Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 21:33:26 GMT 1
Football is corrupt from top to bottom. If you honestly believe that sky money doesn't influence decisions made by the FA and the Football League, to the benefit of the broadcasters then you're a bit naive.
|
|
|
|
Post by impact on Sept 29, 2015 21:33:20 GMT 1
I've never understood why people blame sky for high ticket prices and obscene wages. It's the clubs and the associations who choose to spend it as they do, not sky. If, say, 25% of the population were paid obscenely high wages e.g. £10million per year, what do you think would be the effect on prices in shops? Except sky don't pay the players' wages, they pay for a product. They then sell that product onto the public. |
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Sept 29, 2015 21:36:36 GMT 1
OK, Ill grant you, they have fixtures moved around to suit their schedules. Hardly surprising they want that when they're paying billions.
Im sure if you asked Sky, they'd much rather pay a fraction of what they pay, but that is the amount the prem can demand, so sky pay it. They're obviously going to pay most of the money to the prem because that is the football their customers want to watch ans their sponsors want to sponsor.
But its football ( the prem league in the form of Scudamore, and the clubs themselves) that decide where that money goes- how it is distributed ( or not) through the football pyramid. How much goes to players, agents, foreign clubs in transfer fees and how none of the huge windfall will be used to reduce ticket prices.
NONE of that is anything to do with Sky. All they do is pump in enormous amounts of money that any sport would give their back teeth to get and run a virtual 24 hour a day, 365 days a year advert for the sport.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Sept 29, 2015 21:42:32 GMT 1
Football is corrupt from top to bottom. If you honestly believe that sky money doesn't influence decisions made by the FA and the Football League, to the benefit of the broadcasters then you're a bit naive. So your blaming the actual money then? So to go back to hypotenuse and his Ford he drives off a pier- its not Fords fault, or his fault.. its the car's fault? Of course the money influences everything in football. But we're talking about who's to blame for what that money does. Is it the people putting the money in.. or the people actually deciding what happens to the money? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 21:48:38 GMT 1
Football is corrupt from top to bottom. If you honestly believe that sky money doesn't influence decisions made by the FA and the Football League, to the benefit of the broadcasters then you're a bit naive. So your blaming the actual money then? So to go back to hypotenuse and his Ford he drives off a pier- its not Fords fault, or his fault.. its the car's fault? Of course the money influences everything in football. But we're talking about who's to blame for what that money does. Is it the people putting the money in.. or the people actually deciding what happens to the money? I wouldn't be surprised if the people putting the money in, are having some say in where the money goes. |
|
|
|
Post by hypotenuse on Sept 29, 2015 21:50:52 GMT 1
Now hold on a minute - it isn't my Ford is it?
|
|
|
|
Post by gledholt terrier on Sept 29, 2015 21:58:22 GMT 1
I see Bradford's fans paying bugger all scheme is working a treat.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 22:04:09 GMT 1
We just need simpler, straightforward pricing.
There's too much suspicion and air of deceit around the recent pricing decisions. They were probably done with the clubs best interests at heart, but the truth is, they have fecked off a large number of supporters, some of which will have decided not to attend for the foreseeable.
I think the answers to the problems can be found within this thread.
Season card prices are fair.
Walk ups should be no more than 20-25% more.
Simple as that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2015 23:45:41 GMT 1
So your blaming the actual money then? So to go back to hypotenuse and his Ford he drives off a pier- its not Fords fault, or his fault.. its the car's fault? Of course the money influences everything in football. But we're talking about who's to blame for what that money does. Is it the people putting the money in.. or the people actually deciding what happens to the money? I wouldn't be surprised if the people putting the money in, are having some say in where the money goes. Id go as fas as to say youd have to be pretty naive to think otherwise. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2015 8:34:05 GMT 1
And then what do you do about those who can only get to 7/8 games a season? Fuck you pay £33.50. If I could attend nearly every game it works out as value for money. But to go to 7/8 games a season and pay over double what the average ST price works out - that's a shambles. Best thing to do is keep ST prices frozen or reduced by 10% and lower match day prices to a reasonable amount. Trust me more walk ups would come.Based on what? They haven't when we've run one off offers previously. I'm also struggling to see too many people's imagination being grabbed by paying £342 for a ST, rather than £380. I guess the club could run a similar scheme to the current Take 10 for people who attend less. Another scheme?! Just simplify it. Cheaper POTD prices - see Mastercracker's post. If you pay on the day, you usually decide to go on the day. Charging those people over double what the average ST holder pays is an insult and shows that the club don't understand the mentality of their fans. |
|
|
|
Post by Headless Chicken on Sept 30, 2015 8:43:53 GMT 1
Based on what? They haven't when we've run one off offers previously. I'm also struggling to see too many people's imagination being grabbed by paying £342 for a ST, rather than £380. I guess the club could run a similar scheme to the current Take 10 for people who attend less. Another scheme?! Just simplify it. Cheaper POTD prices - see Mastercracker's post. If you pay on the day, you usually decide to go on the day. Charging those people over double what the average ST holder pays is an insult and shows that the club don't understand the mentality of their fans. I suspect the increase on the day is because they expect those mulling about it are just as likely to decide against going, so try to get people to buy at the cheaper price so they don't have chance to change their mind. My cousin sat with us last year, because his mate decided not to come when it started spitting!!! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2015 9:50:47 GMT 1
Another scheme?! Just simplify it. Cheaper POTD prices - see Mastercracker's post. If you pay on the day, you usually decide to go on the day. Charging those people over double what the average ST holder pays is an insult and shows that the club don't understand the mentality of their fans. I suspect the increase on the day is because they expect those mulling about it are just as likely to decide against going, so try to get people to buy at the cheaper price so they don't have chance to change their mind. My cousin sat with us last year, because his mate decided not to come when it started spitting!!! Soft jessy! I was listening to Noel Gallagher on TalkSport a while back and he talked about never having had a season ticket - back 30 years or so ago you just went on the day if you wanted to or could afford. My old man was the same when I was growing up, never had a ST but went if he wasn't on nights. Whilst I understand the benefits for the club selling ST's in relation to income and budgets - they really are selling the fans/potential fans who can't dedicate their time to the club up the swanny. Take the Derby game. My mate's ST averages at £15 in the south stand per game, £33.50 for me if I pay on the day. Is it right that I have to pay more than double to sit in the same stand and watch the same game as him? No it isn't. It also doesn't help when you hear comments at Canalside before games about floating fans not taking up a 'generous offer' of £15 for a televised game on a Thursday night... Imagine returning to Hudds from Manchester after a long days work at half 6 on a packed sweaty train and going home to eat your tea in the comfort of your own home watching Town rather than taking up that really generous offer of £15 to watch your team on a chilly night, eating a rank pie for your tea instead. It doesn't take a genius to work out that offers for midweek night games aren't going draw in fans like a Sat 3pm KO would. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2015 9:57:33 GMT 1
Football is corrupt from top to bottom. that's why in an earlier post i said I blamed the FA and the PFA. THe FA for not looking after the interests of the national game which is slowly but surely being destroyed by their greed and the greed of the premier league, and the PFA for seeing the increase in money and proceeding to make sure the players got the biggest slice of the financial pie, thus encouraging many players to come here for just the astounding money on offer. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2015 10:11:16 GMT 1
Football is corrupt from top to bottom. that's why in an earlier post i said I blamed the FA and the PFA. THe FA for not looking after the interests of the national game which is slowly but surely being destroyed by their greed and the greed of the premier league, and the PFA for seeing the increase in money and proceeding to make sure the players got the biggest slice of the financial pie, thus encouraging many players to come here for just the astounding money on offer. The Fa can't do anything about the Premier League, it's a totally separate entity. |
|
|
|
Post by bluedogs, Esq. on Sept 30, 2015 10:15:33 GMT 1
I suspect the increase on the day is because they expect those mulling about it are just as likely to decide against going, so try to get people to buy at the cheaper price so they don't have chance to change their mind. My cousin sat with us last year, because his mate decided not to come when it started spitting!!! Soft jessy! I was listening to Noel Gallagher on TalkSport a while back and he talked about never having had a season ticket - back 30 years or so ago you just went on the day if you wanted to or could afford. My old man was the same when I was growing up, never had a ST but went if he wasn't on nights. Whilst I understand the benefits for the club selling ST's in relation to income and budgets - they really are selling the fans/potential fans who can't dedicate their time to the club up the swanny. Take the Derby game. My mate's ST averages at £15 in the south stand per game, £33.50 for me if I pay on the day. Is it right that I have to pay more than double to sit in the same stand and watch the same game as him? No it isn't. It also doesn't help when you hear comments at Canalside before games about floating fans not taking up a 'generous offer' of £15 for a televised game on a Thursday night... Imagine returning to Hudds from Manchester after a long days work at half 6 on a packed sweaty train and going home to eat your tea in the comfort of your own home watching Town rather than taking up that really generous offer of £15 to watch your team on a chilly night, eating a rank pie for your tea instead. It doesn't take a genius to work out that offers for midweek night games aren't going draw in fans like a Sat 3pm KO would. pubs used to closed at 3pm in those days  |
|
|
|
Post by Ginger Ogre on Sept 30, 2015 12:14:56 GMT 1
So your blaming the actual money then? So to go back to hypotenuse and his Ford he drives off a pier- its not Fords fault, or his fault.. its the car's fault? Of course the money influences everything in football. But we're talking about who's to blame for what that money does. Is it the people putting the money in.. or the people actually deciding what happens to the money? I wouldn't be surprised if the people putting the money in, are having some say in where the money goes. 100% Sky want the best players playing in the Premier League so they have the most attractive product to sell. They wont really give a sh*t about anything else. If all the money started filtering down the leagues and the Premiership clubs stopped buying all these stars the product would become less attractive and harder to sell to a worldwide audience. This would then probably reduce the amount of money Sky/BT put in which in turn would ruin the Premier League clubs. There will be something in the contract i'm sure stating that £x must be kept in the Premier League, and that only a tiny amount can be filtered down the leagues. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2015 12:31:25 GMT 1
that's why in an earlier post i said I blamed the FA and the PFA. THe FA for not looking after the interests of the national game which is slowly but surely being destroyed by their greed and the greed of the premier league, and the PFA for seeing the increase in money and proceeding to make sure the players got the biggest slice of the financial pie, thus encouraging many players to come here for just the astounding money on offer. Oh dear. Who do you think embraced this newly set up organisation?...... ok read on. "In 1992, the First Division clubs resigned from the Football League to take advantage of a lucrative television rights deal and on May 27, 1992, the Premier League as we know it today was formed.
This meant a break-up of the 104-year-old Football League that had operated until then with four divisions; the Premier League would operate with a single division and the Football League with three.
There was no change in competition format; the same number of teams competed in the top flight, and promotion and relegation between the Premier League and the new First Division remained on the same terms as between the old First and Second Divisions.
The 22 inaugural members of the new Premier League were Arsenal, Aston Villa, Blackburn Rovers, Chelsea, Coventry City, Crystal Palace, Everton, Ipswich Town, Leeds United  , Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United, Middlesbrough, Norwich City, Nottingham Forest, Oldham Athletic, Queens Park Rangers, Sheffield United, Sheffield Wednesday, Southampton, Tottenham Hotspur, and Wimbledon.
A total of 43 clubs have played in the Premier League from its inception in 1992 until the end of the 2009/10 season. Two other clubs (Luton Town and Notts County) were signatories to the original agreement that created the Premier League, but were relegated prior to the inaugural Premier League season and have not subsequently returned to the top flight.
Seven clubs have been members of the Premier League for every season since its inception. This group is composed of Arsenal, Aston Villa, Chelsea, Everton, Liverpool, Manchester United, and Tottenham Hotspur.
Due to insistence by Fifa that domestic leagues reduce the number of games clubs played, the number of clubs was reduced to 20 in 1995 when four teams were relegated from the league and only two teams promoted.
On June 8, 2006, Fifa requested that all major European leagues, including Italy's Serie A and Spain's La Liga be reduced to 18 teams by the start of the 2007/08 season. The Premier League responded by announcing their intention to resist such a reduction. Ultimately, the 2007/08 season kicked off again with 20 teams.
The league changed its name from The FA Premier League to simply the Premier League in 2007."So who governs it if not the FA? Space Jesus? |
|
|
|
Post by royrace on Sept 30, 2015 14:06:42 GMT 1
Interesting quote from DH in there “We’ve won four in 24 and been playing some dire football, so our ‘walk-up’ is going down and our home numbers are going down. " I think there is a lot of truth in this and it is 100% why my mate didn't renew after having a ST for as long as I've known him. You can quote how many great games we were treated to last season but the footfall says it wasn't great. Even last night we didn't have a massive goal threat despite having by far the better of the game and I worry that our cautious manager may always keep us up, but never be able to bring back the fans with his style of football. I like CP but he still frustrates me with his approach - he'll get us the points - but he won't bring the crowds back unless we really go on an exceptionally good run (unlikely!). It's great that Town are slashing prices but if the product isn't entertaining then the floaters will only turn up when it's cheap. I guess we just have to hope that either CP over-achieves or starts to take more risks and the cheap days are exciting games. I'm sure you're correct but I just cant for the life of me think why anyone who has been a Town fan for a long time would choose now as a time to stop going!?!?!? Its the best we've had it in years, decades in fact! Seriously I'm not saying I don't believe what you're saying I just don't understand it ... at all! By 'best we've had it' I mean: Best Town players Best opposition players Proper football clubs Better league More skill Better goals Multi million pound players on the books OK the football hasn't been brilliant at times and we lose sometimes but compared to the unbeaten run for example (and that was the good times!) I'd take the current situation all day long! Your mate must be mad  Does he hanker back to the good old days when we had Kevin Sharpe at left back and Eddie Youds marshalling the defence  Or maybe he wistfully remembers the Jevons / Parker partnership and wishes we could go back to the good old days of getting mullered by Macclesfield and considering Northampton as one of our biggest rivals. Strange, very strange. |
|
|
|
Post by royrace on Sept 30, 2015 15:06:11 GMT 1
2012 to 2015 (so far) Transfer money paid out (approx.) but very near 3,000,000 2012 to 2015 (so far) Transfer money got in (approx.) but very near 22,500,000 source Wikipedia Surprised or not Means nothing. If you want to know about finances look at the accounts and you'll realise that despite the net profit on transfers the club is losing millions each year. Typical simplistic nonsense to quote transfer fee ins and outs. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2015 16:19:13 GMT 1
The FA can't do anything about the Premier League, it's a totally separate entity. Oh dear. Who do you think embraced this newly set up organisation?...... ok read on. "In 1992, the First Division clubs resigned from the Football League to take advantage of a lucrative television rights deal and on May 27, 1992, the Premier League as we know it today was formed.
This meant a break-up of the 104-year-old Football League that had operated until then with four divisions; the Premier League would operate with a single division and the Football League with three.
There was no change in competition format; the same number of teams competed in the top flight, and promotion and relegation between the Premier League and the new First Division remained on the same terms as between the old First and Second Divisions.
The 22 inaugural members of the new Premier League were Arsenal, Aston Villa, Blackburn Rovers, Chelsea, Coventry City, Crystal Palace, Everton, Ipswich Town, Leeds United , Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United, Middlesbrough, Norwich City, Nottingham Forest, Oldham Athletic, Queens Park Rangers, Sheffield United, Sheffield Wednesday, Southampton, Tottenham Hotspur, and Wimbledon.
A total of 43 clubs have played in the Premier League from its inception in 1992 until the end of the 2009/10 season. Two other clubs (Luton Town and Notts County) were signatories to the original agreement that created the Premier League, but were relegated prior to the inaugural Premier League season and have not subsequently returned to the top flight.
Seven clubs have been members of the Premier League for every season since its inception. This group is composed of Arsenal, Aston Villa, Chelsea, Everton, Liverpool, Manchester United, and Tottenham Hotspur.
Due to insistence by Fifa that domestic leagues reduce the number of games clubs played, the number of clubs was reduced to 20 in 1995 when four teams were relegated from the league and only two teams promoted.
On June 8, 2006, Fifa requested that all major European leagues, including Italy's Serie A and Spain's La Liga be reduced to 18 teams by the start of the 2007/08 season. The Premier League responded by announcing their intention to resist such a reduction. Ultimately, the 2007/08 season kicked off again with 20 teams.
The league changed its name from The FA Premier League to simply the Premier League in 2007."So who governs it if not the FA? Space Jesus? Once again the FA cannot do anything about the Premier League as it's a separate entity - commercially they negotiate their own deals and they divide they money received between those clubs in the Premier League. All the FA can do is on the football side i.e bans. Rather than going on Wikipedia, trying to ride a high horse and saying oh dear, give this a read. www.inbrief.co.uk/football-law/football-associations-power.htm# |
|
|
|
Post by Henry Mcgee on Sept 30, 2015 18:02:24 GMT 1
Interesting quote from DH in there “We’ve won four in 24 and been playing some dire football, so our ‘walk-up’ is going down and our home numbers are going down. " I think there is a lot of truth in this and it is 100% why my mate didn't renew after having a ST for as long as I've known him. You can quote how many great games we were treated to last season but the footfall says it wasn't great. Even last night we didn't have a massive goal threat despite having by far the better of the game and I worry that our cautious manager may always keep us up, but never be able to bring back the fans with his style of football. I like CP but he still frustrates me with his approach - he'll get us the points - but he won't bring the crowds back unless we really go on an exceptionally good run (unlikely!). It's great that Town are slashing prices but if the product isn't entertaining then the floaters will only turn up when it's cheap. I guess we just have to hope that either CP over-achieves or starts to take more risks and the cheap days are exciting games. I'm sure you're correct but I just cant for the life of me think why anyone who has been a Town fan for a long time would choose now as a time to stop going!?!?!? Its the best we've had it in years, decades in fact! Seriously I'm not saying I don't believe what you're saying I just don't understand it ... at all! By 'best we've had it' I mean: Best Town players Best opposition players Proper football clubs Better league More skill Better goals Multi million pound players on the books OK the football hasn't been brilliant at times and we lose sometimes but compared to the unbeaten run for example (and that was the good times!) I'd take the current situation all day long! Your mate must be mad Does he hanker back to the good old days when we had Kevin Sharpe at left back and Eddie Youds marshalling the defence Or maybe he wistfully remembers the Jevons / Parker partnership and wishes we could go back to the good old days of getting mullered by Macclesfield and considering Northampton as one of our biggest rivals. Strange, very strange. I think it is down to the approach/style of play and, ultimately, the excitement on a Saturday. I think he probably got too much of a bee in his bonnet about Powell's negativity but I can understand where he;s coming from. He preferred things under Robins even though we were no more successful (admitting that we seemed to get a bit aimless towards the end of the season) - and I think I'd agree with him. I don't think he'd say that any of the examples you quote were better, I guess its just that he has other options now - but the catalyst was his frustration at Powell's approach. We can't just say it's 'better' when attendances are suggesting the opposite - I'll carry on going but if my other mate stops then the appeal somewhat lessens for me too. Thank God for the South Stand - cause that has transformed how I look forward to Saturday's this time - no matter what the results/performances are. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2015 18:08:04 GMT 1
Oh dear. Who do you think embraced this newly set up organisation?...... ok read on. "In 1992, the First Division clubs resigned from the Football League to take advantage of a lucrative television rights deal and on May 27, 1992, the Premier League as we know it today was formed.
This meant a break-up of the 104-year-old Football League that had operated until then with four divisions; the Premier League would operate with a single division and the Football League with three.
There was no change in competition format; the same number of teams competed in the top flight, and promotion and relegation between the Premier League and the new First Division remained on the same terms as between the old First and Second Divisions.
The 22 inaugural members of the new Premier League were Arsenal, Aston Villa, Blackburn Rovers, Chelsea, Coventry City, Crystal Palace, Everton, Ipswich Town, Leeds United , Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United, Middlesbrough, Norwich City, Nottingham Forest, Oldham Athletic, Queens Park Rangers, Sheffield United, Sheffield Wednesday, Southampton, Tottenham Hotspur, and Wimbledon.
A total of 43 clubs have played in the Premier League from its inception in 1992 until the end of the 2009/10 season. Two other clubs (Luton Town and Notts County) were signatories to the original agreement that created the Premier League, but were relegated prior to the inaugural Premier League season and have not subsequently returned to the top flight.
Seven clubs have been members of the Premier League for every season since its inception. This group is composed of Arsenal, Aston Villa, Chelsea, Everton, Liverpool, Manchester United, and Tottenham Hotspur.
Due to insistence by Fifa that domestic leagues reduce the number of games clubs played, the number of clubs was reduced to 20 in 1995 when four teams were relegated from the league and only two teams promoted.
On June 8, 2006, Fifa requested that all major European leagues, including Italy's Serie A and Spain's La Liga be reduced to 18 teams by the start of the 2007/08 season. The Premier League responded by announcing their intention to resist such a reduction. Ultimately, the 2007/08 season kicked off again with 20 teams.
The league changed its name from The FA Premier League to simply the Premier League in 2007."So who governs it if not the FA? Space Jesus? Once again the FA cannot do anything about the Premier League as it's a separate entity - commercially they negotiate their own deals and they divide they money received between those clubs in the Premier League. All the FA can do is on the football side i.e bans. Rather than going on Wikipedia, trying to ride a high horse and saying oh dear, give this a read. www.inbrief.co.uk/football-law/football-associations-power.htm#Nowt wrong with Wikipedia. space jesus it is then...... "How is this balancing act achieved?
This balancing act is achieved by having a Football Association Premier League Ltd presence on the board of the Football Association.
Why is this necessary?
This is necessary so that the FA Premier League has some sway with the Football Association as certain commercial interests of the Premier League may be affected by the decisions of the Football Association.
Furthermore, certain commercial decisions taken by the FA Premier League may need the agreement of the Football Association before they can go ahead." seriously now, it's not only us. Supporter apathy is spreading. The cost of watching football is killing the game. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/34398908?ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbc_match_of_the_day&ns_source=facebook&ns_linkname=sport |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2015 14:48:06 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by detox on Oct 1, 2015 15:54:00 GMT 1
and if ever a statistic was meaningless, this is it. A composite of 72 clubs, including SC holders, pay at the gate, adults, seniors, juniors, students, under 8's unders 13's under 18s ...etc... The figure means nowt, just put out to take the steam out of the twentiesplenty campaign... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2015 22:42:24 GMT 1
Following on from Brentford's home defeat on Tuesday, we have now dropped to second from bottom in the Championship attendance league. LINKWorrying times indeed! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2015 22:44:36 GMT 1
Following on from Brentford's home defeat on Tuesday, we have now dropped to second from bottom in the Championship attendance league. LINKWorrying times indeed! Bumped into a town board member this evening and he said that the board are seriously addressing our attendances. It's becoming a big issue. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2015 22:45:30 GMT 1
Following on from Brentford's home defeat on Tuesday, we have now dropped to second from bottom in the Championship attendance league. LINKWorrying times indeed! Being below Brentford and MK Dons is quite an embarrassment. |
|
|
|
Post by artysid on Oct 1, 2015 23:01:51 GMT 1
that's why in an earlier post i said I blamed the FA and the PFA. THe FA for not looking after the interests of the national game which is slowly but surely being destroyed by their greed and the greed of the premier league, and the PFA for seeing the increase in money and proceeding to make sure the players got the biggest slice of the financial pie, thus encouraging many players to come here for just the astounding money on offer. The Fa can't do anything about the Premier League, it's a totally separate entity. Does the Premier League have to stay within the FA umbrella for their teams to be eligible to compete in UEFA competitions? |
|
|
|
Post by artysid on Oct 1, 2015 23:04:32 GMT 1
The average cost of Football League tickets across its three divisions over the 2014-15 season was £14.08, the organisation has announced. In the Championship the average cost was £15.65, in League One it was £11.72 and in League Two £11.58. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/34416023I assume this includes averaging in season ticket prices /sales as well as concessions? |
|
|
|
Post by gledholt terrier on Oct 1, 2015 23:14:20 GMT 1
The average cost of Football League tickets across its three divisions over the 2014-15 season was £14.08, the organisation has announced. In the Championship the average cost was £15.65, in League One it was £11.72 and in League Two £11.58. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/34416023I assume this includes averaging in season ticket prices /sales as well as concessions? They will have thrown in every single cheap ticket they can, including babes in arms, but won't have included walk up premiums and it's hard to see how they have taken categorisation in to account. The statistics are meaningless, particularly when you consider that away fans don't have access to anything other than coincidental cheaper prices (and these are likely to be available only when the away support is limited). Lies, damn lies etc, etc |
|
, Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United, Middlesbrough, Norwich City, Nottingham Forest, Oldham Athletic, Queens Park Rangers, Sheffield United, Sheffield Wednesday, Southampton, Tottenham Hotspur, and Wimbledon.
Does he hanker back to the good old days when we had Kevin Sharpe at left back and Eddie Youds marshalling the defence 
Or maybe he wistfully remembers the Jevons / Parker partnership and wishes we could go back to the good old days of getting mullered by Macclesfield and considering Northampton as one of our biggest rivals. Strange, very strange. 
