Before Sky grounds had been death traps
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Before Sky.................
- Thread starter Fourteenth Eye
- Start date
Gully
Monkey in a seagull suit.
I only watch Corrie and the Bill on ITV...and I don't have Sky!
Being a pedantic that should read first division as they 'invented' the premiership.
It was 16 years ago last week that the sixteen clubs signed their intent to join a new super league premier division.
Yoda
English & European
Storer68
New member
Martin Tyler was a nonentity based in Norwich!
Storer68
New member
Martin Tyler was a nonentity based in Norwich!
That was before the Taylor Report.
And then the money from Sky was used by clubs to improve grounds.
- Jul 7, 2003
- 47,641
Let's be fair.
Sky have done some good things for football (as I'm sure the players on £120k a week would agree), and it would be churlish to argue otherwise.
But the game at the top level feels a lot more sterile than it ever used to, and it REALLY grates with me that football's history appears to have been rewritten to suit Sky's view of the game, ie that nothing happened before 1991, or whenever they jumped on board.
Look at all the stats they bandy about- the highest ever Premiership goalscorer, for example. What the hell does that mean? That nobody's goalscoring feats pre 91 counted for anything? Who cares that someone is the highest goalscorer over the past 16 years, what an utterly pointless accolade, not to mention an insult to the great players of the previous hundred and twenty or so years who've scored far more goals.
But they don't count, do they, as they come from an era B.S. (Before Sky).
So forget about Dixie Dean, Stanley Matthews, Ian Rush, Jimmy Greaves, Denis Law etc. They just don't matter as they never played in the Sky era.
Sky have done some good things for football (as I'm sure the players on £120k a week would agree), and it would be churlish to argue otherwise.
But the game at the top level feels a lot more sterile than it ever used to, and it REALLY grates with me that football's history appears to have been rewritten to suit Sky's view of the game, ie that nothing happened before 1991, or whenever they jumped on board.
Look at all the stats they bandy about- the highest ever Premiership goalscorer, for example. What the hell does that mean? That nobody's goalscoring feats pre 91 counted for anything? Who cares that someone is the highest goalscorer over the past 16 years, what an utterly pointless accolade, not to mention an insult to the great players of the previous hundred and twenty or so years who've scored far more goals.
But they don't count, do they, as they come from an era B.S. (Before Sky).
So forget about Dixie Dean, Stanley Matthews, Ian Rush, Jimmy Greaves, Denis Law etc. They just don't matter as they never played in the Sky era.
Superphil
Dismember
I was just reading the match program from the play off final at the new Wembley, they (The FA, Football League etc) make a big song and dance about how the partneship with Sky and sponsors has lead to wonderful stadiums for all to enjoy, all over the country, no smoking, great food (doesn't mention expensive) comfy seats, environment for all, women spectators, child spectators, "Your safety is our number one concern" listen to the safety announcers message, "The leagues customer charter" Customer Services, "a fair deal for fans" 
All very well, but as a fan (not customer or spectator) I don't remember wanting any of those things. Granted safety is important, but all the rest has been forced on the fans, and did we really want it all? I am never happier than when we go to a ground with terraces, and the others around me seem pretty pleased too. At Carlisle last season we were pissed off becuase they wouldn't let us have the terrace, with no roof, no toilets, no food etc. We had to sit in the lardy dah stand.
It seems to me that the people who have benefited form all this money and the raising of the profile have been the players and the staff who work for the clubs and the Football authorities.
Kids used to go pre Sky, Women used to go pre Sky, why the f*** should football be steralised like this? The sum of it all, souless stadiums, Sky high prices, for what? So a few ladies can avoid getting their shoes scuffed, a few snotty kids playing on their nintendos can see the pitch (if they can be bothered to look up) when the rest of us were quite happy with it how it was.
I mean it when I say, I used to enjoy going to football a lot more 10 or 15 years ago.
All very well, but as a fan (not customer or spectator) I don't remember wanting any of those things. Granted safety is important, but all the rest has been forced on the fans, and did we really want it all? I am never happier than when we go to a ground with terraces, and the others around me seem pretty pleased too. At Carlisle last season we were pissed off becuase they wouldn't let us have the terrace, with no roof, no toilets, no food etc. We had to sit in the lardy dah stand.
It seems to me that the people who have benefited form all this money and the raising of the profile have been the players and the staff who work for the clubs and the Football authorities.
Kids used to go pre Sky, Women used to go pre Sky, why the f*** should football be steralised like this? The sum of it all, souless stadiums, Sky high prices, for what? So a few ladies can avoid getting their shoes scuffed, a few snotty kids playing on their nintendos can see the pitch (if they can be bothered to look up) when the rest of us were quite happy with it how it was.
I mean it when I say, I used to enjoy going to football a lot more 10 or 15 years ago.
Bob!
Coffee Buyer
- Jul 5, 2003
- 11,639
How did that used to happen then, I thought you always had to be top to win it?
surrey jim
Not in Surrey
snigger
- Jul 7, 2003
- 47,641
I agree with some of Phil's points, while it's nice to see some stunning new stadiums, they're all starting to look a bit samey, and there's something quite earthy and 'real' about going to places where you can still stand, where the locals understand the pain of watching a semi-useless team week in, week out.
Would I rather sit in a shiny seat at the Walkers' Stadium, paying £28 for a flat atmosphere and a few enthusiastic cheerleaders at half time, or stand on the terrace at Millmoor, Huish Park or London Road with a bunch of passionate Albion die-hards?
A toughie, but give me London Road every time.
PS Sky may try and sell their revolution as being to the benefit of fans, but the players and managers are the real winners. The stadiums would have changed anyway, regardless of Sky money, the only difference is that change might have been slower, but the Taylor Report demanded improvements so something had to give.
The Taylor Report, in case people have forgotten, recommended that prices for watching football need not rise dramatically with the advent of new stadia, but that they should cost no more than £6.00. I can't tell you the last time I paid £6 for an Albion game...
Would I rather sit in a shiny seat at the Walkers' Stadium, paying £28 for a flat atmosphere and a few enthusiastic cheerleaders at half time, or stand on the terrace at Millmoor, Huish Park or London Road with a bunch of passionate Albion die-hards?
A toughie, but give me London Road every time.
PS Sky may try and sell their revolution as being to the benefit of fans, but the players and managers are the real winners. The stadiums would have changed anyway, regardless of Sky money, the only difference is that change might have been slower, but the Taylor Report demanded improvements so something had to give.
The Taylor Report, in case people have forgotten, recommended that prices for watching football need not rise dramatically with the advent of new stadia, but that they should cost no more than £6.00. I can't tell you the last time I paid £6 for an Albion game...
perth seagull
Well-known member
- Jul 5, 2003
- 5,487
Sorry, but this is one thing you can't blame Sky for. Our national team has been rubbish well before the advent of Sky. We were worse in the 1970s when England failed to qualify for the 1974 and 1978 World Cups. The influx of foreigners has had no bearing on the national team, we have always been cack.
dougdeep
New member
Gully
Monkey in a seagull suit.
As I don't have Sky there is something I would like answered, it is well known that they now have the rights to broadcast a large chunk of sporting coverage, but what programmes do they make themselves. I am thinking of the best that the free to air channels produce, not just soaps (Corrie, East Enders, etc), but documentaries, wildlife programmes and comedy. Or, is it all stuff imported from the good old USA?
Virgo's Haircut
Resident Train Guru
Before Sky...
We were lucky to get 1 game a week on the telly
Before Sky...
You would never see games from the Conference on the telly
We were lucky to get 1 game a week on the telly
Before Sky...
You would never see games from the Conference on the telly
Indeed my friend.