General Premier League Thread 2019-20

ebbsy

The question I have is Euro 2021 still feasible in that format ? People travelling all over Europe ?

I think they will finish the leagues. The cups may well fall by the wayside, and that may include Europe.

Osamabindipper

ebbsy wrote: »

The question I have is Euro 2021 still feasible in that format ? People travelling all over Europe ?

I think they will finish the leagues. The cups may well fall by the wayside, and that may include Europe.

If there is no vaccine then no i wouldn't think so but if there is no vaccine we may not see domestic football also.

Cookiemunster

Osamabindipper wrote: »

If there is no vaccine then no i wouldn't think so but if there is no vaccine we may not see domestic football also.

If there's no sign of a vaccine by this time next year, then we'll have to learn to carry on as normal as possible while living with it. You can't shut the world down indefinitely.

Osamabindipper

Cookiemunster wrote: »

If there's no sign of a vaccine by this time next year, then we'll have to learn to carry on as normal as possible while living with it. You can't shut the world down indefinitely.

Thats a fair point too but you would imagine without a vaccine some kind of distancing will in place for sometime. Maybe crowds be several limited.

Then again we don't know Maybe there won't be a vaccine but our bodies learn to cope with it and there won't be the same strain on the icu departments ect and life can carry on. It's a learning curve.

Osamabindipper

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52399569

y0ssar1an22

Osamabindipper wrote: »

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52399569

did he speak up before the match i wonder?

Chuck Noland

Osamabindipper wrote: »

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52399569

Whilst he is right too, it’s the definition of locking the barn door after the horse bolts

Loafing Oaf

"That needs to be investigated to find out whether some of those infections are due directly to the Atletico fans."

Could this ever be established with certainty?

Cantona's Collars

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

"That needs to be investigated to find out whether some of those infections are due directly to the Atletico fans."

Could this ever be established with certainty?

Liverpool fans also said that they went to the game with symptoms. It was a case of the failure of authorities rather than the fans. You can't blame them for going to a massive game for their clubs.

Agent Coulson

Oliver Dowden confirmed in a briefing on Wednesday afternoon that he is talking to the Premier League about the possibility of screening games on free-to-air channels.

The Culture Secretary has revealed Sky Sports and BT Sport are considering making some action freely available for supporters to watch.

Oliver Dowden confirmed in a briefing on Wednesday afternoon that he is talking to the Premier League about the possibility of screening games on free-to-air channels.

The move is in a bid to stop people going round to a friend's house with a subscription package once the action restarts.

The Premier League has been suspended since March 13 due to the Covid-19 outbreak, but clubs are committed to resuming and finishing the season once it is safe to do so.

However, there is believed to be an acceptance among clubs that the campaign will be finished behind closed doors.

It was reported on Friday evening that Premier League clubs have set the date as June 8 for a return to action.

With the report also claiming that the date is viewed as the best-case scenario for clubs, with training tentatively pencilled in for either May 11 or May 18.

Broadcasters are believed to be looking at plans to broadcast every match live once the campaign returns.

And Dowden is hopeful that a solution with the Premier League and the broadcasters can be found.

“I’ve raised this challenge to the Premier League in the conversations I have had with them,” he said.

"I have said to the Premier League, in particular, I think it wouldn’t send the best signal if they were the first or one of the first major sports to resume behind closed doors and the public at large couldn't have access to it.

“The sports themselves are reliant on the revenue, so I don’t want to be in the position of issuing some blanket mandate or trying to change things round.

“But I do think they need to be mindful of that, and in fairness they are mindful of it.

“There are different ways you can both have elements of protecting revenue from broadcasts but also whether there are ways at increasing access.

“I have urged them to do that, and that is what they are considering as they go through the ideas of how it might work if they resume behind closed doors.”

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/breaking-sky-bt-games-free-18133433

Cork Boy 53

Osamabindipper wrote: »

Nope I think it be very hard to track down a virus in Liverpool.

How so?

Osamabindipper

Cork Boy 53 wrote: »

How so?

Obviously it's over a month ago now and thousands of people have been infected and many have died. How would they go about tracking it down??

Cork Boy 53

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Oliver Dowden confirmed in a briefing on Wednesday afternoon that he is talking to the Premier League about the possibility of screening games on free-to-air channels.



https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/breaking-sky-bt-games-free-18133433

Even if this does happen I`m sure no meaningful games will be free to air. It would just be dead rubbers.

Mitch Connor

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

Liverpool fans also said that they went to the game with symptoms. It was a case of the failure of authorities rather than the fans. You can't blame them for going to a massive game for their clubs.

Yes you can. People have personal responsibility and Covid19 wasn't some utterly unknown thing at the time.

Mitch Connor

Cork Boy 53 wrote: »

Even if this does happen I`m sure no meaningful games will be free to air. It would just be dead rubbers.

Sky and BT would have to be the ones showing the matches, imo.

They have paid huge money to televise games, and as of know they have not tried to claw that money back with no product being offered.

If you start showing games on FTA, you massively devalue what Sky and BT have paid for, against the product offering they bid on and paid for.

I just can't see it happening, unless they are in control. BBC/ITV, C4 can't be the ones showing them, imo.

I do think games played behind closed doors will be televised, but it will have to be via Sky or BT - maybe they stream them online for people who don't have a Sky or BT package. In that scenario, they can make money on advertising, if not subscriptions.

Fitz*

I'd would guess that Sky & BT are allowed to pick their games as normal for PPV TV. Any game not picked could then be chosen for FTA. BBC would normally be the crowd to lose out here as games would be shown for free before Match of the Day, but showing some games live on BBC may make up for this.

Sky get their games.
BT get their games.
BBC get their games.
Fans get to see their teams.

Everyone's a winner.

ebbsy

Listen , I'm a Liverpool supporter, and I was very surprised when that game went ahead.

It shouldn't have happened.

Cantona's Collars

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

Liverpool fans also said that they went to the game with symptoms. It was a case of the failure of authorities rather than the fans. You can't blame them for going to a massive game for their clubs.

But people travelling from abroad?

Mitch Connor

FitzShane wrote: »

I'd would guess that Sky & BT are allowed to pick their games as normal for PPV TV. Any game not picked could then be chosen for FTA. BBC would normally be the crowd to lose out here as games would be shown for free before Match of the Day, but showing some games live on BBC may make up for this.

Sky get their games.
BT get their games.
BBC get their games.
Fans get to see their teams.

Everyone's a winner.

Except sky and BT have paid litteral billions for the games. BBC have paid zero for live games.

There would be war if games are just handed to BBC.

I can't see anyway that it is not Sky or BT that show any matches - Maybe Amazon. It'll be people who paid for Live football that get to show it.

MeMen2_MoRi_

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Yes you can. People have personal responsibility and Covid19 wasn't some utterly unknown thing at the time.

It's something that's lacking, we had a massive story here last year about the minister falling off a swing and looking to get a huge pay day from it.

8-10

Deleted User wrote: »

But people travelling from abroad?

Should have been told not to travel in my view

y0ssar1an22

whats the thinking for FTA matches? i dont get it

Iused2likebusts

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

whats the thinking for FTA matches? i dont get it

Everyone gets to see the games can watch them in their own home.

Liam O

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Except sky and BT have paid litteral billions for the games. BBC have paid zero for live games.

There would be war if games are just handed to BBC.

I can't see anyway that it is not Sky or BT that show any matches - Maybe Amazon. It'll be people who paid for Live football that get to show it.

BT and sky can go FTA on their platforms but in the current situation would advertising make up for the losses from doing that?

poppers

Liam O wrote: »

BT and sky can go FTA on their platforms but in the current situation would advertising make up for the losses from doing that?

Sky and BT would probably have customers signed up already have they released any figs for people cancelling their contracts.

Im sure the gov could throw them a few bob to pay for games to go Fta.

Guy:Incognito

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

"That needs to be investigated to find out whether some of those infections are due directly to the Atletico fans."

Could this ever be established with certainty?

Interview the virus and ask it, paying special attention to its accent.

y0ssar1an22

Iused2likebusts wrote: »

Everyone gets to see the games can watch them in their own home.

i just dont get it. football fans would pay for subscriptions anyway.

can't be a money thing. if they go to the pub, they'd drink the few pints and maybe a meal.

people who go to matches? well they save the price of a ticket in return for a tv subscription.

wonder how the broadcasters will react?

citytillidie

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

i just dont get it. football fans would pay for subscriptions anyway.

can't be a money thing. if they go to the pub, they'd drink the few pints and maybe a meal.

people who go to matches? well they save the price of a ticket in return for a tv subscription.

wonder how the broadcasters will react?

Not everyone will be able to afford Sky and BT at this time, people maybe putting funds to stuff more important like food, if they are not getting the same amount of money like earning 20% less than they normally do or worse no longer working.

Cantona's Collars

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

i just dont get it. football fans would pay for subscriptions anyway.

can't be a money thing. if they go to the pub, they'd drink the few pints and maybe a meal.

people who go to matches? well they save the price of a ticket in return for a tv subscription.

wonder how the broadcasters will react?

There's surely massive contractual issues there. Broadcasters paid a king's ransom for rights and not everyone in the UK have satellite TV let alone a Sky subscription so then would the games be shown on BBC and ITV?
There was a massive furore earlier on this forum about £750 million being owed if the EPL wasn't complete and now games are talked about as going FTA?

dogbert27

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

whats the thinking for FTA matches? i dont get it

They don't want friends gathering in a house together to watch a match

yabadabado

I doubt Sky or BT would let any games go FTA when they have signed a hugely costly deal for the rights.

Unless the EPL do some deal with them why would they let anything go FTA .It wouldn't be in their interest.

Rayne Wooney

Yeah, their government obviously want some benefit out of it to let it go ahead. FTA might keep more inside.

UEFA were adamant the leagues finish the other week, now they could potentially be finished “on merit” whatever that means, I think the impact of this is hitting home.

I don’t know how they could call the league with a quarter to go without causing major issues. If null and voiding the league ruins it’s integrity, so does calling the 38 game season 10 games short in some cases and relegating unfortunate teams.

Uefa and integrity go hand in hand tbf..

Mushy

yabadabado wrote: »

I doubt Sky or BT would let any games go FTA when they have signed a hugely costly deal for the rights.

Unless the EPL do some deal with them why would they let anything go FTA .It wouldn't be in their interest.

Surely Sky/BT get their usual picks, so that's about 5 matches, then the rest can be FTA? Maybe lose the thing about showing each team a minimum number if times so they can literally pick the top viewing teams.

y0ssar1an22

citytillidie wrote: »

Not everyone will be able to afford Sky and BT at this time, people maybe putting funds to stuff more important like food, if they are not getting the same amount of money like earning 20% less than they normally do or worse no longer working.

dogbert27 wrote: »

They don't want friends gathering in a house together to watch a match

yeah, thats fair enough i guess. will it be on a case by case basis if they can afford it or not? i doubt it, logistical nightmare. everyone cancels their subscriptions and sky, bt, et al lose a fortune. cannot see that happening.

if there is social distancing then games cannot go ahead. if there is no social distancing, then gathering in a house is not a problem.

Bundesliga looks quite likely to go ahead now in May according to the Guardian. Great to see football on the horizon. A lot of eyes of them took see they handle it. EPL watching with interest.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/apr/23/bundesliga-return-in-may-now-looks-inevitable-but-fans-are-far-from-happy

y0ssar1an22

Mushy wrote: »

Surely Sky/BT get their usual picks, so that's about 5 matches, then the rest can be FTA? Maybe lose the thing about showing each team a minimum number if times so they can literally pick the top viewing teams.

i want a carnival of football (a mini world cup for each of the premier league, champs, uefa, and all the other league; once we're not back in work!), but for the above to work, games would need to be staggered; else everyone tunes in for the 'big games', for the most part.

i dunno, FTA vs subscription broadcasting is so low down on the decision tree as to whether football in the UK resumes anytime soon.

y0ssar1an22

Rayne Wooney wrote: »

Yeah, their government obviously want some benefit out of it to let it go ahead. FTA might keep more inside.

UEFA were adamant the leagues finish the other week, now they could potentially be finished “on merit” whatever that means, I think the impact of this is hitting home.

I don’t know how they could call the league with a quarter to go without causing major issues. If null and voiding the league ruins it’s integrity, so does calling the 38 game season 10 games short in some cases and relegating unfortunate teams.

on merit is pretty much as a respective league stands. maybe a get-out for uefa if there was a big team not in champions league spots (dont think thats the case across europe, you could argue england, but not really).
i had a look earlier, giving PPG and taking into account the games in hand the table does not change.

calling it as it stands, or adjusting for PPG avg is the best solution if it cannot be completed.

can you go further, and estimate PPG based on the ease/difficulty/home away of remaining games? give each team a score, that is also factored in? teams with an easier run in would benefit. thats far too complicated and too many variables.

Cantona's Collars

https://twitter.com/ESPNFC/status/1253387868308987905

yabadabado

Mushy wrote: »

Surely Sky/BT get their usual picks, so that's about 5 matches, then the rest can be FTA? Maybe lose the thing about showing each team a minimum number if times so they can literally pick the top viewing teams.

Why would 2 companies who paid a fortune for the rights let anyone else have access unless they get something out of it

No football in 6 weeks and no one knows how long more ,so both companies will want maximum return on their investment and I can't see that including any FTA unless they get well looked after.

Maybe make one game free to air per round and all other games available to Sky/BT to show how they please.

Guy:Incognito

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

https://twitter.com/ESPNFC/status/1253387868308987905

I think most of us figured thatd happen and is the best outcome. No reason why the top leagues cant be done behind closed doors when they arent reliant on gate money to any degree the way the lower leagues are.

Its the lower leagues that will suffer unfortunately. They cant afford to function paying players and not having the income. But then the players cant afford to be out of work eitherwhile also not really being in a position to just go get a job thill it all blows over and then there might not even be clubs for them to come back to.

y0ssar1an22

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

I think most of us figured thatd happen and is the best outcome. No reason why the top leagues cant be done behind closed doors when they arent reliant on gate money to any degree the way the lower leagues are.

Its the lower leagues that will suffer unfortunately. They cant afford to function paying players and not having the income. But then the players cant afford to be out of work eitherwhile also not really being in a position to just go get a job thill it all blows over and then there might not even be clubs for them to come back to.

the thing is, as (I think) we're all concerned, its not a question of how and where, its a question of when. When is all that matters. if the when is too far away, the league wont finish.

Cantona's Collars

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

the thing is, as (I think) we're all concerned, its not a question of how and where, its a question of when. When is all that matters. if the when is too far away, the league wont finish.

We saw dates thrown out when leagues were postponed and we are still seeing it. The same hopes and plans with new dates. Only government can say when sporting events get the green light. That's always been at the end of pretty much every statement from footballing bodies.

Cork Boy 53

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

https://twitter.com/ESPNFC/status/1253387868308987905

I cant see any matches going ahead in Spain anytime in the rest of 2020 not even behind closed doors.

Mushy

yabadabado wrote: »

Why would 2 companies who paid a fortune for the rights let anyone else have access unless they get something out of it

No football in 6 weeks and no one knows how long more ,so both companies will want maximum return on their investment and I can't see that including any FTA unless they get well looked after.

Maybe make one game free to air per round and all other games available to Sky/BT to show how they please.

But they only get to show 4/5 games per round. Not like theyd lose favourable games to FTA providers, and if they got to show all Man Utd and Liverpool games (assuming their matches have biggest numbers) without having to worry about meeting minimum number of showing each team (unless that's already been met), then it would be workable. People will still tune in for the bigger games. Kick off times can be staggered so nothing clashes with their chosen games too, so maybe remove the tv blackout for good.

yabadabado

yabadabado wrote: »

Why would 2 companies who paid a fortune for the rights let anyone else have access unless they get something out of it

No football in 6 weeks and no one knows how long more ,so both companies will want maximum return on their investment and I can't see that including any FTA unless they get well looked after.

Maybe make one game free to air per round and all other games available to Sky/BT to show how they please.

I've said already but this is Sky/BTs best opportunity to start a proper streaming service

A pay per match scheme or something could be looked at too

y0ssar1an22

Deleted User wrote: »

I've said already but this is Sky/BTs best opportunity to start a proper streaming service

A pay per match scheme or something could be looked at too

Amazon were making a move 12 months ago, got a few games (how was that i wonder as a matter of interest?). A streaming service would be great. They could blow skt/bt outta the water if they wanted to. maybe this is that catalyst.

sky feel too 'connected' with all the clubs. sky sources say/understand/believe, its all horse****. kaveh and darmesh would be out of jobs!, and poor swanson!

Father Hernandez

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

Amazon were making a move 12 months ago, got a few games (how was that i wonder as a matter of interest?). A streaming service would be great. They could blow skt/bt outta the water if they wanted to. maybe this is that catalyst.

sky feel too 'connected' with all the clubs. sky sources say/understand/believe, its all horse****. kaveh and darmesh would be out of jobs!, and poor swanson!

Amazon's service was brilliant, like a breath of fresh air. Tonnes of money was spent in those 2 rounds where they would've received a very small % in revenue in comparison to costs. I wonder if they'll do the same again if they were to get the rights FT.

The biggest issues Amazon had was

1) the speed of everyone's internet/WiFi that if it doesn't work, it immediately becomes an Amazon problem. We don't get that problem on linear TV because if there is a fault, it usually falls on the TV provider. If we have to lower the quality of the settings to get the broadcast to work, it's immediately an inferior quality to what you see on TV.

2) Lag. We were watching the game a lot more time before we'd normally see it on normal TV. To the point that if you'd see a notification of the goal on an app and then see it 'live'. Doesn't make great viewing, issue for some, not for others. Also depending on internet speed, not everyone will be watching the same game at the same time.

3) Having to watch it on your mobile device. Prob an easy fix to have a new app for your Smart TV but inevitably will alienate some % of an audiences.

Until the above 'issues' are fixed, I don't think we'll ever completely move to a full on streaming service.

Personally I find the only issue with watching Sky/BT is that it's too expensive and some analysts, etc are crap. With a streaming service, there are more variables.

8-10

Father Hernandez wrote: »

2) Lag. We were watching the game a lot more time before we'd normally see it on normal TV. To the point that if you'd see a notification of the goal on an app and then see it 'live'. Doesn't make great viewing, issue for some, not for others. Also depending on internet speed, not everyone will be watching the same game at the same time.

Probably some sizeable implications for online gambling companies if streaming games with a slight lag becomes commonplace.

Will give them yet another edge as they'll make in-game markets based on real time information a good few seconds before those looking to bet

8-10

8-10 wrote: »

Probably some sizeable implications for online gambling companies if streaming games with a slight lag becomes commonplace.

Will give them yet another edge as they'll make in-game markets based on real time information a good few seconds before those looking to bet

Valid point but the latency I suspect will come from the users end and not the services end

That will be the betting companies loophole