Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Points deduction for not being on SKY !



Ernest

Stupid IDIOT
Nov 8, 2003
42,748
LOONEY BIN
RELEGATION-haunted Huddersfield Town faced a Football League points deduction if next month’s game against Hull City was not screened live by Sky.

The Examiner can today reveal the background to a tickets row which has left fans seething.

Under the Sky TV contract all clubs must host at least one live game per season. But Town were at risk of breaching that because of a hardline stance on costs taken by West Yorkshire Police. The force had already refused permission for Sky to screen the home games against Leeds United and Cardiff City.

Senior officers also planned to block the Hull game on March 30, which could have meant Town becoming the first club to breach the Football League’s contract with the pay TV giant. That would have exposed the club to various sanctions including a loss of vital league points.

The Examiner can reveal how Town officials were summoned to a meeting at the Football League HQ in Preston and warned of the implications of the Hull kick-off not being switched to 5.20pm for Sky.

That led to the club pleading with police to let the game go ahead. Senior officers agreed but imposed strict conditions. These included issuing just 1,500 tickets to away fans and banning independent travel, forcing them to use official coaches only.

Both Town and Hull fans attacked the decision, which could now lead to a legal challenge backed by the Football Supporters’ Federation.

Town chief executive, Nigel Clibbens, told how the club was approached by the Football League in January to say the Hull game had been chosen by Sky.

Mr Clibbens said: “We contacted West Yorkshire Police to inform them as usual but they requested a meeting and subsequently two days later they informed us they would not sanction the change in kick-off time due to their risk assessment and the additional financial burden this would place on them.”

Town informed the Football League of the decision and were called to Preston.

“At the meeting we were told that Huddersfield Town has a contractual obligation as a member of the League to facilitate Sky TV games under the Football League contract,” said Mr Clibbens. “If we couldn’t fulfil this, we could be subject to sanctions including a possible points deduction. “We informed West Yorkshire Police of the implications for us of being unable to stage the game at the requested kick-off time. “We were pleased that West Yorkshire Police showed a willingness to reconsider the position and work with us to find a solution. “In conjunction with the police, we discussed options and solutions to reduce the policing costs and risk associated with the game. “Together we agreed a series of stipulations, which the police and Huddersfield Town were prepared to move forward together with and we sought agreement from Hull.”

The original conditions were:

Limiting Hull fans to 1,000 tickets;
Making the game the highest Category A* with ticket prices costing up to £32; Imposing a Category CIR policing plan based on the stadium footprint, similar to the Leeds game when 4,000 away fans attended;
Having a ‘bubble travel plan’ where away fans could only buy tickets with the official travel club;
Making the game all-ticket;
Insisting that only home fans with ticket purchasing history could buy home tickets.

At a later meeting the police were persuaded to increase the away allocation to 1,500 but the other conditions stood.

Mr Clibbens said Town had every sympathy with the fans but their hand had been forced.

He said: “Being faced with the unenviable prospect of not fulfilling the Sky TV contract and the huge potential implications for the club, we are just very relieved the game is to be staged. “The real people who suffer are the normal everyday Hull fans who just want to support their team but have to abide by the restrictions. “We are really grateful for the support of Hull City in helping us deal with the issue and agreeing to the conditions, which meant that West Yorkshire Police was willing to move from its original position to sanction the game.

“The Football League also told us that no club in the history of all the Sky agreements had failed to fulfil its TV obligations – every team must have one live televised home game. “At the same time we recognise the issues and difficulties faced by the police. “The football club and the police have worked together to try and resolve the issues. “The circumstances are difficult for everyone but we are pleased that the game is set to go ahead. “As a club we try to ‘make the difference’ in our community and our working relationship with West Yorkshire Police has been very good. “We look forward to this continuing and hope that the game goes ahead as a great advert for both clubs and their supporters.”

Supt Ged McManus, of West Yorkshire Police, said: “Due to intelligence about some of the supporters planning to attend the match, restrictions are necessary to allow the match to be policed safely and effectively. “The safety of those attending the match and of those in Huddersfield is of paramount concern to West Yorkshire Police.”

NEITHER Huddersfield Town nor Hull City have bad records when it comes to soccer hooliganism in the recent past.

Police made 27 arrests at Town games last year (seven at home, 20 away) and just 14 at Hull City games (seven home, seven away). By comparison there were 65 arrests at Birmingham City games, 62 at Leeds United games, 48 at Sheffield United games and 62 at Sheffield Wednesday matches. Town currently have 41 fans subjected to banning orders while Hull have 55. Leeds have 91, Leicester 46 and Birmingham 77.

HULL City fans have threatened legal action if West Yorkshire Police do not back down over ticketing arrangements for the game at Huddersfield.

The Football Supporters’ Federation (FSF) is backing fans left angry by West Yorkshire Police restrictions. The police have insisted only 1,500 Hull fans can travel – and they must use official coaches from the KC Stadium.

Amanda Jacks, director of casework for the FSF, said yesterday she had received 125 e-mails and they were still coming. She said West Yorkshire Police claimed to have intelligence that Hull fans were intending to “turn up at 11am and go on the beer all day”. She added: “The idea that all these 1,500 fans would do that is insulting. “You only have to look at the Home Office website to see that last year only 14 Hull fans were arrested home and away, and not one for alcohol-related offences. “And what we don’t know is whether any of those arrests led to convictions. “Huddersfield Town fans have a similar good reputation. “We’ve had e-mails from supporters who are travelling from Spain and Norway to the game, whose plans have been scuppered because they have got to go to Hull to pick up an official coach. “There are fans who live in Huddersfield who are having to go to Hull for a coach to take them back to Huddersfield.” Ms Jacks said solicitors had been consulted and legal action was likely. Ms Jacks urged anyone who wants to object to the ticket restrictions to e-mail her on amanda.jacks@fsf.org.uk. The e-mails will be forwarded to West Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner Mark Burns-Williamson. Mr Burns-Williamson was again unavailable for comment yesterday.
 




Peever

New member
Sep 5, 2010
1,733
Canada
So 1500 supporters want to show up early and dump several thousand pound into the local economy...what a horrible idea!

Twats
 






Seasidesage

New member
May 19, 2009
4,467
Brighton, United Kingdom
If this was allowed to go unchallenged how long before the 'bubble' game became the norm? I really think the Police have forgotten why they are there. It is to enforce the laws of this country not to dictate them...
 




severnside gull

Well-known member
May 16, 2007
24,767
By the seaside in West Somerset
Blame Leeds.

Since they won their case against the police on policing costs there seems to be a change in policy with Huddersfield paying the penalty.
I dont know how many Leeds home games have had the kick off time changed for tv but might be interesting. Looking from the outside they seem to get preferential treatment as a general rule.
 


Peever

New member
Sep 5, 2010
1,733
Canada
Blame Leeds.

Since they won their case against the police on policing costs there seems to be a change in policy with Huddersfield paying the penalty.
I dont know how many Leeds home games have had the kick off time changed for tv but might be interesting. Looking from the outside they seem to get preferential treatment as a general rule.

Slightly uninformed here....what was the case? Leeds not happy with the amount being charged?
 






Mellotron

I've asked for soup
Jul 2, 2008
32,306
Brighton
How many points would it be? Couldn't see a number in the article.
 


pork pie

New member
Dec 27, 2008
6,053
Pork pie land.
I really cannot see why the old bill are supposed to be in the wrong.

Football clubs should be FORCED to pay ALL COSTS associated with the policing of matches. Why should tax payers pay for it, when the clubs are profiting (or would be if they payed the players sensible wages).
 


The Large One

Who's Next?
Jul 7, 2003
52,343
97.2FM
A Hull City fan writes on the WSC website...

Police are imposing draconian measures on Hull

20 February ~ When Huddersfield Town travelled to the KC Stadium eight seasons ago, for a match in League One, a fight broke out between a handful of young men in the main car park. It wasn't pleasant and resulted in some rightly stiff sentences from the courts. The thugs in question weren't even attending the game. This altercation has, however, been the stick with which West Yorkshire Police (WYP) – and Humberside Police, when the West Yorkshire clubs visit Hull – have beaten Hull City supporters ever since.

Tigers fans aren't a controversial or even especially boisterous bunch but WYP have never failed to try to reduce their numbers when looking at fixtures involving the club on their patch. Their latest effort has tipped many peaceable City fans over the edge. Having already switched the Easter Saturday game at Huddersfield to a 12.30pm kick-off, for the usual nonsensical reasons involving public safety and disorder prevention, they've conceded power over the match to Sky and allowed a 5.20 start instead. However, they have imposed draconian restrictions on the Tigers supporters not unreasonably wishing to make the 70-mile trip.

Only 1,500 tickets will be given to Hull City and each supporter purchasing one will be forced to travel only on allocated club-run coaches. No fan is to be permitted to travel under their own steam and by a means of their choice, thereby making the journey pretty much impossible for the hundreds of supporters who no longer live in East Yorkshire. This legally dubious stipulation has left the fans apoplectic.

WYP appear to pressurise the Football League each July to make sure games at Leeds United are scheduled for weeknights, while the last trips to both Huddersfield and Bradford (a distant eight seasons ago) were both switched to Sunday lunchtimes. Beyond the anger lies confusion; though Hull fans are renowned for disliking Leeds, there is next to no animosity towards Huddersfield. The two Sheffield clubs engender much more antipathy yet Hull games at Bramall Lane and Hillsborough have happily and uneventfully commenced at 3pm on a Saturday with great regularity.

The official supporters' club and two highly influential fanzines have issued a joint statement imploring Hull City to decline the tickets until better treatment and more trust for the fans has been secured, to the tune of a bigger allocation and the freedom to travel at a time and via a method of an individual's choosing. The club claims it had long negotiations with WYP over this issue but couldn't budge them; sadly for the current regime, the evidence of their predecessors suggest they didn't try hard enough.

In 2005, City chairman Adam Pearson refused to take any tickets for a New Years Eve game at Leeds until identical restrictions on fans were lifted, while even his discredited successor Paul Duffen was admirably critical of Colchester United on behalf of Tigers fans when a 2007 game at Layer Road was wrongly postponed due to heavy rain just an hour before kick-off. Though the club has said it has done all it can, the level of indignation from supporters – and great interest from local media organisations, some of whom have rarely been friends of Hull City or football – suggests that it could and should try again, and take direct action if necessary.

Rattled by their powerlessness to tell Sky where to go, WYP have taken their frustration out on the fans of Hull City, an easy target. There are no more unruly elements among the travelling Tigers fans than any other group of supporters and they do not ever invade pitches or attack goalkeepers. The fans simply want to watch a progressive Hull City team earn a place back in the Premier League this season and are, again, being stopped by an authoritarian bunch of uniformed weight-throwers who haven't a clue. Matthew Rudd
 




Westdene Seagull

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch
NSC Patron
Oct 27, 2003
21,411
The arse end of Hangleton
I really cannot see why the old bill are supposed to be in the wrong.

Football clubs should be FORCED to pay ALL COSTS associated with the policing of matches. Why should tax payers pay for it, when the clubs are profiting (or would be if they payed the players sensible wages).

Football clubs pay twice - once in their taxes and then again for the police deployed within their stadium footprint.
 


Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
62,171
Location Location
The police want to wind their f***ing necks in. Where do they get off, dictating draconian restrictive measures on ticketing and travel for away fans. As said earlier, they're there to enforce the law where needed, not start making new ones as they go along under the age-old "safety is our top priority and of paramount importance" shite. That noble mantra doesn't give them licence to completely bollocks-up the arrangments of thousands of law-abiding Hull fans who just want to travel and watch a game of football. Not to mention the potential consequences for Huddersfield being unable to comply with its obligations to Sky.

Utterly PATHETIC from West Yorkshire Police.
 


The Large One

Who's Next?
Jul 7, 2003
52,343
97.2FM
Blame Leeds.

Since they won their case against the police on policing costs there seems to be a change in policy with Huddersfield paying the penalty.
I dont know how many Leeds home games have had the kick off time changed for tv but might be interesting. Looking from the outside they seem to get preferential treatment as a general rule.

Was it Leeds? Or Wigan?
 






big hilda

Active member
Feb 13, 2013
137
I would...:thumbsup:

amanda-jacks.png
 


severnside gull

Well-known member
May 16, 2007
24,767
By the seaside in West Somerset
Slightly uninformed here....what was the case? Leeds not happy with the amount being charged?

exactly that.
the police pretty much arbitarily decide how many officers to deploy and where. Leeds took them to court saying they should only have to pay for officers in the immediate (and heavily stewarded by the club) area of the ground and not elsewhere in the city (city centre/railway station/motorway services etc). Leeds won.
To some extent you can understand the police viewpoint given Leeds' fans reputation but they too often seem to want to be dictatorial and to over-react. Since the case police forces everywhere have had to review their approach. Some - like Sussex - seem to have got it balanced but in Yorkshire (surprisingly post-Hillsboro enquiry) seem to have just found new ways of hitting football. Maybe it is an age thing and senior officers still view football fans as the thugs of two decades ago rather than the reality that for the laege part clubs are now focussed on providing family friendly entertainment in order to optimise revenue.

And yes TLO I am sure it was Leeds because no matter it was justified I remember rhinking they were cheeky buggers given rheir track recird :lol:
 


The Large One

Who's Next?
Jul 7, 2003
52,343
97.2FM
exactly that.
the police pretty much arbitarily decide how many officers to deploy and where. Leeds took them to court saying they should only have to pay for officers in the immediate (and heavily stewarded by the club) area of the ground and not elsewhere in the city (city centre/railway station/motorway services etc). Leeds won.
To some extent you can understand the police viewpoint given Leeds' fans reputation but they too often seem to want to be dictatorial and to over-react. Since the case police forces everywhere have had to review their approach. Some - like Sussex - seem to have got it balanced but in Yorkshire (surprisingly post-Hillsboro enquiry) seem to have just found new ways of hitting football. Maybe it is an age thing and senior officers still view football fans as the thugs of two decades ago rather than the reality that for the large part clubs are now focussed on providing family friendly entertainment in order to optimise revenue.

And yes TLO I am sure it was Leeds because no matter it was justified I remember thinking they were cheeky buggers given their track recird :lol:

Found it. It was Wigan too.

BBC NEWS | UK | England | Manchester | Police match cost appeal success
 




Tony Meolas Loan Spell

Slut Faced Whores
Jul 15, 2004
18,068
Vamanos Pest
Hull fans after the game the other week were a friendly bunch in the WSL after the game.
 


Herne Hill Seagull

Well-known member
Jul 10, 2003
2,985
Galicia
Surely the League, if they're even vaguely competent(!) would have had an 'exceptional circumstances' or 'circumstances beyond the clubs' or the League's control' clause in the contract, so Sky can't punish them for something that's entirely the decision of the police?
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here