL Clubs in question would be in favour of ANY of the proposals.

 

[chaddyrovers]

 

 

 

[RevidgeBlue]

One of the major points about this which people seem to be overlooking is the proposal that Clubs can broadcast their own games on their own digital media platforms.

The "big" Clubs have been after some form of this forever and to date it has been resisted by the PL to try and maintain an element of competition. I know a lot of people don't like the PL anyway but I think the beauty of it such as it is and the reason it is so popular across the world is that in the past revenue has been distributed on a collective basis. This has meant that whilst in the past the cream will rise to the top over any given season, on any given matchday, a Palace or a Southampton has every chance of giving a Chelsea, Arsenal Spurs or United a good game and even  turning them over.

This simply doesn't happen across most of the major European Leagues and thumpings of 4 to 7 nil are relatively commonplace. If the collective approach is allowed to fall by the wayside then the PL will become like a slightly bigger version of the top flight in Scotland whereby instead of Rangers and Celtic massacring everyone every week it'll be four or five sides massacring nearly everyone and only getting a competitive game between themselves or a couple of sides just outside the top bracket.

That's no doubt what the top Clubs want to keep them fresher for Europe but it should be resisted for as long as possible.

[Mattyblue]

I did think Rick Parry ending back on the scene running the EFL was a bit odd at the time, though obviously didn’t realise he was a Trojan horse for his old paymasters...

[tomphil]

Most chairmen, owners, CEO's or MDs in the EFL want as easy a life as possible and aren't in a lot of cases emotionally connected to their clubs. They are just doing a job and drawing a wage so when money comes on the table that helps this they'll be inclined to just want to grab it quickly with both hands.

They know the top clubs in cahoots with the tv companies run the game anyway and already have all the power. It's just crumbs from the top table that rarely fall their way and nothing else really changes in terms of their day to day stuff.

There isn't really a bigger picture footballs problem is and always has been short termism, this will work out no different in the long run it'll be another cock up that only benefits the usual. 

[Mattyblue]

And the EFL turned down £375milllion of potential investment just days before this Man Utd/Lpool stitch up was announced. 

(I say EFL, but it wasn’t even disclosed to the member clubs, you know the actual ‘’EFL’, not the blazers and admins in HQ - Parry didn’t want to derail his long term planning, obviously...)

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/efl-rejected-375m-offer-american-4601151.amp

[Blue blood]

15 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Yes. Absolutely agree.

The notion that the big six Clubs could veto the takeover of another Club is particularly abhorrent. Don't want anyone upsetting the applecart even though its virtually impossible now to anyway thanks to FFP.

Not sure why anyone apart from the PL Clubs in question would be in favour of ANY of the proposals.

 

Yes it's one step away from proposing that clubs outside the big 6 are not allowed to shoot or tackle. Perhaps they should add in fines for scoring against the big 6 too. How anyone can look in the mirror whilst suggesting these changes is beyond me. 

[Leonard Venkhater]

21 hours ago, Herbie6590 said:

 

The Enabling Act is still a pretty good metaphor though. I heard another good one this morning- "a sugar-coated cyanide pill"...

[AllRoverAsia]

15 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

 

 

 

If Ridsdale is in favour it must be worse and more corrupt than I thought.

[JHRover]

I see Bolton are broadly in favour of the proposals.

Not long ago their Chairman was advocating a closed shop with them protected from relegation. Now they're in the 4th division they are supporting similar from the opposite end of the stick desperate for hand outs from the glorious self appointed leaders.

[Leonard Venkhater]

8 minutes ago, AllRoverAsia said:

If Ridsdale is in favour it must be worse and more corrupt than I thought.

Giving him the benefit of the doubt (for 10 seconds) maybe he was just leaving the door open, giving a qualified acceptance in the expectation of challenging the "poisonous" aspects lol. Anyway, what would be the loss to PNE? There are die-hard Knobend OAP's, who have never seen their team in the English top-flight!

[joey_big_nose]

14 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

One of the major points about this which people seem to be overlooking is the proposal that Clubs can broadcast their own games on their own digital media platforms.

The "big" Clubs have been after some form of this forever and to date it has been resisted by the PL to try and maintain an element of competition. I know a lot of people don't like the PL anyway but I think the beauty of it such as it is and the reason it is so popular across the world is that in the past revenue has been distributed on a collective basis. This has meant that whilst in the past the cream will rise to the top over any given season, on any given matchday, a Palace or a Southampton has every chance of giving a Chelsea, Arsenal Spurs or United a good game and even  turning them over.

This simply doesn't happen across most of the major European Leagues and thumpings of 4 to 7 nil are relatively commonplace. If the collective approach is allowed to fall by the wayside then the PL will become like a slightly bigger version of the top flight in Scotland whereby instead of Rangers and Celtic massacring everyone every week it'll be four or five sides massacring nearly everyone and only getting a competitive game between themselves or a couple of sides just outside the top bracket.

That's no doubt what the top Clubs want to keep them fresher for Europe but it should be resisted for as long as possible.

What makes it interesting is in England we do have a lot of very well supported clubs. It would actually be quite feasible for the likes of West Ham, Newcastle, West Brom, Aston Villa, Leeds, Leicester etc to walk away and set up their own league. And that's just in the Premier League.

Could get really really ugly. I just can't see those clubs accepting second class citizen status. I can't really see what's in it for the club's outside the top six and those clubs who don't get parachute payments in the EFL.

[JHRover]

It can't or won't come to anything for as long as FIFA, UEFA and the FA hold firm.

The select few can propose whatever they like and threaten whatever they like but without authorisation from the above it can't happen. The above hold all the power.

The worry is of course that the above will buckle under pressure.

The  FA have already demonstrated that they aren't fit to govern our national game and are by and large out of touch with reality. They could and should have kept the Premier League on a tight leash back in the 90s but relinquished too much power.

 

[Oldgregg86]

The problem is football as a sport is dead. Every club is self serving and will vote accordingly. The integrity of the sport as whole is dead . You only need to look at grass root level to see that. Self interest and greed from the top to the need for survival at the bottom . No one is looking at the bigger picture to make the game as beautiful, competitive and sustainable as possible

Edited October 13, 2020 by Oldgregg86

[joey_big_nose]

Thinking about it actually maybe the big six have thought it through and see it as a way to drive through them leaving and forming a Euro super League? If everyone throws their toys out it opens up their ability to do that.

"Well we tried to work with you but you have given us no choice" etc

Sure Barca, Madrid, PSG, Inter, Juventus, Milan etc are up for it.

Edited October 13, 2020 by joey_big_nose

[RevidgeBlue]

6 minutes ago, JHRover said:

It can't or won't come to anything for as long as FIFA, UEFA and the FA hold firm.

The select few can propose whatever they like and threaten whatever they like but without authorisation from the above it can't happen. The above hold all the power.

The worry is of course that the above will buckle under pressure.

The  FA have already demonstrated that they aren't fit to govern our national game and are by and large out of touch with reality. They could and should have kept the Premier League on a tight leash back in the 90s but relinquished too much power.

 

That'll be why the bribe to the FA of £100m has been included.

[rigger]

21 hours ago, Ewood Ace said:

It's not a 10 minute delay on Ifollow. 

it has been twice on mine.

[Ewood Ace]

3 minutes ago, rigger said:

it has been twice on mine.

Really, whenever I've watched on Ifollow it has been a minute behind at the very most and that isn't much different to if a game is being broadcast by Sky.

[rigger]

3 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

Really, whenever I've watched on Ifollow it has been a minute behind at the very most and that isn't much different to if a game is being broadcast by Sky.

the game against Wycombe, I noticed it was five past three and we still hadn't kicked off so I looked on sky and there it was we had kicked off on time. I went back to Ifollow and even went through the refresh process, and it was still ten minutes behind.