Leeds v Football League

[Hotchilidog]

Like a stopped clock even Cellino can be right twice a day. On this occasion he is correct. The way Leeds fixtures have been messed around is ridiculous. It seems to clear to me that that Sky needs Leeds more than the other way round (although bizarrely we seem to be the bigger televisual draw this season).

Our own season is threatenend by these moves too, as we are losing valuable rest/training days due to short weeks caused by friday and monday fixtures. We now play Leeds on a monday, long trip to Preston on saturday before a huge game against Sheff Wednesday on a tuesday which is followed only three days later by the re-arranged home game with Reading. A crucial two week period of four games that has now become congested thanks to TV, all on the back of a three match away game stretch. In my opinion our promotion rivals have been given a minor advantage by us having to play these fixtures in a more compact timeframe than would otherwise have been so.

All this messing around for what? a poxy £100m tv deal which is a mere makeweight in the multi-BILLION pound Premier legue deal. If Sky want to screw around with the fixtures then they can bloody well cough up for the privelege in my view. I hope that other chairman join Cellino in at least rethinking how they approach the next deal (this one they all agreed too so it's done).

 

[KZNSeagull]

Total TV money received by the Albion last season was £4.5 million. This is split between a 'solidarity payment' from the Premier League of just over £2 million (I think) and the balance of about £2.4 million being from the Sky TV deal.

From next season onwards clubs in the Championship will receive a solidarity payment based on a formula. I think it works out as 30% of a third year parachute payment due to a club relegated from the PL.

PL clubs in their third year following relegation will receive 20% of the equal share distribution given to other PL clubs (this excludes merit and overseas TV rights income), but the PL has not publicised this information as far as I can see.

Currently the equal fee payment is £21.968 million per club. If we assume that this increases by a conservative 50% (the new TV deal is an overall increase of 70% for domestic rights) then this rises to £32.952 million.

20% of this figure would give a Premier League solidarity payment of £6.6 million, which is pretty substantial.

I am only giving a semi educated guess though!

Just to clarify then re the highlighted bits, Championship teams would get one payment based upon this formula or would there still be a separate tv deal payment above and beyond this as well?

I also see that along with parachute payments reducing from 4 to 3 years, that teams that only spend 1 division in the PL will only get 2 years of parachute payments instead of 3. That may concentrate their minds a bit.

 

[sparkie]

It's a shame there is no company that offers coverage of our match at Hull over the internet so we can watch at home tomorrow night. I'd be happy to pay a pay per view fee.

 

[8ace]

It's a shame there is no company that offers coverage of our match at Hull over the internet so we can watch at home tomorrow night. I'd be happy to pay a pay per view fee.

Probably wouldn't be allowed because of the ECL anyway.

 

[Gwylan]

If Sky want to screw around with the fixtures then they can bloody well cough up for the privelege in my view. I hope that other chairman join Cellino in at least rethinking how they approach the next deal (this one they all agreed too so it's done).

This the point I was making. I'm sure most people are unhappy with the way fixtures are moved around but the place to argue it is when the contracts are drawn up. It's no good agreeing to something and then try to renege on the deal afterwards.

But I also don't get this unhappiness with Sky from people. At a guess, I'd say most people on NSC are Sky subscribers, if you don't like football being messed around with, don't subscribe to Sky. It's pretty simple really

 

[El Presidente]

Just to clarify then re the highlighted bits, Championship teams would get one payment based upon this formula or would there still be a separate tv deal payment above and beyond this as well?

I also see that along with parachute payments reducing from 4 to 3 years, that teams that only spend 1 division in the PL will only get 2 years of parachute payments instead of 3. That may concentrate their minds a bit.

Yup, the FL72 deal with Sky is separate to the above.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Yup, the FL72 deal with Sky is separate to the above.

Splendid, thank you!

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

But I also don't get this unhappiness with Sky from people. At a guess, I'd say most people on NSC are Sky subscribers, if you don't like football being messed around with, don't subscribe to Sky. It's pretty simple really

I agree that if one subscribes to sky sports then one shouldn't complain. It'd be interesting to know what %of our fans do subscribe.

 

[8ace]

I agree that if one subscribes to sky sports then one shouldn't complain. It'd be interesting to know what %of our fans do subscribe.

It would, maybe you should do a POLE.

 

[Easy 10]

Well yes. As part of their membership of the FL, Leeds have agreed to abide by what the TV companies want... even if that meant they were on every week.

As I said, if they don't like it, the place to argue is the FL itself not the courts. If he felt that strongly, why not insert a clause in the contract specifying a maximum number of games one club could be featured. Or one that says if a game is selected at less than a month's notice the fee is doubled ... or some additional clauses. Those are items that may get some support, maybe not.

But stamping your feet like a two-year-old is not the way to go about it

Well I find myself on the side of Leeds United over this, not the TV company. Yes, contractually Sky are within their rights to do what they want, but I understand Cellino's stance and I agree with it - Sky have mucked their fixtures around more than is reasonable. Our game with them will be the 11th time they've been on this season. I hope he and the fans there continue to kick up a fuss and cause Sky some problems and embarrassment.

 

[Hotchilidog]

I agree that if one subscribes to sky sports then one shouldn't complain. It'd be interesting to know what %of our fans do subscribe.

Why? I have Sky Sports but I actually spend more time watching cricket and the NFL on it than I do football.

I think it is perfectly fair to question the late moving of fixtures that show no regard to the effect it has on fans changing plans and on clubs who may have fixture congestion as a result.

I can understand the Premier league bending over backwards to the broadcaster as they get an absolute bundle of cash, I find the football league's supine stance far more difficult to understand, the inconvenience to teams and fans is not outweighed by the benefits they recieve in my view.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

It would, maybe you should do a POLE.

I will once I work out how to set it on my phone!

 

[El Presidente]

Well I find myself on the side of Leeds United over this, not the TV company. Yes, contractually Sky are within their rights to do what they want, but I understand Cellino's stance and I agree with it - Sky have mucked their fixtures around more than is reasonable. Our game with them will be the 11th time they've been on this season. I hope he and the fans there continue to kick up a fuss and cause Sky some problems and embarrassment.

I'm against Cellino here.

He is trying to portray himself as the fans' saviour, but his aim is to wriggle out of the FL72 contract to sign a separate one for all of Leeds home matches to make more money for himself, as this would be more lucrative.

Given that under FA rules there can be no 3pm Saturday broadcasts, it would result in potentially every match at Elland Road being moved to suit TV, which would inconvenience the fans even further.

All that is happening at present is that once again the lawyers are looking at Range Rover brochures as a result of the current spat between Cellino and the Football League. He has no interest in the interests, wishes or welfare of the fans.

Leeds fans thought that Ken Bates was their saviour, and they were wrong there too. Cellino is purely self motivated, just as cuddly Ken 'I don't know who owns the club' Bates was when in charge.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I may be talking out of my arse but I didnt think Leeds could play at a seaside resort on a 'normal' kick off time after they wrecked Bournemouth a few years back. Although not sure how moving a game to a Friday night would solve that issue.

There were problems with Leeds & Brighton fans when we were at Withdean.

 

[Peter Grummit]

From recent press report:
Cellino told Sardinian newspaper L’Unione Sarda: "At some point someone told me: ‘Cellino, Cellino’ – 20 supporters of my team – ‘time to go.’
"I said: ‘But why don’t you go away?’ And the supporters [said]: ‘We pay.’ So I said: ‘No, you pay to see the game. To criticise me you need to pay extra’, and I put £5 more for each ticket.

Cellino has no-ones interests at heart but his own. We should charge him £5 for refreshments in the Boardroom when he visits.

PG

 

[atomised]

Im against Cellino too. Anyone who believes he gives a damn about the fans or protecting match day stadium income here is deluded. This is the man who recently put prices up in an area of the stadium to include compulsory food and drink purchase.

 

[Easy 10]

I'm against Cellino here.

He is trying to portray himself as the fans' saviour, but his aim is to wriggle out of the FL72 contract to sign a separate one for all of Leeds home matches to make more money for himself, as this would be more lucrative.

Given that under FA rules there can be no 3pm Saturday broadcasts, it would result in potentially every match at Elland Road being moved to suit TV, which would inconvenience the fans even further.

All that is happening at present is that once again the lawyers are looking at Range Rover brochures as a result of the current spat between Cellino and the Football League. He has no interest in the interests, wishes or welfare of the fans.

Leeds fans thought that Ken Bates was their saviour, and they were wrong there too. Cellino is purely self motivated, just as cuddly Ken 'I don't know who owns the club' Bates was when in charge.

I wasn't aware of any underlying motives or schemes he has up his sleeve, but I wouldn't put it past him.

I still like seeing him causing Sky aggro though, as they DO take the piss out of the fans with their constant rescheduling.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

Why? I have Sky Sports but I actually spend more time watching cricket and the NFL on it than I do football.

I think it is perfectly fair to question the late moving of fixtures that show no regard to the effect it has on fans changing plans and on clubs who may have fixture congestion as a result.

I can understand the Premier league bending over backwards to the broadcaster as they get an absolute bundle of cash, I find the football league's supine stance far more difficult to understand, the inconvenience to teams and fans is not outweighed by the benefits they recieve in my view.

That is a good statement. However any subscriber props up Sky's grip on football whatever the reason for subscribing.

 

[Official Old Man]

Two games, Brentford & Bolton, and six season ticket holders.
Brentford. Only I turned up as the others all have work that would not get them to the ground in time. One pie & pint. £7.50
Bolton. All six of us. Six pies & pints for starters. Half time another eight pints (two of us like their beer) and four post match pints and a couple of burgers. £102
OK, so the club had our ST money but in another way we had paid to go to a game that we could never get too.
In any other world, lets say a concert at the Brighton Centre, if the date is changed you get a full refund. It's about time the same happened with a Sky moved game.

 

[Ernest]

I wasn't aware of any underlying motives or schemes he has up his sleeve, but I wouldn't put it past him.

I still like seeing him causing Sky aggro though, as they DO take the piss out of the fans with their constant rescheduling.

Do you SUBSCRIBE to SKY Sports ?