Premier League trying to fight streaming, can the war be won?

Mr.H

The only way to stop it is to get people to agree not to do it

Stream services can be taken down but they will always be resurrected

Guy:Incognito

Inquitus wrote: »

You could quite easily allow club based subs and equitable money sharing, which I would be in favour of. If Cardsharing dies, then there is Aceplayer which can never be blocked, and then the next thing and the next thing, so no they will never win this battle.

It'll work for a while till the few big clubs pulling in 90% of the viewers get greedy and decide they should be getting 90% of the income.

ziggyman17

I would love to have an individual sub to watch all Man Utd games...... But when the day comes that each team can have an individual sub will be the day that football in England is killed, because Man Utd will clean up and if you think their profits are big now, just wait till they can sell individual subs, worldwide they will dwarf every other team going.....

niallo27

ziggyman17 wrote: »

I would love to have an individual sub to watch all Man Utd games...... But when the day comes that each team can have an individual sub will be the day that football in England is killed, because Man Utd will clean up and if you think their profits are big now, just wait till they can sell individual subs, worldwide they will dwarf every other team going.....

In fairness man how maybe boring draws can you go through before you cancel your subscription

sabat

ziggyman17 wrote: »

I would love to have an individual sub to watch all Man Utd games...... But when the day comes that each team can have an individual sub will be the day that football in England is killed, because Man Utd will clean up and if you think their profits are big now, just wait till they can sell individual subs, worldwide they will dwarf every other team going.....

Firstly, they'd have to pay the opposition teams half the time; secondly, they have almost infinite funds for transfers already and they're still sh1te.

enfant terrible

niallo27 wrote: »

Maybe your right it might be the end but I have heard it so many times it's hard to believe it. These channels are still clearing on the SD box though until that stops I will remain optimistic.

This is the end guaranteed, no fix for this one.

ziggyman17

sabat wrote: »

Firstly, they'd have to pay the opposition teams half the time; secondly, they have almost infinite funds for transfers already and they're still sh1te.

its not about how ****e they are............ the simple fact is they will clean up......if they have 150 million to spend each summer now, then if individual subs come in then they will probably have 300 million to spend each year and still keep the Glazers happy with cash, the club is a license to print money and this will put them out of reach of every other club in the world weather you like it or not.......

niallo27

enfant terrible wrote: »

This is the end guaranteed, no fix for this one.

Bollox it's not clearing on SD fix is already there.

enfant terrible

niallo27 wrote: »

Bollox it's not clearing on SD fix is already there.

Good luck with the fixes

JonnyM

Sky sports 4 and 1 and HQ still working.

JamboMac

Sky won't win the little guy has a bigger drive to create something to circumvent any changes, this is how its constantly worked. Sky have ripped people off for too long. Now its gonna bite then in the ass.

the whole year inn

enfant terrible wrote: »

This is the end guaranteed, no fix for this one.

What encryption are they using, nothing is secure and will be cracked sooner rather that later.

Oat23

JonnyM wrote: »

Sky sports 4 and 1 and HQ still working.

3rd time I'm posting this: Only 1 frequency has been blocked so far but the rest will obviously follow. The reason 1, 4 & HQ are working is because they are available on multiple frequencies.

Try Eurosport or TCM.

the whole year inn wrote: »

What encryption are they using, nothing is secure and will be cracked sooner rather that later.

They are using icam plus. People said it would be cracked when Sky IT started using it but 18 months later Sky IT is still dark.

the whole year inn

Oat23 wrote: »

3rd time I'm posting this: Only 1 frequency has been blocked so far but the rest will obviously follow. The reason 1, 4 & HQ are working is because they are available on multiple frequencies.

Try Eurosport or TCM.



They are using icam plus. People said it would be cracked when Sky IT started using it but 18 months later Sky IT is still dark.

Yep can confirm those channels are not working, Does Italy have a big. Market share towards Sky revenue. Would have thought Ireland and England Sky would focus on and if that turned off for cs users then we would see movement on that.

Fr Tod Umptious

Oat23 wrote: »

Why can't they just move EPL games to a different time? Fans can then watch/attend both. A later time suits The Americas and Asia more as well.

I assume 'tradition' even though the EPL sold out long ago.

Stick them on a Sunday.
The only reason they are on a Saturday goes back to a time when the Sabbath meant more than it means today.

In the US you have college (American) football on a Saturday and pro (American) football on a Sunday.

Do the same in England, EPL on a Sunday, lower league on a Saturday.

Fr Tod Umptious

JamboMac wrote: »

Sky won't win the little guy has a bigger drive to create something to circumvent any changes, this is how its constantly worked. Sky have ripped people off for too long. Now its gonna bite then in the ass.

The little guy would go straight back to Sky if he felt it was value for money.

Right now Sky are in a bit of a bad spot, they have lost a good deal of high profile sports to BT (UCL, some rugby, some cricket etc) yet they have paid over the odds for the latest EPL rights.

Right now BT seem to have a lot more "live" sport, starting early with stuff from Australia and ending late with US sports.

Sky is just full of filler, "Best of Steven Gerrard" and the like.

Right now Sky sports ain't worth it.

Copper_pipe

Still have SS1 and SSN HQ on my Zgemma

Oat23

the whole year inn wrote: »

Yep can confirm those channels are not working, Does Italy have a big. Market share towards Sky revenue. Would have thought Ireland and England Sky would focus on and if that turned off for cs users then we would see movement on that.

Sky IT was hugely popular on CS because it used to have all the EPL games, CL & EL games. Most pubs used to have it.

I don't think the increased focus (if there is one) on icam plus now Sky UK are implementing it will make a difference.

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Stick them on a Sunday.
The only reason they are on a Saturday goes back to a time when the Sabbath meant more than it means today.

In the US you have college (American) football on a Saturday and pro (American) football on a Sunday.

Do the same in England, EPL on a Sunday, lower league on a Saturday.

Even if they moved Championship to Non-league games forward an hour to 2pm and moved the EPL to 4.30pm it would work fine. Put the evening kickoff to 7.30pm or 8pm like the Friday/Monday games.

I agree with what you say about Sky not being value for money. It's seriously overpriced for what you get.

On top of all the live sports you get on BT, they must have weekly highlight shows from at least 10 leagues around the world. And they have the European football show on Sunday nights which I love.

emmetlego

A little help. My S SP 4 is still working fine, but my S SP N HQ is gone. I've looked at king of sat and as you're all well aware, there's no new frequency. How do I get around this? PM maybe?

Lovely Bloke

I think what we might see is the likes of Eir, BT, Vodafone getting involved more and more in the rights bidding, because as Primarily Teclo/ISP services they have the actual wherewithal to just arbitrarily block any website they want, at any time, without a court order.

It wouldn't take much to employ a team of ten agents to sit down on a matchday and trawl the usual places, then just blacklist the sites on their network, in real time.

so, if in the future Vodafone made a successful bid to be the exclusive broadcaster of EPL games here in Ireland, you'd have to have a Vodafone TV sub, or broadband, or a mobile sub, or whatever - but if you can only access the games from a Vodafone IP Address then it becomes trivial for them to just block access to nefarious services.

Albert_Camus

Albert_Camus wrote: »

Griezmann and these lads won't be cheap. The fans need to start paying up ☺️

Well if the tv money decreases then subsequently, the salaries and valuations will have to follow suit but players already on huge contracts could really put football clubs under serious pressure.

The tv companies will never stop illegal streaming. They are trying to put out an amazon sized forest fire and lets face it, the real robbery here is what they are charging to watch relative mediocrity this day and age. The premier league patting themselves on the back as the best league in the world but they are struggling to keep their UEFA coefficent spot

Dirty Dingus McGee

A big problem is the continuous splitting of the packages meaning you need to to subscribe various providers to watch what you want.It's only 2 at the moment but who know what will happen in the future and the problem as well will be that you satellite provider may not be able to provide all the channels on the one platform, it's not too bad at the moment because you can get all the Sky and BT channels on Sky but what happens if another players comes onto the market and tries to force people to jack in Sky package as a whole to buy their service for the games they show.

Consumers really are being taken advantage of at the moment and their seems to be **** all that can be done about it legally.

Tom Mann Centuria

emmetlego wrote: »

A little help. My S SP 4 is still working fine, but my S SP N HQ is gone. I've looked at king of sat and as you're all well aware, there's no new frequency. How do I get around this? PM maybe?

Don't think you can get around it. Think it's gone for good.

Lucas Hood

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

Don't think you can get around it. Think it's gone for good.

Yep and they'll all probably be gone soon enough.

Tom Mann Centuria

Lucas Hood wrote: »

Yep and they'll all probably be gone soon enough.

I'd imagine so. Thankfully most of what I watch is on eir or BT so I'm not too bothered. Can't afford to pay for sky sports so I'll make do without it.

For the quality of games and players, MOTD is enough to take in. The Premier league product is dining off past glories of the 90s and noughties and trying in vain to convince us that this current generation are even comparable.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

For the quality of games and players, MOTD is enough to take in. The Premier league product is dining off past glories of the 90s and noughties and trying in vain to convince us that this current generation are even comparable.

That's everyone told.

Cancel those subscriptions and set fire to those android boxes folks! MOTD is plenty.

astrofool

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

A big problem is the continuous splitting of the packages meaning you need to to subscribe various providers to watch what you want.It's only 2 at the moment but who know what will happen in the future and the problem as well will be that you satellite provider may not be able to provide all the channels on the one platform, it's not too bad at the moment because you can get all the Sky and BT channels on Sky but what happens if another players comes onto the market and tries to force people to jack in Sky package as a whole to buy their service for the games they show.

Consumers really are being taken advantage of at the moment and their seems to be **** all that can be done about it legally.

Blame the EU for this one. Competition means two companies offering the same product competing on price, not two companies offering different products, meaning the consumer needs to buy from all of them at the same time. Manu v Liverpool and Manu v Man City are two different products, but the EU sees them as the same and has two different companies provide them, pushing up costs to the customer as they have to buy both.

RoboKlopp

RoboKlopp wrote: »

That's everyone told.

Cancel those subscriptions and set fire to those android boxes folks! MOTD is plenty.

Well im only giving my own personal opinion to be honest but at the same time i kinda struggle to understand how the Premier League still holds the appeal.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Deleted User wrote: »

Well im only giving my own personal opinion to be honest but at the same time i kinda struggle to understand how the Premier League still holds the appeal.

They've flooded the market with too many games and diluted the appeal of the average televised game.Back in the 90's early 00's you had maybe 2 or 3 matches per week and I looked forward to them all and would look at the full 90 minutes of all of them now I just pick and choose and won't stick with a ****e match because there will always be another one on soon.What is the appeal and razzmatazz attached to watching Bournemouth (a tiny club) in a televised match. I think the league misses the likes of Leeds,Villa and Newcastle being relevant and challenging for European places.Those 3 are properly big clubs but aren't in the league or haven't been any good for about 10 years.Also the season is almost 10 months long so it isn't gone long enough that you can miss it.

Jayop

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

They've flooded the market with too many games and diluted the appeal of the average televised game.Back in the 90's early 00's you had maybe 2 or 3 matches per week and I looked forward to them all and would look at the full 90 minutes of all of them now I just pick and choose and won't stick with a ****e match because there will always be another one on soon.What is the appeal and razzmatazz attached to watching Bournemouth (a tiny club) in a televised match. I think the league misses the likes of Leeds,Villa and Newcastle being relevant and challenging for European places.Those 3 are properly big clubs but aren't in the league or haven't been any good for about 10 years.Also the season is almost 10 months long so it isn't gone long enough that you can miss it.

Bournemouth have brought more entertainment in the last few years than those three combined in about twenty.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Jayop wrote: »

Bournemouth have brought more entertainment in the last few years than those three combined in about twenty.

Well that's clearly not true.

Leeds were great for about 3 or 4 seasons from the late 90's onwards.At the same time Newcastle under Bobby Robson were great and Villa had a brilliant couple of years under O'Neill.

Big clubs and big stadiums equals a big match.When those teams were challenging for Europe they had some good tussles with the title challengers and it created more big matches.

Bournemouth although nice to watch at time play in a small stadium are a club with no history and therefore when a team like them play against the big guns there's no real special edge to it, when the 3 i mentioned were good and came up against the likes of Man Utd,Liverpool,Arsenal,Man Utd they were big games.

Jayop

It clearly is true from my point of view. Leeds had a couple of good seasons where they over stretched themselves, finished 3rd once and then dropped 2 divisions. They were the latest club to try to properly buy success without the proper financial backing and they have never recovered.

Villa have spent the last 20 years floating around between mid table mediocrity and eventually getting relegated after years of looking like they would.

In the last 20 years Newcastle have been relegated twice, won nothing and had one league finish of 3rd. They have done nothing worth talking about since the 1997 season.

I'm much more impressed by what Bournemouth are doing and the type of attractive football they play.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Well that's clearly not true.

Leeds were great for about 3 or 4 seasons from the late 90's onwards.At the same time Newcastle under Bobby Robson were great and Villa had a brilliant couple of years under O'Neill.

Big clubs and big stadiums equals a big match.When those teams were challenging for Europe they had some good tussles with the title challengers and it created more big matches.

Bournemouth although nice to watch at time play in a small stadium are a club with no history and therefore when a team like them play against the big guns there's no real special edge to it, when the 3 i mentioned were good and came up against the likes of Man Utd,Liverpool,Arsenal,Man Utd they were big games.

Well tbh i disagree with this completely. Sometimes the nicest stories is where the underdog rises up the ranks and punches above their weight with the best. it cant be all a closed shop of elite teams. Personally, id prefer a level playing field where everyone has a fair chance of winning instead of those who win the billionaire lotto having an advantage.

The reason the premier league product has lost its appeal isnt because there is poorer teams, but there is inferior players. Other than Messi and Ronaldo and a handful of others, there just isnt the same calibre of really top class player in the game any longer.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Jayop wrote: »

It clearly is true from my point of view. Leeds had a couple of good seasons where they over stretched themselves, finished 3rd once and then dropped 2 divisions. They were the latest club to try to properly buy success without the proper financial backing and they have never recovered.

Villa have spent the last 20 years floating around between mid table mediocrity and eventually getting relegated after years of looking like they would.

In the last 20 years Newcastle have been relegated twice, won nothing and had one league finish of 3rd. They have done nothing worth talking about since the 1997 season.

I'm much more impressed by what Bournemouth are doing and the type of attractive football they play.

Leeds, Villa and Newcastle are big clubs.

Bournemouth are not.Their stadium holds 11 thousand.

The likes of Leeds,Newcastle and Villa being good like they were for a long while was good for the premier league because they provided big matches Bournemouth and small clubs like them don't.It doesn't matter how nice their football is nobody gives a toss about them , the clubs I mentioned are big names and that tends to be good for the league.

Newcastle finished 4th in 2002 and 3rd in 2003, 5th in 2012.

Villa and Leeds finished in the top 6 or 7 quite often before their relegations.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Deleted User wrote: »

Well tbh i disagree with this completely. Sometimes the nicest stories is where the underdog rises up the ranks and punches above their weight with the best. it cant be all a closed shop of elite teams. Personally, id prefer a level playing field where everyone has a fair chance of winning instead of those who win the billionaire lotto having an advantage.

The reason the premier league product has lost its appeal isnt because there is poorer teams, but there is inferior players. Other than Messi and Ronaldo and a handful of others, there just isnt the same calibre of really top class player in the game any longer.

Bournemouth have been backed by a wealthy owner,their rise coincides with him taking a stake in the club.They aren't quite the lovely story of the little guy rising up that has been portrayed.

Big teams are good for sports leagues is the point I am making.People have an interest whether positive or negative in them and it gets more interest in general.It's like the effect Dublin have on the GAA.

Which is a bigger game Man Utd v Leeds or Man Utd v Bournemouth.

I think big clubs like I mentioned not being any good now are a loss from the EPL.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Bournemouth have been backed by a wealthy owner,their rise coincides with him taking a stake in the club.They aren't quite the lovely story of the little guy rising up that has been portrayed.

Big teams are good for sports leagues is the point I am making.People have an interest whether positive or negative in them and it gets more interest in general.It's like the effect Dublin have on the GAA.

Which is a bigger game Man Utd v Leeds or Man Utd v Bournemouth.

I think big clubs like I mentioned not being any good now are a loss from the EPL.

Look at their squad though, there was never any really big names and Harry Arter was bought for something incredibly paltry. £4000 i believe. I get what your saying with regards to the history of the Man United v Leeds fixture going back to the days of Busby v Revie right up to their race for the title in 92 and beyond (War of the Roses and all that jazz) and tbf thats a good point but I certainly wouldnt think the league has suffered due to a lack of Leeds v Manchester United fixtures good as derby as it was. I cant help thinking that like alot of field sports that skill has suffered due to a need for optimum strength, stamina, and speed. Players are seemingly given specific instructions where to stand, where to run. There is few players with any real craft or guile left

Look at how Rooney has declined. There is few players of this current generation that will be remembered in years to come alongside the likes of Bergkamp, Cantona, Henry, Ronaldo, Gerrard, Lampard, etc. You have Ibrahimovic who is 35 going on 36 and is arguably a part of that noughties generation but not many others.

jive

[Deleted User] wrote: »

There is few players with any real craft or guile left

Look at how Rooney has declined. There is few players of this current generation that will be remembered in years to come alongside the likes of Bergkamp, Cantona, Henry, Ronaldo, Gerrard, Lampard, etc. You have Ibrahimovic who is 35 going on 36 and is arguably a part of that noughties generation but not many others.

Hazard, Sanchez, Aguero, KDB, DDG

Rooney will still be remembered even if he never hit the heights he should have. Nostalgia is a funny thing, there's plenty of great players in the PL. The best are all in Madrid and Barcelona but that has been the case since the decline to Serie A.

Jayop

jive wrote: »

Hazard, Sanchez, Aguero, KDB, DDG

Rooney will still be remembered even if he never hit the heights he should have. Nostalgia is a funny thing, there's plenty of great players in the PL. The best are all in Madrid and Barcelona but that has been the case since the decline to Serie A.

I'd say in all respect to Tipp that his view is informed by the fact his club are no longer in the top battles (neither is mine) and that effects how we judge players even from other teams. When Keane and co we're going up against those great Arsenal teams we were rating their players so highly because we knew our players were great and they were matching them so often. Now I look at the league and see Hazard having a field day against my club and think that it's not as big an achievement because we're relatively poorer.

The fact is though that the likes of Aguero, Hazard, and a few others are up there with the best the league has ever produced. It's just that right at this moment the best players are playing for clubs not supported in big numbers in Ireland and as a result we rate them below our previous greats.

MD1990

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

They've flooded the market with too many games and diluted the appeal of the average televised game.Back in the 90's early 00's you had maybe 2 or 3 matches per week and I looked forward to them all and would look at the full 90 minutes of all of them now I just pick and choose and won't stick with a ****e match because there will always be another one on soon.What is the appeal and razzmatazz attached to watching Bournemouth (a tiny club) in a televised match. I think the league misses the likes of Leeds,Villa and Newcastle being relevant and challenging for European places.Those 3 are properly big clubs but aren't in the league or haven't been any good for about 10 years.Also the season is almost 10 months long so it isn't gone long enough that you can miss it.

Not sure why you have singled out Bournemouth. Many of there games have been great to watch.
Especially the home games against Liverpool & Arsenal.

Jayop

Bunley could have been a better shout, or previously QPR or the likes of Cardiff. To pick on Bournemouth is very strange. It's not like there wasn't small clubs in the league when the likes of Newcastle, Leeds and Villa were there. Big clubs and small clubs go up and down. For the likes of Villa, I honestly couldn't have been happier when they went down despite having a bit f a soft spot for them. They had become depressing to watch or play against at that stage. Same for Newcastle. I'll be glad to see them back up but they were no craic at all in the end.

jive

Jayop wrote: »

I'd say in all respect to Tipp that his view is informed by the fact his club are no longer in the top battles (neither is mine) and that effects how we judge players even from other teams. When Keane and co we're going up against those great Arsenal teams we were rating their players so highly because we knew our players were great and they were matching them so often. Now I look at the league and see Hazard having a field day against my club and think that it's not as big an achievement because we're relatively poorer.

The fact is though that the likes of Aguero, Hazard, and a few others are up there with the best the league has ever produced. It's just that right at this moment the best players are playing for clubs not supported in big numbers in Ireland and as a result we rate them below our previous greats.

I feel the same way, seemed like they cared more back in the day with Keane, viera and the likes. The players like cantona and bergkamp were super stylish in comparison to today's work horses like mane and lukaku.

In reality I know I've just grown up and don't care as much today as I did back then the harsh reality of time is relentless

JamboMac

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Leeds, Villa and Newcastle are big clubs.

Bournemouth are not.Their stadium holds 11 thousand.

The likes of Leeds,Newcastle and Villa being good like they were for a long while was good for the premier league because they provided big matches Bournemouth and small clubs like them don't.It doesn't matter how nice their football is nobody gives a toss about them , the clubs I mentioned are big names and that tends to be good for the league.

Newcastle finished 4th in 2002 and 3rd in 2003, 5th in 2012.

Villa and Leeds finished in the top 6 or 7 quite often before their relegations.

Leeds aren't really a big club and its been 13 years since they have seen the premier league. Leeds are in their with the sheffield wednesday of the past, where big teams and where built off large investment which was the downfall in the end.

chopperbyrne

Leeds are on course to securing a playoff spot, and it will be great for the EPL if both Leeds and Newcastle get promoted.

None of that has anything to do with illegal streaming though.

That war will never be won, until an affordable, legal alternative is offered.

Dirty Dingus McGee

MD1990 wrote: »

Not sure why you have singled out Bournemouth. Many of there games have been great to watch.
Especially the home games against Liverpool & Arsenal.

They've been on TV for the last couple of Saturday night games.Thats why I picked them.

Dirty Dingus McGee

JamboMac wrote: »

Leeds aren't really a big club and its been 13 years since they have seen the premier league. Leeds are in their with the sheffield wednesday of the past, where big teams and where built off large investment which was the downfall in the end.

Leeds aren't really a big club?


Leeds is the biggest City in England with only one team.They're a huge club they've just been badly mismanaged.

JamboMac

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Leeds aren't really a big club?


Leeds is the biggest City in England with only one team.They're a huge club they've just been badly mismanaged.

Big club equals title won not how big a city you are in and many clubs eclipse leeds.

Dirty Dingus McGee

JamboMac wrote: »

Big club equals title won not how big a city you are in and many clubs eclipse leeds.

They've won 3 league titles and are one of only 7 english teams to get to a European Cup final.

JamboMac

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

They've won 3 league titles and are one of only 7 english teams to get to a European Cup final.

Here is sheffield wednesday honours.

http://www.11v11.com/teams/sheffield-wednesday/tab/honours/

http://www.11v11.com/teams/leeds-united/tab/honours/

Who has won more?

Oh and can't find the european cup leeds reached the final in, pretty sure they only got as far as the semi's which leicester are close to doing.

JamboMac

JamboMac wrote: »

Here is sheffield wednesday honours.

http://www.11v11.com/teams/sheffield-wednesday/tab/honours/

http://www.11v11.com/teams/leeds-united/tab/honours/

Who has won more?

Oh and can't find the european cup leeds reached the final in, pretty sure they only got as far as the semi's which leicester are close to doing.

1975 v Bayern Munich. You really need to do your homework better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bov7NckEIFo