davieG Posted 8 October 2014 Author Posted 8 October 2014 I don't understand why this keeps getting brought up, it doesn't make sense on even the most basic of levels. The whole point of the fixture system is that you play everyone twice; once at home, and once away. Of course there's situations like we've had with Coventry where they've had to play in another City, but there is just no way you can justify this in a regular league season. They don't have to justify it from a fans perspective, when has that ever been a consideration? The justification for it is ££££££££££££££££££s, even that might be acceptable if it didn't go on bigger player wages and diabolical transfer fees. Sadly I believe our owners, just like any others would be first in the queue to stage one of our games in Thailand.
purpleronnie Posted 8 October 2014 Posted 8 October 2014 Will they just pick a big game at random? Will the teams not involved be rewarded financially? Will anyone abroad care about swansea v west brom?
Kitchandro Posted 8 October 2014 Posted 8 October 2014 They don't have to justify it from a fans perspective, when has that ever been a consideration? The justification for it is ££££££££££££££££££s, even that might be acceptable if it didn't go on bigger player wages and diabolical transfer fees. Sadly I believe our owners, just like any others would be first in the queue to stage one of our games in Thailand. It's not the fans perspective, it's the perspective of the basic rules of the league system.
davieG Posted 8 October 2014 Author Posted 8 October 2014 It's not the fans perspective, it's the perspective of the basic rules of the league system. Seemingly it's only fans that are bothered by the idea, not the owners or those professionals involved in the game as players, managers, coaches, administrators certainly not those involved in marketing. To them it's just a job
Jordan Posted 8 October 2014 Posted 8 October 2014 Seemingly it's only fans that are bothered by the idea, not the owners or those professionals involved in the game as players, managers, coaches, administrators certainly not those involved in marketing. To them it's just a jobIt's just a job, and it is a well-paying job, but players play too often and travel too much as it is anyway, especially with so many friendlies already being played in Asia and North America. Adding an extra game to be played internationally just puts more stress and wear on the players. I wouldn't be surprised if a majority of players opposed a "Game 39" idea if they were polled.
davieG Posted 8 October 2014 Author Posted 8 October 2014 It's just a job, and it is a well-paying job, but players play too often and travel too much as it is anyway, especially with so many friendlies already being played in Asia and North America. Adding an extra game to be played internationally just puts more stress and wear on the players. I wouldn't be surprised if a majority of players opposed a "Game 39" idea if they were polled. As this idea is one of the league games they'll have no choice and there's no way the PL would poll the players and I can't see the PFA objecting after all doesn't PL give funds to the PFA from their TV rights/
Jordan Posted 8 October 2014 Posted 8 October 2014 As this idea is one of the league games they'll have no choice and there's no way the PL would poll the players and I can't see the PFA objecting after all doesn't PL give funds to the PFA from their TV rights/Gordon Taylor and the PFA criticized the PL's last proposal to play a round of league games abroad, so what makes you think they've done an about-face in the meantime?
davieG Posted 8 October 2014 Author Posted 8 October 2014 Gordon Taylor and the PFA criticized the PL's last proposal to play a round of league games abroad, so what makes you think they've done an about-face in the meantime? Probably because now it's one of the regular league games they're proposing.
Jordan Posted 8 October 2014 Posted 8 October 2014 Probably because now it's one of the regular league games they're proposing.Get back to me when they come out in support of the proposal.
bovril Posted 8 October 2014 Posted 8 October 2014 Will the fans rise up against this and march on the Premier League head quarters when it gets passed?? Will they ****! You can march all you want while people still watch it on tele or in the stadiums. I include myself in this, we all love the product so they'll continue to flog it in every way possible.
willie-bell-in-rothley Posted 8 October 2014 Posted 8 October 2014 Should Leicester City Play regular Premier league season matches on foreign soil This is being mooted around by premier league chiefs again, what do you think about possibly no being able to see our team play
ScouseFox Posted 8 October 2014 Posted 8 October 2014 don't see what's wrong with just having pre season tours and competitions in foreign places. they don't give a shit who wins really, they don't give a shit what they win. 3 points, community shield, the bangkok trophy, all they care about is seeing steven gerrard in the flesh or taking a picture of robin van persie from the stand. it's all just about the $$$
lgfualol Posted 8 October 2014 Posted 8 October 2014 I dont really see the point. I dont know why they cant just leave the league alone. At least that 39th game idea has been scrapped.
davieG Posted 8 October 2014 Author Posted 8 October 2014 Get back to me when they come out in support of the proposal. I don't think they will support but I also don't think they will say anything against it, they'll just keep stum. Sure I could be wrong but I have little faith Taylor he's tantamount to the equivalent of Blatter - from Wiki - He has been chief executive of the English footballers' trades union, the Professional Footballers' Association since 1981.[2] He is reputed to be the highest paid union official in the world. Not suggesting either are corrupt but well able to look after themselves.
Raw Dykes Posted 8 October 2014 Posted 8 October 2014 It's a tough one. If it was just one game a season, say, and it brought in a lot of revenue, and potentially new supporters, it might be worth it.
Manwell Pablo Posted 8 October 2014 Posted 8 October 2014 It'll happen one day I'm sure as the game continues to get more and more bastardized by money and suits. I'm obviously fully against it though.
ScouseFox Posted 8 October 2014 Posted 8 October 2014 It's a tough one. If it was just one game a season, say, and it brought in a lot of revenue, and potentially new supporters, it might be worth it. worth it for who? the suits? the owners? the fa? not the fans...
Grandad. Posted 8 October 2014 Posted 8 October 2014 If I was in charge I would piss the Charity Shield abroad, new country every year and make the Asia Premier League trophy bigger in pre-season.. I would even go as far as to say the Charity Shield replacement game at Wembley could be replaced with play-off games for the fourth Champions League spot between 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th League spots, now that would be impressive and also be very profitable for Wembley.
Corky Posted 8 October 2014 Posted 8 October 2014 It's a tough one. If it was just one game a season, say, and it brought in a lot of revenue, and potentially new supporters, it might be worth it. No it wouldn't. Ten sides would be sacrificing a home game to play in another stadium in another part of the world. And a potentially great day out could turn into an expensive trek to the other side of the world.
lgfualol Posted 8 October 2014 Posted 8 October 2014 Who's up for going to Malaysia to watch Leicester vs Burnley?
Julian Joachim Jr Shabadoo Posted 8 October 2014 Posted 8 October 2014 Who's up for going to Malaysia to watch Leicester vs Burnley? Now that's an exception, Dyche would refuse any money be spent on airfare for his players so we would win by default
davieG Posted 8 October 2014 Author Posted 8 October 2014 Now that's an exception, Dyche would refuse any money be spent on airfare for his players so we would win by default They could only afford to travel by bus.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.