MPH Posted 15 February 2008 Posted 15 February 2008 Would there be any point in fans following their club through this competition knowing that the 'finals' could be played in China or some other inaccessible place. Don't you remember when we got to these finals we took 30000 plus fans to Wembley - do they really mean sod all to people like you who support these crazy ideas. oh i remember it well. loved it... and i never said it i was an avid supporter of the idea , or keenly for it i just wouldnt be against it... It would just be interesting to see leicester gain a global fanbase and not just mainly ex-pats.. ( although we do have a few non ex-pats already which is great!)
MC Prussian Posted 15 February 2008 Posted 15 February 2008 oh i remember it well. loved it...and i never said it i was an avid supporter of the idea , or keenly for it i just wouldnt be against it... It would just be interesting to see leicester gain a global fanbase and not just mainly ex-pats.. ( although we do have a few non ex-pats already which is great!) What exactly is a non-ex-pat? A simple pat (on the back)? And in regards to your suggestion: Most "fans" (that's all those poor tarts that have yet to see a live game at Anfield, Emirates, Old Trafford or Stamford Bridge) decide to support one of the Big Four, with a few remaining for the likes of Everton, Newcastle (because of their history). Luckily enough, Leicester City is not (yet) completely taken over by goddarn Glory Hunters. For obvious reasons. Should we ever be able to establish ourselves in the top tier again, that might be the case. *shudders* I think I'd rather stay in the Championship for a while and win the Cup once or twice. That'd do it for me.
MPH Posted 15 February 2008 Posted 15 February 2008 What exactly is a non-ex-pat? A simple pat (on the back)? well an ex pat would be someone from leicester living a broad. ( or from anywhere in the country i guess). a native of that country i guess is what i mean
davieG Posted 15 February 2008 Posted 15 February 2008 oh i remember it well. loved it...and i never said it i was an avid supporter of the idea , or keenly for it i just wouldnt be against it... It would just be interesting to see leicester gain a global fanbase and not just mainly ex-pats.. ( although we do have a few non ex-pats already which is great!) Well for me if you're not against it you're for it, avid or not. Your consideration of the expats over the long suffering 'home based' support is frankly insulting.
Fat Ron Posted 15 February 2008 Posted 15 February 2008 Its a ridiculous idea to have any Competitive English game anywhere but in England (Apologies to the Welsh sides!!), Thats why it will happen. The FA/Premier League see only 1 thing.. £. Scudamore has said that the idea is to stop the 'Big 4' taking global dominance, I doubt that any 'supporters' in China or where ever they plan to play the games will side with Bolton, Birmingham or Wigan.. All it will do is accelerate the Global dominence of Man United, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool with the odd side getting a few quid (Spurs, Villa, Everton) Also, look at the grounds on Match of the day this Saturday, apart from the top 4 and Newcastle they cant sell out due to rising ticket prices so I really dont see how this exercise will increase the devotion, support or finances of any of the lower sides. Keep English football English.
MPH Posted 15 February 2008 Posted 15 February 2008 Well for me if you're not against it you're for it, avid or not. Your consideration of the expats over the long suffering 'home based' support is frankly insulting. including myself i guess. but i dont feel insulted.. sorry if you do! I just wondered and thought about ways in which other clubs can break the stranglehold that the tops clubs have over the premier league.. IF it happened, and i doubt it would over time it would have a beneficial effect for the home based fans who would be the main benefactors over the long run of the increased revenue that could come from this sort of thing.. i guess i was looking at the long term wrather than short term solutions.
Fat Ron Posted 15 February 2008 Posted 15 February 2008 including myself i guess. but i dont feel insulted.. sorry if you do!I just wondered and thought about ways in which other clubs can break the stranglehold that the tops clubs have over the premier league.. IF it happened, and i doubt it would over time it would have a beneficial effect for the home based fans who would be the main benefactors over the long run of the increased revenue that could come from this sort of thing.. i guess i was looking at the long term wrather than short term solutions. The only way to beat the strangle hold of the top clubs is to beat them on the pitch. Liverpool dominated the English game through the 80's but havent won the Title since 1989, why?? Because other teams upped the anti, Man United, Arsenal and Blackburn to begin with. By moving games abroad you change the rules, We may as well bring back the Anglo Italian Cup and that was a right waste of space!!! IMO
davieG Posted 15 February 2008 Posted 15 February 2008 including myself i guess. but i dont feel insulted.. sorry if you do!I just wondered and thought about ways in which other clubs can break the stranglehold that the tops clubs have over the premier league.. IF it happened, and i doubt it would over time it would have a beneficial effect for the home based fans who would be the main benefactors over the long run of the increased revenue that could come from this sort of thing.. i guess i was looking at the long term wrather than short term solutions. I fail to see how this in any way shape or form would have any effect, other than strengthening the tops clubs. Instead of all this bollocks and misleading guff about playing overseas for the benefit of the less well off clubs and laughingly the fans they should consider redistributing the enormous wealth they already receive to create a level competitive playing field.
MPH Posted 15 February 2008 Posted 15 February 2008 I fail to see how this in any way shape or form would have any effect, other than strengthening the tops clubs. Instead of all this bollocks and misleading guff about playing overseas for the benefit of the less well off clubs and laughingly the fans they should consider redistributing the enormous wealth they already receive to create a level competitive playing field. now THAT is one thing i agree with 100%
Daggers Posted 15 February 2008 Posted 15 February 2008 Blatter hostile to overseas planThe president of football's world governing body Fifa has told the BBC that plans by the Premier League to host games abroad will never happen. Sepp Blatter also warned that the proposal could harm England's attempt to host the 2018 World Cup. in fullAlways thought he was a git - but the enemy of my enemy is my friend...and so on...
Simi Posted 16 February 2008 Posted 16 February 2008 in fullAlways thought he was a git - but the enemy of my enemy is my friend...and so on... Scudamore wants to meet with him to "explain" the plans to him. Humm.
Guest Posted 17 February 2008 Posted 17 February 2008 Scudamore wants to meet with him to "explain" the plans to him.Humm. I hope Blatter tells him where to go.
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 18 February 2008 Posted 18 February 2008 I'm sure these plans have all come from America's Sports all popping up over here to capture a new market - and to be honest with you, with football being a buisness, the Premier League/Clubs would be right in looking into this idea. The big clubs already know there's a big American and Asian fan base with a wealth of money - so much so, they are buying our top clubs. Before that, clubs would tap into the money by buying a Asain star and give him a few token games - do you think Immamoto would have gone to Arsenal and the like if he was English - Sun Ji Park etc, etc, etc - Good players, but would they have been snapped up if they didn't have hundreds of fellow countrymen buying their shirts. FIFA may have tried to signal the end to this idea - but they are being slightly hypocyrtical - after all they have taken the World Cup over to the US and South Korea to generate money and interest - which it clearly has spurred things in those areas and possibly these plans. There are a few strange things in the inital plans for me: Why a 39th game??? Why not just a regular season game? I'd not like the idea of taking away the Boxing Day and New Year Fixtures to have an aboard game, but if a winter break is going to come in, those games would go anyway. So it could be incorporated there just as easily as 39th game? Playing in Europe - Surely outside Europe is more to the point? Having followed the NFL for a few years now - 5 years back a game in the UK was just un-imaginable, their fans hated it. But slowly, money and buisness sense talked, and we've had the SuperBowl Winners here (to the detriment to Englands Euro 2008 hopes - although I blame the groundsman/non working roof.) and their's another game in the pipeline for next season. I don't think this idea will go away, I think it will gather momentum over time - Friendlies are getting further away and about money these days, so the wheels of montion have already started. English fans are in a no-win situation I see - their clubs are buisnesses, but if you vote with your wallet and don't attend that strengthens the argument that clubs need to look aboard doesn't it? So maybe the fans should come up with some constructive idea's for backing it - eg: Each team gives 5000 free tickets and travel to the overseas game for season ticket holders for each game aboard. If this doesn't happen with the Premier League, I can see it happening with the Champions League - in fact I could certainly see the final being held outside Europe. Give it tens years - it will happen, there's too much money in it for to not to happen.
Simi Posted 18 February 2008 Posted 18 February 2008 The reason for it being a 39th game is that Scudamore wants to make sure the Premiership remains "fair". If it was a normal match, the home and away thing would be lost so one team would not get to play another at home. If that makes sense. Therefore one team is getting an advantage over another.
potter3 Posted 18 February 2008 Posted 18 February 2008 The reason for it being a 39th game is that Scudamore wants to make sure the Premiership remains "fair". If it was a normal match, the home and away thing would be lost so one team would not get to play another at home. If that makes sense. Therefore one team is getting an advantage over another. Even though it means one team will have to play Man U 3 times whereas some other team will have to play Reading or someone 3 times.
Simi Posted 18 February 2008 Posted 18 February 2008 Even though it means one team will have to play Man U 3 times whereas some other team will have to play Reading or someone 3 times. Yeah, but why should Scudamore take into account the problems of anyone other than the Top Four
lcfc_jme Posted 18 February 2008 Posted 18 February 2008 Even though it means one team will have to play Man U 3 times whereas some other team will have to play Reading or someone 3 times. Speaking of Reading, I'm sure I heard Madejski stating that he wishes that Scudamore had thought the plan out in a lot more detail and consulted clubs and the relevant authorities in private before making this public, and that he was turning his back on the idea even though he publically orgasmed over it not long ago?!! And then he went on to state that it wasn't motivated by money or financial incentives. willy puller.
davieG Posted 19 February 2008 Posted 19 February 2008 The reason for it being a 39th game is that Scudamore wants to make sure the Premiership remains "fair". If it was a normal match, the home and away thing would be lost so one team would not get to play another at home. If that makes sense. Therefore one team is getting an advantage over another. The reason for a 39th game is because they want to make MORE money. For everything people state as a reason for not doing this, whatever they come up with there is only one reason for doing it MONEY!!!!!!!
Joe. Posted 19 February 2008 Posted 19 February 2008 http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/e...rem/7252782.stm Just fuck off Scudamore.
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 19 February 2008 Posted 19 February 2008 The reason for it being a 39th game is that Scudamore wants to make sure the Premiership remains "fair". If it was a normal match, the home and away thing would be lost so one team would not get to play another at home. If that makes sense. Therefore one team is getting an advantage over another. I can see why they proposed 39 games - but the games could be done on a rota basis - 10 teams home games go one season, the other ten the next - but with some agreement what would happen with the promoted and relagated teams. I would also argue that really, they ought to start off with one or two to test the water. Blatters quote is interesting - "This will never happen, at least as long as I am the president of Fifa." So does that mean if it went ahead he would re-sign?
davieG Posted 23 February 2008 Posted 23 February 2008 Arsenal boss Arsene Wenger believes the Premier League's plans for an international round of matches are dead in the water. It had been proposed an extra round of fixtures be created and played abroad in order to showcase the talent in the Premier League. However, Wenger believes the way the Premier League has gone about their plans - in not speaking with the appropriate parties prior to unveiling their vision - may have done immeasurable harm. "The idea looks to be dead, maybe because the idea came out in a brutal way and maybe the PR was not done," stated Wenger. "Now it looks to be an idea which is in a very difficult position. "I was open-minded but as well I will not cry if it doesn't happen. I just felt there was something to explore there which will now not be done. "It looks difficult to resurrect now because Uefa, Fifa and The FA have come out against it. It is a big stream to swim against now." Euphemism for no chance to pass the brown envelops around to pay off FIFA, EUFA and the FA <h1 class="results"></h1>
Floating Fox Posted 18 March 2008 Posted 18 March 2008 PL defeated. Fans have won (For now). Makes a change.
Daggers Posted 18 March 2008 Posted 18 March 2008 PL defeated. Fans have won (For now). Makes a change. No matter what they say - the PL have not given up on this one yet. Right now, somewhere in a marketing department, plans are being redrawn and strategies put in place. Money will find a way, (to paraphrase Jurassic Park).
Head Honcho Posted 18 March 2008 Posted 18 March 2008 I remember the days when Uk clubs would up sticks for the summer and play in the NASL. Stoke City(Cleveland) Dundee Utd.(Dallas) Glentoran Belfast (Detroit) Wolverhampton Wanderers (Los Angeles) Hibernian (Toronto) Sunderland (Vancouver) Aberdeen (Washington)
Floating Fox Posted 18 March 2008 Posted 18 March 2008 No matter what they say - the PL have not given up on this one yet.Right now, somewhere in a marketing department, plans are being redrawn and strategies put in place. Money will find a way, (to paraphrase Jurassic Park). True Scudamore (massive ****.) will still try, but I think this is too far. I really do. At least this decade.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.