davieG Posted 5 June 2012 Posted 5 June 2012 Merc Leicester city centre's giant television screen will not be used to show England's matches in the Euro 2012 football tournament. Thousands of supporters flocked to Humberstone Gate to follow the national side's fortunes in the 2010 World Cup. Fans in Leicester watch 2010 World Cup in Humberstone Gate • • But the city council says it would be too expensive to show matches from the European tournament, which starts on Friday, in Poland and Ukraine. It also says it thinks supporters will prefer to watch at home or in the pub. However, football fans are disappointed by the decision. Cliff Ginetta, chairman of Leicester City Supporters' Club, said: "It's typical of the city council. What's the point of having the screen if it's not for things such as big football tournaments? "Perhaps they think there might be trouble, but if it's properly organised it shouldn't be a problem." England's campaign kicks off at 5pm on Monday against France. The team then plays Sweden at 7.45pm on Friday, June 15, and Ukraine at 7.45pm on Tuesday, June 19. Many pundits fear England will fail to advance from the group stages, but city mayor Sir Peter Soulsby said he would reconsider the decision should England get through. He said: "My advice has been previous matches shown on the big screen haven't drawn particularly large crowds. I think this is largely because it doesn't provide the atmosphere fans are looking for. "People already have their favourite venues to watch big matches, whether this is with friends at a pub or at home. "There is also a significant cost to show Euro 2012 matches on the big screen and to organise the necessary safety measures to ensure each screening goes ahead safely. "It costs many thousands of pounds to do the security. It is also expensive to stream the matches to the screen. "If England should qualify for the later stages, this may be something we'll reconsider." England fan John Proctor, 29, of Clarendon Park, Leicester, said: "Screens like that are ideal for massive football games. "I watched the England v Germany game there in the World Cup and it was a cracking atmosphere, even though we lost. "The screen is fantastic and it's a huge shame not to use it." Ian Watson, 43, from Belgrave, said: "Most fans can't afford to go to the tournament but would like to experience a big crowd atmosphere. It's a waste not to use it." Chief Inspector Ian Coulton, who is running Leicestershire Police's operation around Euro 2012 and the Olympics, said: "Depending on how far England get, we will speak to the city council about the big screen to see if they want to show the later games and then we'll respond accordingly. "We will be deploying extra officers when England are playing anyway." The screen was donated to the city in 2009 by the London organising committee of the Olympics to show coverage from this summer's games.
Head Honcho Posted 5 June 2012 Posted 5 June 2012 Think this could the work of the chain pubs that saturate Leicester city centre and the profits they will undoubtedly lose if the screen was showing the match.
Dan Posted 5 June 2012 Posted 5 June 2012 So they give us a screen for things like the World Cup, Euros and Olympics, and then they don't show the Euros? What a joke. "To cut costs", I bet they go and waste the money saved elsewhere on something worse. Well that kind of fvcks plans for Sweden.
Father Ted Posted 5 June 2012 Posted 5 June 2012 Same old Shitty Council cocking things up as usual. Not surprised.
Finnegan Posted 9 June 2012 Posted 9 June 2012 It would need to be policed, which costs money. It's also, as HH says, taking away from local businesses which would make them distinctly unpopular. There are two sides to every coin. Besides, with the weather as it is, they're right in that a lot of people will stay away anyway.
Father Ted Posted 9 June 2012 Posted 9 June 2012 It would need to be policed, which costs money. It's also, as HH says, taking away from local businesses which would make them distinctly unpopular. There are two sides to every coin. Besides, with the weather as it is, they're right in that a lot of people will stay away anyway. In other words, Leicester City Council would rather just spend more money on digging holes in the roads and then filling them again. Absolute w*nkers, Soulsby and Vaz are the two biggest w*nkers in Leicestershire yet they seem to be the two most powerful.
The Doctor Posted 9 June 2012 Posted 9 June 2012 Not sure I see the issue, do pubs not have TV's anymore?
Finnegan Posted 9 June 2012 Posted 9 June 2012 In other words, Leicester City Council would rather just spend more money on digging holes in the roads and then filling them again. Absolute w*nkers, Soulsby and Vaz are the two biggest w*nkers in Leicestershire yet they seem to be the two most powerful. There are times I hold hope that you may have grown up a little and then you just take sixty odd steps backwards. For a start, Vaz has little to do with the council, he's a member of parliament and they rarely put their weight directly into local government unless there's a particular case from a local constituent they're dealing with. Secondly, Peter Soulsby isn't some sort of Bond villain sat in a big leather chair at the top of NWC, controlling all that goes on. He's got umpteen directors, service heads and managers beneath him (who aren't politicians) who run their individual departments. This will have been a fairly low-down decision that, frankly, he won't have given a flying **** about until it hit the Mockery (and even now neither he nor Keeling will particularly bat an eyelid) made by someone with a good few years experience in their job who will have costed it up, looked at their budget, realised it's not worth it and said no. We're supposedly in times of austerity, the country is skint, local councils are getting criticized constantly for their spending policies and most divisions within LCC are strapped for cash. Yet you want them spending frivolously on public showings of football games in the pissing rain, a few hundred meters from a lot of pubs who will be playing them anyway?
ADK Posted 9 June 2012 Posted 9 June 2012 So how many of the outraged in this thread would have been watching on the big screen rather than in a pub or at home?
AKCJ Posted 9 June 2012 Posted 9 June 2012 To those not seeing why people are getting annoyed. Watching games on that screen at the World Cup was a hell of a lot of fun. Much better than being squished into a bar paying 3 quid for a pint of piss It was an exceptional atmosphere and it brought the City together IMO.
The Doctor Posted 9 June 2012 Posted 9 June 2012 To those not seeing why people are getting annoyed. Watching games on that screen at the World Cup was a hell of a lot of fun. Much better than being squished into a bar paying 3 quid for a pint of piss It was an exceptional atmosphere and it brought the City together IMO. Well, in that case you ought to try drinking something else. Seriously, the weather's shit, the pubs are showing it anyway - what's the problem?
davieG Posted 9 June 2012 Author Posted 9 June 2012 It would need to be policed, which costs money. It's also, as HH says, taking away from local businesses which would make them distinctly unpopular. There are two sides to every coin. Besides, with the weather as it is, they're right in that a lot of people will stay away anyway. Not personally bothered as I rarely go into town anyway, but wont policing costs and the affect on business apply to every 'big' event or is football seen as something different. I'd also guess that a lot of families looking for a different way to watch the matches but not prepared to subject their kids to crowded pubs might have enjoyed it. I'm not a Leicester City council taxpayer but do pay the County council so understand the need to use the money carefully, let's hope they scrutinise the other money they spend just as thoroughly.
Leicester_Loyal Posted 9 June 2012 Posted 9 June 2012 We're supposedly in times of austerity, the country is skint, local councils are getting criticized constantly for their spending policies and most divisions within LCC are strapped for cash. Yet you want them spending frivolously on public showings of football games in the pissing rain, a few hundred meters from a lot of pubs who will be playing them anyway? I actually agree with you for once
Ford Super Sunday Posted 9 June 2012 Posted 9 June 2012 Why did the Mercury feel the need to wheel out rent-a-quote, stuck in the 1990's Ginetta for that article. What a well reasoned, insightful comment he makes, yet again. Judging by the reactions here, you'd think the only place to watch the match in the whole city was on that big screen. Get some perspective; go to a pub, watch it at home on your big HD TV, or watch it with your mates. Get a grip of yourselves
Rincewind Posted 9 June 2012 Posted 9 June 2012 Even if they did show the games alcohol would be banned and a lot of supporters would need their dose of Carling or Stella. There are plenty of places that will be showing England games nearby within walking distance of the centre. Longstop, Salmon Goose, O'neills to name a few Plus those on Granby Street Belvoir Street and the Slug and pubs nearby. I will probably stay at home for the games. Going out would mean spending money I may not have. Re the screen it is in use all the time showing news type programs. Don't see many people watching it. If it could be assured of safety and trouble free I am sure they would just run the games in the background but there will always be a few idiots that would spoil things which the council have to take into consideration.
MooseBreath Posted 9 June 2012 Posted 9 June 2012 So how many of the outraged in this thread would have been watching on the big screen rather than in a pub or at home? Exactly. If you weren't planning on watching it on the big screens then you are part of the reason why they won't be shown. It wasn't popular enough to justify the cost. Personally I caught a bit of a world cup game there but it was crap. It's a high street not a park or a square, so it didn't work. I went back to the pub after about five minutes. It does raise the question of what these big screens are for though. I see them in most city centres usually playing BBC News or some such. Hardly anyone ever watching them. Might as well do away with them altogether.
Finnegan Posted 9 June 2012 Posted 9 June 2012 Exactly. If you weren't planning on watching it on the big screens then you are part of the reason why they won't be shown. It wasn't popular enough to justify the cost. Personally I caught a bit of a world cup game there but it was crap. It's a high street not a park or a square, so it didn't work. I went back to the pub after about five minutes. It does raise the question of what these big screens are for though. I see them in most city centres usually playing BBC News or some such. Hardly anyone ever watching them. Might as well do away with them altogether. It was part of the hype for the Olympics.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.