Barber on TV Deal.

[Goldstone1976]

I was taught that if I had nothing nice to say then I should say nothing. So: I'm usually quite understanding of PB's position and pronouncements. Usually.

 

[Bozza]

What I do disagree with you is your opinion of Paul Barber. It's very easy to slag people off but he has been elected by his peers to the Football League and was voted CEO of the year after he got rid of Gus at no cost to the club. Before that managers walked away with paid up contracts which is what Gus expected.

I think we are lucky to have him.

I pretty much agree with all of that.

However, that doesn't mean I can't view pieces of work in isolation, and I didn't think this was a very good one.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

You must be right but I do not remember swiping any bar codes. I am sure you know better than me because I am an infrequent visitor.

What I do disagree with you is your opinion of Paul Barber. It's very easy to slag people off but he has been elected by his peers to the Football League and was voted CEO of the year after he got rid of Gus at no cost to the club. Before that managers walked away with paid up contracts which is what Gus expected.

I think we are lucky to have him.

Where did I slag him off? I said I thought that is how the article read. I said nothing about the person.

 

[El Presidente]

Normal NSC approach in relation to all things Albion is to discuss an issue, have a moan, and then move onto something else, such as Most Flatulent Spice Girl, would you employ a Polish plumber, or best pound shop in Croydon.

PB is between a rock and a hard place on this. Say nothing (which may have been the best option as we all know that Sky run football and individual clubs have negligible power) and he'll be criticised for being out of touch, or go public and defend the deal and he will be accused of being in the pockets of Sky and we will be scouring the papers today to see if he is in the wedding photos of Sky uber fuhrer Rupert Murdoch when he wedded Jerry Hall.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

PB is between a rock and a hard place on this. Say nothing (which may have been the best option as we all know that Sky run football and individual clubs have negligible power) and he'll be criticised for being out of touch, or go public and defend the deal and he will be accused of being in the pockets of Sky and we will be scouring the papers today to see if he is in the wedding photos of Sky uber fuhrer Rupert Murdoch when he wedded Jerry Hall.

I think the problem is that he recently spoke more convincingly about this issue. Perhaps it's my imagination, but this time, as was said earlier in the thread, it came over in a very staged way. That seems patronising.

 

[drew]

Yeah? I have never had a smart card but have either bought online or at the stadium before the game. Haven't had to swipe a bar code just shown the ticket to a steward. Just saying.

The ticket or 'print at home' ticket would have a bar code. If you didn't scan it the steward did otherwise the turnstile won't open.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I think the problem is that he recently spoke more convincingly about this issue. Perhaps it's my imagination, but this time, as was said earlier in the thread, it came over in a very staged way. That seems patronising.

To be so at odds with supporters I can only presume there's an agenda. Angling for a job at Sky?

 

[Steve in Japan]

This is getting a VERY positive spin in the Argus. "Barber calls for TV talks to set minimum period for fixture changes". I think that was buried at the very end of the Seagulls article. Wouldn't the time to discuss that be during the, err, negotiations with Sky? No? Or were we too busy grabbing the moolah?

 

[studio150]

To be so at odds with supporters I can only presume there's an agenda. Angling for a job at Sky?

Is he?

It seems to me that mainly the supporters shouting the most are those that buy rail tickets to away games.

How many of the 20000 home supporters are that bothered if a home game gets moved to a Saturday lunchtime or to an evening not that many as a percentage.

There are more supporters than just the vocal NSC posters to consider. As with many things in life there is a silent majority that have differing views to those that shout the loudest.

 

[atomised]

Theres already a rolling period of 5 weeks at this point in the season that was set I assume when the negotiations took place. If they can extend that then it can only be positive for fans. A far more likely bet than limiting the number of games.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Is he?

It seems to me that mainly the supporters shouting the most are those that buy rail tickets to away games.

How many of the 20000 home supporters are that bothered if a home game gets moved to a Saturday lunchtime or to an evening not that many as a percentage.

There are more supporters than just the vocal NSC posters to consider. As with many things in life there is a silent majority that have differing views to those that shout the loudest.

Good post.

There would be no joy in someone posting that they actually enjoy sometimes getting a game on TV that they couldn't get to watch live. NSC would run them out of town.

They'd be shouted down by a very vocal collection of fans with an anti-sky agenda. I've found this very tedious and depressing over the last few days.

As for attendance figures, I could quite easily lose the will to live over that one. I'm far more interested in how many people are helping Tony out with the finances, than how many can't make it because they are on holiday or at a wedding etc.

Strewth.

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

Maybe the club could have made a gesture and refund the train tickets for those that have already purchased.

Im sure it would be (at most) a couple of grand but lets say 5k tops. Set a timelimit of 30days to claim and need to provide proof of purhase prior to the announcement of the fixture change.

Surprised this hasnt been done. It would piss me off as train tickets are not always cheap!

 

[drew]

Is he?

It seems to me that mainly the supporters shouting the most are those that buy rail tickets to away games.

How many of the 20000 home supporters are that bothered if a home game gets moved to a Saturday lunchtime or to an evening not that many as a percentage.

There are more supporters than just the vocal NSC posters to consider. As with many things in life there is a silent majority that have differing views to those that shout the loudest.

I agree. I'm one of those that spent money on train tickets and I did exchange some emails the other evening with PB but I am glad he is with our club rather than elsewhere.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Is he?

It seems to me that mainly the supporters shouting the most are those that buy rail tickets to away games.

How many of the 20000 home supporters are that bothered if a home game gets moved to a Saturday lunchtime or to an evening not that many as a percentage.

There are more supporters than just the vocal NSC posters to consider. As with many things in life there is a silent majority that have differing views to those that shout the loudest.

I've been following football a long time and most people I know, or have known, prefer games to be played at 3pm with a handful of games moved for tv. I don't know anyone who is pro the way this season is being carved up for the benefit of tv. And to have a CEO who goes the extra length to support this really disappoints me.

I am happy to be proved wrong though.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I agree. I'm one of those that spent money on train tickets and I did exchange some emails the other evening with PB but I am glad he is with our club rather than elsewhere.

Same here. We either buy in advance to save some cash and risk losing it all, or wait and pay over the top. Maybe if I was on 500,000 a year I'd be a bit more blasé about it....but I'm not.

 

[Javeaseagull]

Where did I slag him off? I said I thought that is how the article read. I said nothing about the person.

Sorry, I didn't mean you had slagged him off but didn't make that clear, did I?

 

[El Presidente]

I've been following football a long time and most people I know, or have known, prefer games to be played at 3pm with a handful of games moved for tv. I don't know anyone who is pro the way this season is being carved up for the benefit of tv. And to have a CEO who goes the extra length to support this really disappoints me.

I am happy to be proved wrong though.

Agree with you on the first point, for me 3pm on a Saturday is the focal point on which the rest of my weekend revolves, but there are others with different circumstances who may prefer things different. I'm old school, pub, giggles, football, pub, home is the perfect Saturday.

As for PB, Sky will pay the Albion about £6-7million next season if we are not promoted, and £100 million if we are. It gives the club the ability to sign players such as Knockaert and Skalak (aka the White Elvis). I don't like Sky particularly, and think their subscription fees are obscene, but my head says I understand where he is coming from, even if my heart feels differently.

As for the Forest switch, I think the club have lost the PR debate on this one, but we are no different to other clubs in having fixtures changed at relatively short notice.

If we'd been as crap on the pitch as we were last season, the match wouldn't be televised as it would have been meaningless. Given a choice of the Albion in 4th position and Monday night match or 17th position and 3pm on a Saturday, I'd go for the former.

 

[Machiavelli]

Good post.

There would be no joy in someone posting that they actually enjoy sometimes getting a game on TV that they couldn't get to watch live. NSC would run them out of town.

They'd be shouted down by a very vocal collection of fans with an anti-sky agenda. I've found this very tedious and depressing over the last few days.

As for attendance figures, I could quite easily lose the will to live over that one. I'm far more interested in how many people are helping Tony out with the finances, than how many can't make it because they are on holiday or at a wedding etc.

Strewth.

I have an anti-Murdoch agenda, which gets translated into an anti-Sky agenda. They're a monopolistic company, that like to bleat on about one of the finest institutions in this country for having a monopoly. Fortunately, their monopoly is now being challenged. Murdoch has also had a negative effect on democracy and democratic debate in this country.
Beyond that, I agree with El Pres in post 77. I also think it's better that there are not only people/fans paying for tickets, but also attending the games and getting behind the team.

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

Thing is if you want to showcase your product you really want a full stadium. Not loads of empty seats. Sky dont seem to have grasped that.

Also the clubs should get together and agree to refund those people who have bought advance train tix. It will amount to **** all in the grand scheme of things but the PR is invaluable.

 

[studio150]

Thing is if you want to showcase your product you really want a full stadium. Not loads of empty seats. .

So how many clubs in the Championship play in front of full houses when their game is not being televised.