Is this the beginning of the End, of our beautiful game...?

[tRiKS]

Just to clarify my position: this new develop of Scudamore's is 100% cast-iron bonkers. Utterly unworkable.

Thankfully, no Chairman in the league would go for this. However, the idea that this as a concept could not be explored is very small-minded. And don't forget that with pre-season breaks, some of the games could well be in Europe, or just a short flight (5hrs-ish) away anyway.

There are plenty of potential positives with this proposal. Not exploring them is just as silly as going ahead with this peculiar suggestion from Sack-brained Scudamore.

Good on you, triks for at least trying to highlight some of the merits. :up:

Thanks.

Same as that. i don't want it becasue i don't trust the or want the moeny men to get thier slice but i can still see green shoots of benefit growing out of thier piles of bull shit. I certainly don't agree with the way they are currently proposing how the fixtures are decided.

 

[tRiKS]

That is unfair then. When the Miami Dolphins came to London to play all their season ticket holders that wanted to go were given tickets. All they had to pay for were flights and somewhere to stay.

The Pittsburgh Steelers have always been in Pittsburgh. The Dallas Cowboys have never moved. Nor have the Miami Dolphins and San Fran. 49ers. Their is still a lot of history and tradition within the NFL.

The miami game was a movement of an existing fixture. the proposal for PL is to add a fixture. One of the non-arguments that has annoyed me in this debate is peoples obession that we lose something… WE DON’T… We get a game added, we lose nothing. They may very well add the ticket as part of the season ticket (I thinK they’d be foolish to do so with out a better selling on facility) but that to me would defeat the object of one of the positives from doing it. Filling the ground with overseas based fans or even capturing the imagination of a fresh batch of potentials.

 

[yanno]

The Pittsburgh Steelers have always been in Pittsburgh. The Dallas Cowboys have never moved. Nor have the Miami Dolphins and San Fran. 49ers. Their is still a lot of history and tradition within the NFL.

When the Glazers bought the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, they threatened to move the franchise to Baltimore. Baltimore no longer had an NFL franchise because the Baltimore Colts had been moved to, and renamed, the Indianopolis Colts. Ultimately, the Glazers discovered they could extort more money out of Tampa's taxpayers than Baltimore's, and once they were promised a new stadium they kept the franchise in Tampa.

Teemu - I accept there is some history and tradition in the NFL, even if most New Yorkers I know refer to the Giants as the New Jersey Giants (because of their stadium relocation). But my larger point is about the mentality of NFL owners, and their dismissive attitude towards the traditions of sport. It's no surprize to me that now we have two major clubs owned by American "businessmen", and others owned by Russian and Thai "businessmen", plus clubs owned by homegrown pornographers, that the traditions and integrity of British soccer are being thrown out of the window.

 

[Bill_Oddie]

As an amusing aside, I did like the Football365 comment in Mediawatch, responding to Scudamores pledge that 'matches will not take place in locations with unsuitable climates':

"Things just keep getting worse for Middlesboro" :lol:

 

[SpurSince57]

Looking at it another way, if La Liga or Serie A were to pull a similar stunt, how many of us could be arsed to go and see, say, Osasuna and Recreativo at the Lane or the Immigrants? Or Udinese v. Livorno?

The notion that it could be done by P1 v. P2, P3 v. P4, etc, is also totally unworkable. No club could know with certainty who its opponents would be, or where it would be playing, until the previous weekend. Similarly, the punters in Bangkok or Buenos Aires or wherever wouldn't have any idea whom they might be going to see.

FUMTU to TARFU.

 

[worcestersauce]

About a month ago I called into a radio show to ask what they thought this years peter scudamore fuck up would be, based on two years ago standing at highbury in an arsenal shirt refusing to travel 4 miles to west Ham and insisting that Spurs had to play seriously ill men and endanger their health or they would lose three points, then last year he thought west ham were relegated so moved away from tradition and fined them instead of docking points. I was a bit tongue in cheek but nobody guessed he would come up with this cretinous idea and as justification for an extra game with who you got to play being a matter of chance said it was no different to a cup game. This is the chief exec of the premier league and he doesn't know the difference between league and cup formats what an absolute knownothing cretin.
Someone said fans should boycott a game but it would be more effective to boycott the merchandise, nobody buy a shirt for the season this starts, if you want a shirt buy an international one.

 

[LSUY]

But my larger point is about the mentality of NFL owners, and their dismissive attitude towards the traditions of sport.

Tom Hicks and George Gillett aren't NFL owners.

Malcolm Glazer is sadly an NFL owner and an idiot.

The only other NFL owner that has control of a Premier League club is Randy Lerner and from what I've heard from Villa fans is that he is a great owner.

Most NFL owners like Robert Kraft, the Rooney family and Randy Lerner have been brilliant owners. They respect the traditions of the sport and have played a key role in turning around their franchises fortunes.

 

[Bonjour]

This would be kinda like the inverse of the World Series..

 

[SpurSince57]

Hopefully, FIFA will just knock this nonsense on the head.

 

[yanno]

Hopefully, FIFA will just knock this nonsense on the head.

Yup. It's probably the first time ever that I've wanted FIFA and/or UEFA to intervene and say:

NON

YOU CANNOT BE SERIOUS

 

[tRiKS]

Looking at it another way, if La Liga or Serie A were to pull a similar stunt, how many of us could be arsed to go and see, say, Osasuna and Recreativo at the Lane or the Immigrants? Or Udinese v. Livorno?

The notion that it could be done by P1 v. P2, P3 v. P4, etc, is also totally unworkable. No club could know with certainty who its opponents would be, or where it would be playing, until the previous weekend. Similarly, the punters in Bangkok or Buenos Aires or wherever wouldn't have any idea whom they might be going to see.

FUMTU to TARFU.

They're not proposing to send the games to countries with strong domestic leagues. ... In fact i bet west and central europe aren't even in the running regardless of if they have a strong league or not. Same as Brazil and Argentina.

My assumption is that it'l be a ground from - Africa, Asia, N America (2) and Australasia

the world cup sells out without prior knowledge of the fixtures... and that at time when there is a greater saturation of games to chose from in a short space of time.

Would they fill a ground with 60k twice in one weekend when there is only that weekend to chose to watch a football match? A resounding YES. No problem..

i think they'd be touts selling tickets for £££'s even outside a Cardiff v westham fixture.

 

[yanno]

tRIKS - please answer one simple question: why do these have to be proper EPL matches rather than exhibition/friendly games which could be played in pre-season?

 

[tRiKS]

tRIKS - please answer one simple question: why do these have to be proper EPL matches rather than exhibition/friendly games which could be played in pre-season?

They don't.

But every person viewing sport is excitied and motivated differently when they know what they are seeing is real. Any suggestion to the contary is selling people short.

I see the positive in giving fans the chance to expeirence what we do... competitive games offers that much more than friendlies.

Friendlies imo are more cynical in motivation not less.

 

[yanno]

Friendlies imo are more cynical in motivation not less.

But to use Big Bizness' terminology for a moment, I would maintain that the "global brand" is clubs like Man Utd and players like Cristiano Ronaldo. They are what truly sells - not the EPL. If you put Ronaldo and Man Utd on any pitch in the world, you'd have a sell out crowd, regardless of the competitive status of the match.

The real reason these have to be EPL matches rather than friendlies, is that the driving force behind this proposal is the EPL rather than individual clubs. It is the EPL "brand" that is being sold here. It is an attempt to open "foreign markets" to nobodies like Bolton and Wigan under the EPL logo. Which is probably why the self-styled Big Four are being promised preferential treatment in the seeding and selection of matches. In other words, the self-styled Big Four benefit less proportionately from this nonsense than the likes of Wigan & Bolton, because Man Utd & co are already "global brands".

But the fatal flaw in this rubbish plan is that by extending the EPL to 39 matches, its entire competitive basis is destroyed. As Scudamore smugly explains, the 39th match will cause the EPL to be unfair.

The EPL are only thinking about fans in the context of how much more money they can screw them for whilst simultaneously destroying the integrity of their own product...

 

[Tickers]

I'm amazed that some posters - considered, intelligent posters - are actually giving this ludicrous proposal serious thought.

If this comes to pass, football has eaten itself.

Someone mentioned Football365 earlier - well those guys might as well close down the website now; nothing satirical or piss-takey they could come up with could possibly match this for complete, pound-signs-flashing-in-the-eyes dismissal of a league concept or disdain for the fans who turn up to watch games every fucking week. Unless he's entered a dumbest-****-in-the-room competition, I genuinely worry about Scudamore's sanity. And some of you one here as well.

Fucking bollocks.

 

[tRiKS]

But to use Big Bizness' terminology for a moment, I would maintain that the "global brand" is clubs like Man Utd and players like Cristiano Ronaldo. They are what truly sells - not the EPL. If you put Ronaldo and Man Utd on any pitch in the world, you'd have a sell out crowd, regardless of the competitive status of the match.

The real reason these have to be EPL matches rather than friendlies, is that the driving force behind this proposal is the EPL rather than individual clubs. It is the EPL "brand" that is being sold here. It is an attempt to open "foreign markets" to nobodies like Bolton and Wigan under the EPL logo. Which is probably why the self-styled Big Four are being promised preferential treatment in the seeding and selection of matches. In other words, the self-styled Big Four benefit less proportionately from this nonsense than the likes of Wigan & Bolton, because Man Utd & co are already "global brands".

But the fatal flaw in this rubbish plan is that by extending the EPL to 39 matches, its entire competitive basis is destroyed. As Scudamore smugly explains, the 39th match will cause the EPL to be unfair.

The EPL are only thinking about fans in the context of how much more money they can screw them for whilst simultaneously destroying the integrity of their own product...

Yes in the model of fixture selection Scudamore has suggested so far that is what would happen. I've altered the fixture selection to demonstrate that despite the corporate greed motivating this move, massive and hounourable postitives can be accomplished.

I think the driving forces behind this have considered that utd and players like Ronaldo are the most marketable comodities. I think they and in turn you, underestimate how well the football would stand up on it's own or how intelligent all those overseas fans and potential fans are.

The good would out!! .. it's unfortunate that the fat cats would get fatter in the process but don't let that distemper those little rays of light. Don't you or anyone be fooled into thinking the Fat cats didn't get fat in the 60's, 70's and 80's.

 

[Stoof]

The good would out!! .. it's unfortunate that the fat cats would get fatter in the process but don't let that distemper those little rays of light. Don't you or anyone be fooled into thinking the Fat cats didn't get fat in the 60's, 70's and 80's.

If you really think there's good to come of this well, you're wrong, deluded, wrong, insane and wrong. If they're proposing moving competitive games away from the country that they are fighting in the league for, I'd consider my position very carefully.

Christ, football supporters go up in arms if they move their ground to the next tube stop. Hell, some form splinter supporter clubs (FC United) if they don't like the new owners!

I love that you're trying to fumble in the dark for some sort of reasonable explanation behind this - but you can't, nay, won't get past that English League Games NEED to be played in England.

It's that simple.

 

[yanno]

I think they and in turn you, underestimate how well the football would stand up on it's own or how intelligent all those overseas fans and potential fans are.

I disagree. If I want to see beautiful football, I'll watch Barca play Sevilla. I don't watch Bolton v Wigan to see high quality football. I watch it in expectation of a huge belly laugh as Titus Bramble demonstrates once again why he's a truly unique footballer. If the "global audience" was really exposed to the fulll dross of the EPL, they'd soon realize the Simpsons are far more entertaining....

Meanwhile, I see even intelligent managers like Steve Coppell are coming out with complete Orwellian doublethink:

"The Premier League has no obligation now to nurture young talent or play English players. They have a mandate to go out and make money. Look at the FA Youth Cup at the moment - there is a domination of foreign players at the big clubs. We are no longer the English league.
"We have destroyed competition in this country for many years but as the manager of Reading I am proud and delighted to be a part of it, even though it is not an even competition. It has become a huge corporation that takes its lead from making money. There is no responsibility for the English game but it is not greed, it's business. And a successful business always tries to grow and acquire more."

http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,,2254817,00.html

Greed 7 Integrity 0
[played in NYC]

 

[tRiKS]

If you really think there's good to come of this well, you're wrong, deluded, wrong, insane and wrong. If they're proposing moving competitive games away from the country that they are fighting in the league for, I'd consider my position very carefully.

Christ, football supporters go up in arms if they move their ground to the next tube stop. Hell, some form splinter supporter clubs (FC United) if they don't like the new owners!

I love that you're trying to fumble in the dark for some sort of reasonable explanation behind this - but you can't, nay, won't get past that English League Games NEED to be played in England.

It's that simple.

It's not moving though it's adding. If it we're moving i'd agree whole heartedly.

I don't feel that i am in the dark.. i feel more and more that one ADDED game will turn the light on for so many others.

Once again let me reititerate that i see the positive side despite acknowledging all the horrible greedy motivations in the chairmen for doing this. They are clumping mother funners but they've accidentally opened a very worthy door to thousands.

 

[ever]

probably been asked allready,

but what happens when man utd get drawn against derby in hong kong, sunderland were effectivly safe after 38 games, but after the "extra" game they end up going down?