[Albion] The fixture list is rigged towards the top 6 teams

[sydney]

Personally I agree with the sentiment but it’s the lack of transparency that I don’t like. Fair enough United and Liverpool bring in the millions, but don’t pretend it’s all equal when there clearly is a bias.

it's the same as accountability for referees.....i think i would be a great idea for ref's to attend the post match interview and talk the press through contentious issues.....i think i would make for great tv.....especially when the ref has to admit in front of millions of viewers that he " ahem ....may have urm , made a mistake".

oh hold on .

pricks at the top feathering their own nests .....don't get me started on agents , how on earth we have players on anywhere near 200k a week is pretty shocking in my opinion .......it's crass.

 

[Stat Brother]

A lack of transparency will lead to conspiracy theories.

But you seem to be the only person who believes there's a lack of transparency, and even then you don't believe it.

Once again I'm struggling to understand your opinion.

 

[Tweeting Seagull]

But you seem to be the only person who believes there's a lack of transparency, and even then you don't believe it.

Once again I'm struggling to understand your opinion.

As I say, The fact it’s being leaked in the telegraph makes the premier league look crooked.

 

[GT49er]

This year its actually helped us in that Man U rested half their team against us and also likely Liverpool may do the same and both their players and City players may be thinking of world cup games coming up. That may not be so convenient in the future.

You haven't really thought this through, have you? Liverpool lost to Chelsea at the weekend, and now they have Spurs breathing down their necks for third place, and Chelsea close enough to knock them out of the Champions league places for next season altogether - and Liverpool have one chance to put that right.......us! Yeh, they'll have the reserves out for a stroll in the park at Anfield next weekend!
And as for Citeh, they dropped two points against 'Udders at the weekend, and now the only way they can get to their target of 100 points (and one or two other records, I think) is by beating us tomorrow. Yeh, good time to be playing them too!

 

[Triggaaar]

Yeah, we are all supposed to be so grateful for the overpaid 'stars' of the premier league and the inflated prices we now have to pay to watch them. We saw Man U on Friday and they weren't all that.

The only people benefiting are footballers and agents.

I don't agree, I think the higher level of money does mean that that the standard of football is higher than it would otherwise be.

Personally I agree with the sentiment but it’s the lack of transparency that I don’t like. Fair enough United and Liverpool bring in the millions, but don’t pretend it’s all equal when there clearly is a bias.

The teams that are bringing in the money are whichever ones have been at the top for a while. Without Utd and Liverpool it would just be some other teams. And decent money was coming in before they started fixing the fixtures, so it's not a necessary evil.

 

[beorhthelm]

havent read all 5 pages so dont know if anyone has pointed out, this is a tender document, i.e. for the future, not necessarily a statement of current policy.

 

[Bold Seagull]

As I say, The fact it’s being leaked in the telegraph makes the premier league look crooked.

I'm not sure you can say it's been leaked. They've just got hold of a TV rights bid document and 'revealed' its contents. I think Telegraph Sport often like to present themselves as revealing exclusives etc. but the reality is all the media can get hold of these documents.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

The only people benefitting.....are the players (and the agents they employ)? Who do you think should be given the money?

CDs would be so much cheaper if it weren't for the greedy pop stars wanting so much money......

I seem to be missing a point here.....

Yes, let's pay players less money, sell the ones who won't accept a pay cut. Top plan.

I don't agree, I think the higher level of money does mean that that the standard of football is higher than it would otherwise be.

The teams that are bringing in the money are whichever ones have been at the top for a while. Without Utd and Liverpool it would just be some other teams. And decent money was coming in before they started fixing the fixtures, so it's not a necessary evil.

There is only a finite pool of top players. Ergo whatever money is on offer would be distributed at a natural level. The age in which Sky have distorted football for TV has led to general propaganda that everything is better. Well I am not in favour of cartels but I do know that if the clubs in Europe decided to stop paying these inflated fees, then the players wages would return to something more realistic.

As another poster said, the money could easily subsidise tickets which at least in this country are horribly expensive. I love the attitude Bayern Munich have in selling their tickets at a very low price to 'thank' their fans.

 

[father_and_son]

i think my point was we have a growing trend to those big six being in the mix of the top six (except the occasional anomalies) , i can only see them entrenching themselves and making it harder for others to be in their club.

i was sent this a while back on how the diversity of the top six finishers post war has changed

View attachment 96725

This just screams "break-away super league".

Losing these 6 would make for a far more interesting PL.

For as long as the rich clubs are allowed to use the financial might to buy up talent that they have no intention of playing (or just inflate the transfer fees so smaller clubs can afford no more than 1 or 2 marque players) just to stop the rest of the clubs being able to form a team that could challenge them.

Allowing these 6 to f*ck off to a European Super League seems to be the easiest solution as a US-Style draft would be too difficult to implement in an international, multi-league system and a wages/transfer fee cap would never pass a vote by the clubs (or get agreement internationally) and a limit on the size of squads has not stopped Chelski et al. buying up the talent behind the scenes.

The PL would be a financially poorer league but be far, far superior in footballing terms!

 

[Triggaaar]

There is only a finite pool of top players. Ergo whatever money is on offer would be distributed at a natural level. The age in which Sky have distorted football for TV has led to general propaganda that everything is better.

I'm not basing my opinion on Sky, I'm basing it on what I see on the pitch. The increased money in England means we're bringing in talent from abroad that we otherwise wouldn't be able to. IMO that standard of football in the Championship is much higher than when we were there 30 years ago. I expect the standard in the PL is higher too.

Well I am not in favour of cartels but I do know that if the clubs in Europe decided to stop paying these inflated fees, then the players wages would return to something more realistic.

Yes if clubs weren't paying the fees, the same players would still play, so the overall standard of world football wouldn't drop much (noting that less money would be available for top training facilities and staff). But we'd be attracting fewer good players from abroad.

As another poster said, the money could easily subsidise tickets which at least in this country are horribly expensive. I love the attitude Bayern Munich have in selling their tickets at a very low price to 'thank' their fans.

Totally agree. We should also be able to stand and drink in the terraces.

 

[Springal]

Yes but you miss the point. The expenditure necessary to eventually reach the premier league would not have reached such dizzying heights without the inflated transfer process and wages. The only people benefiting are footballers and agents.

Do you think Bloom would have invested what he has if the rewards were not as they are ?

 

[father_and_son]

Do you think Bloom would have invested what he has if the rewards were not as they are ?

Yes.
TB has invested sensibly in creating an asset (or series of assets) that equal or exceed the investment he has put in.
I don't believe that he is naive enough to ever believe that he was in this for a profit.

Most clubs, PL or not, make a trading loss, the only significant difference in the PL is the size of the loss.

The few that actually make money fall into 3 basic categories...
Big Boys. There are a few of the big clubs that have ancillary income that means they actually make (and extract) a profit.

Clever Chairs. I believe that we fall into the category and that we are now in a position that we can make (but not extract) a profit. This is only done by being exceptionally careful and investing very wisely. Although I don't think TB expects his money back, he does own an asset that could be sold to recover his total outlay.

Asset Strippers. Owners can extract money from a club by selling the ground, training centre, players, etc with no plan to replace these assets. We have been on the receiving end of this before and it still happens with alarming frequency.


The reason to buy a club is much the same as the reason you buy an Old Master. You want to show it off and when you have finished showing it off, you sell it for more than you paid for it. It will cost you money for as long as you own it, but that's part and parcel of owning it. Some owners even balls this up and end up devaluing their asset.

 

[studio150]

You could look to the NFL and Major League baseball salary caps and luxury taxes as a way forward in that direction, and the way losing teams get easier fixture lists the following season (which we do by relegating them). And it seems to work. The last 10 Super Bowls have been won by nine different teams: Eagles, Patriots, Broncos, Patriots, Seahawks, Ravens, Giants, Packers, Saints, Steelers; the past 10 World Series by 8 - Astros, Cubs, Royals, Giants, Red Sox, Giants, Cardinals, Giants, Yankees, Phillies. The Yankees are the richest team in world sports by most reckonings but can't dominate their sport.

Of course, salary caps and luxury taxes have always been reckoned to fall foul of EU competition law, which might not be a problem for the UK after Brexit. But then the top four would complain that they can't be competitive in Europe where there are no restrictions on how much can be spent on players.

It's not a fair comparison though.

Effectively the USA sports you mention are operating in isolation with virtually no top leagues anywhere else in the world, so the leagues are in a stronger position to impose the restrictions you mention.

The same can not apply in Football, as there are far more leagues where the better players would be able to move to for higher wages. How many English players would move overseas for higher wages once their contract renewal offer is 50% lower than the current one, and the tax they pay will be doubled.

The quality of the domestic leagues would plummet in one transfer window.

FFP anyone?

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

It's not a fair comparison though.

Effectively the USA sports you mention are operating in isolation with virtually no top leagues anywhere else in the world, so the leagues are in a stronger position to impose the restrictions you mention.

The same can not apply in Football, as there are far more leagues where the better players would be able to move to for higher wages. How many English players would move overseas for higher wages once their contract renewal offer is 50% lower than the current one, and the tax they pay will be doubled.

The quality of the domestic leagues would plummet in one transfer window.

FFP anyone?

I think that's what I was trying to say at the end, wasn't it?

 

[el punal]

The article says it’s based on an average of the previous 3 years

Yes I know. I was just doing my cheeky Tuesday response - still on cloud nine from Friday night!

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

Do you think Bloom would have invested what he has if the rewards were not as they are ?

I have no idea. All of that depends upon his wealth and generosity. Both of which, I am not privy to.

 

[Brovion]

You haven't really thought this through, have you? Liverpool lost to Chelsea at the weekend, and now they have Spurs breathing down their necks for third place, and Chelsea close enough to knock them out of the Champions league places for next season altogether - and Liverpool have one chance to put that right.......us! Yeh, they'll have the reserves out for a stroll in the park at Anfield next weekend!
And as for Citeh, they dropped two points against 'Udders at the weekend, and now the only way they can get to their target of 100 points (and one or two other records, I think) is by beating us tomorrow. Yeh, good time to be playing them too!

Ha! Yes, and it's going to be worse by the fact we are NOT, contrary to popular belief, 'on the beach' now that we've attained our goal. Oh no. To extend the holiday comparison we've been on the beach; now we've gone back to the hotel, got showered, changed, have had something to eat, and are now all pissed legless in the nightclub. And last year after we'd reached our goal we struggled away at Norwich and Villa, and lost at home to Bristol City!

 

[Guy Fawkes]

I wouldnt concern yourself with the fixture list.
More worrying is the growing way the big six clubs over the years( apart from a few anomalies) are gaining a stranglehold on the top six places year in year out. I dont begrudge their success or the fact the best players who want the best wages are drawn to them, i would however like football to be less biased to the richer clubs and there is more equilibrium in everyone having a fair crack at the whip.
In the end this particular league risks becoming stale and boring if it is the usual suspects every year............leicester winning the league shouldnt be considered an extraordinary unprecedented event where we all fall over over ourselves and say "oh look, they can do it and buck the trend".....it should be just another club in the mix having a great season

There will always be disparity between teams - Or should we have looked to negate our advantage last season when playing Burton away at their 6k capacity stadium in the Championship, it's hardly fair that we had more spending power because we had a 30k capacity stadium and one of the highest ticket prices for the division?

The big 6 teams have far more commercial reach (irrespective of the TV deals) than most in the division, meaning that they sell far more merchandise as they have far more to sell to, they can fill bigger stadiums and they can command higher sponsorship deals for everything from Stadium naming rights to shirt sponsorship to anyone else wanting to use their (clubs) image as apart of their own companies marketing campaign, paying more for the chance to do this than they would have to for a Bournemouth or a Swansea giving the top 6 club for financial muscle than the others

Liverpool dominated for years but dropped back but they have always been one of the divisions biggest clubs, but their position and success is not down to the size of the TV deals with Sky, but also partly the above but also partly because of their history and globally they are seen as someone to aspire to play for - except for fans or locals, who would grow up and think I really want to play for teams like Bournemouth when I am older?

Having the most money doesn't guarantee success, spending a lot on inflated transfer fees and wages doesn't guarantee success and their are bargains to be had that can close the gap in results (Mahrez at Leicester, Gross for us, etc) but even if we were to break into the top 6, (however unlikely) it's how you spend your money that helps determine if you stay or drop away

Some of the top 6 sides have built for a long time, others have had very rich owners who have brought their way into that top 6 club and there is nothing to say that they will always maintain it. Blackburn brought success but the owner stopped funding it to anywhere near the same extent, Newcastle as well. Several bad buys, poor management, etc can see clubs drop back, but if they have the global appeal, they will still be able to sign players that would be out of the reach of other (lesser) clubs as a result

TV coverage globally has increased the pull of our clubs abroad, and the popular / successful ones are always going to be able to get the better players if competing or signatures. The difference now is possibly players who wouldn't have moved to play in this country from abroad without this, are now jumping at the chance because of the prestige of the league and the lure of the money and fame it offers and that its a chance to play in pone of the best leagues in the World (how many would have stayed in their own country and played their before the hype of this league?)

 

[rippleman]

I am far more concerned that match officials and the FA are biased in favour of the big clubs. Lets look at a couple of incidents

1) Hemed banned for over-balancing and treading on an opponent's leg. No intent to cause damage and no damage caused.

2) Lukaku not even charged for kicking Bong in the nuts

Then you look at last Friday when Murray was being held, kicked, pulled over; can't recall him getting more than one free-kick. That is clear in my memory of course but there have been other occasions this season where we didn't get what we were due because we are "just a small club".

 

[Wrong-Direction]

Money makes the world go around [emoji445][emoji383]

Sent from my SM-A310F using Tapatalk