Manchester United Talk banner
21 - 40 of 44 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
51 Posts
"Why should we complain if the people involved with this are happy ... ?

It has nothing to do with us really ..."


How does it not have soemthing to do with us? Football clubs are nothing without the fans, it's the fans that make them what they are today, They are the reason why Manchester United are the biggest club in the world and why Lincoln City (who took four supporters to Macclesfield this week) are not. Trouble is it's increasingly these loyal fans who are being disregarded and left behind by the clubs and the Premier League and the FA in their lust for cash. Football should be about accessable entertainment and being part of a close-knit community, not about the "expansion of the brand" or "selling product". The clubs obviously need to do this to some extent, but not at the expence of the supporters. A balance needs to be found and this is not it.

"So what ...

How will this affect any of us ... ?"


Do you mean "us" as in the likes of me and many others on this board who go to matches at OT 0-5 times a year? If so, then it probably won't affect us much, but for die hard fans who are season ticket holders and who go to all the away matches and who already spend thousands a year to do this, they are being asked to spend thousands more just for one (unfair) match. Of course they are not being forced to attend, but try telling them they'll have to miss a game - their season ticket will be devalued (although I'm sure they'll justify a price rise anyway somehow) and they'll be even more out of pocket than usual.

The only affect I can see it having on the likes of us who maybe go to a handful of games a season is that we'll now be competing for that odd ticket with more overseas tourists who have seen the United in their country during these matches. All of which means we'll all be seeing even less of the games.

"What's the big deal ... ?

The players are happy - New York is happy - The FA is happy !"


But the fans aren't - the amount of opposition to this plan is already amazing. When the FA started, football was a game that was accessable to everyone on the country, whatever class you were from and however wealthy you were, that's just becoming further and further from where we stand now and if this plan (that's actually proposed by the Premier League, not the FA) goes ahead, it'll just be a further step in removing the game from it's roots and disenfranchising it's core supporters in favour of persuing ever more profits from the "emerging markets".

The worst part of this plan though, is that by adding a random extra game it may well effectively decide who wins the league, who stays up and who goes down on the sheer luck of the draw.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,946 Posts
The first point you mention you have completely misunderstood ....

You neglected to copy/paste the preceding 4 or 5 lines I wrote ...

I mean it has nothing whatsoever to do with anybody other than the players
whether they choose to go or not.

If Ronnie and Rooney say "Yes I'm all for this let's go" ...

Or if they say "No I can't be bothered with it" ...

Is entirely their choice.

The day they start to design their lives and lifestyle around everything fans
demand of them is the beginning of the end.

If I was them I wouldn't do that - Jesus they have to keep a check on what %age
of their life they 'hand over' to fans.

If they decide it is best for them to do it then fair enough - if they decide they
don't want to do it - that too is a fair decision for THEM !

The other stuf I wrote is aimed at the fans we have here.

It reflects what I consider would be their reactions.

We don't have a single fan here who attends all home/away games.

For those that do attend every game you make a very good and valid point so thanks for your views ... ;)

I agree with you that for them - the hardcore fans it is not so good.

Nice post too Mr ... :)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
51 Posts
I just don't think it will work like that. The players are contracted to play, and if the PL push this idea, they will have no choice.

It's kind of like how it would pan out if you worked in a big chain shop like I do and there's a bank holiday monday coming up. Shops used to be closed on bank holidays and the staff could spend time with their families. Now, by all rights the shop doesn't have to open, you don't have to work and you don't want to, but it would mean that an opportunity to make a bit of extra revenue would be lost for the company. So the head office asks the manager to open the shop, he sees it their way as his job is all about making those extra £££. His acceptance then leaves the rest of the staff with no choice but to have to work - we can't overrule the manager's decision, neither can he overrule the head office guys. It's a case of "we say jump..."

The trouble is that the head office idea of opening the shops then means that the public see that the shops are open so they feel compelled to do what they normally do and go shopping. The time they could have spent with their families doing something else is replaced by buying the products that they have been marketed with money they don't have. This type of business has already had a terrible effect on society.

A couple of bigwigs in an office somewhere have a great deal of impact on a great number of people, and the Premier League with this proposal are seeing football as a "product" the clubs as "brands" and the fans as "consumers" and are constantly looking for ways to increase their "margin". Unfortunetely the only sure way to increase margin is to exploit someone along the way and the supporters (in this country) are the ones who will suffer.

Another problem is that all these big businesses think they can continue to "grow their brands" ad infinitum, and it's just not possible. What will they do next? As a PL spokesman said "you either move forward or you move back - you can't stand still so we are seeking to move forward". That means there will be another plan to make more £££ after this - what will that be and where will it end? If you saturate the market with your "product" you devalue it, but they don't care at the moment cause there are still more £££ to be made.

I don't think anything the players do (short of an NBA style strike) will change these plans, unfortunately. They are at the whim of the big-wigs and too far down the chain to influence this proposal (and to be fair, if I were a player and they offered me a trip to one of these places with a week off either side, I'd jump at the chance).

Sorry for the long winded analogy, BTW.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,565 Posts
I'm in Chicago, and I haven't had the opportunity to see a Premiership game unfortunately, or a Premiership team play at all. I'm in favor of the teams going overseas to play games, but not a Premiership game. What I don't understand is why the teams can't just organize a preseason tour of a region, and face other Premiership teams while you're there. You can still face the local opposition, but play a United v Fulham game or something. Playing a Premiership game overseas... Bad idea. Playing a friendly game against another Premiership team overseas, good idea.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,926 Posts
I was shocked when I heard this. Its a crazy idea to me. Lets look at the facts, the English Premier League has 20 teams with each team playing 38 games a season plus other cup compeitions. Now I've already debated this with people and I thought that not too long ago, people were complaining that there were to many games during a season. We need a winter break etc... Now I don't agree with the winter break, but cutting the teams in the division form 20 to 18 would be a much better soloution.

So having said that, the FA come up with another brainwave! Instead, lets add an extra game for each team, and to make it even better, lets make them play in Japan, or Argintina, or Sydney, or Canada! This is a joke to me. It's called the "English Premier League", and therefore the league is completed in England. Spain and Italy aren't proposing this crap! It would also destroy weaker teams completley as they simply aren't big enough to carry out these trips and win games too. I know they get an equal share......but that's besides the point.

Imagine Manchester United or Arsenal, they've played infront of huge crowds week in week out and they visit magnificant stadiums around the world and more often than not......win. Could you imaging Derby travelling to Sydney, playing in an 80,000 seater stadium, searing heat, fans that never heard of them before and they need a win to stay up and to add salt to the wounds have to play Man Utd? I think we all know that they'd be absolutly hammered, no disrespect to them.

Games around the world are played pre-season when the teams prepare for the task ahead and to make them do it during the season isn't respectfull.


My final point is this:


Imagine we had progressed to the FA Cup final, Champions League Final and we were unbelievably close to securing the title with a win away from doing it. We have to go to Japan and play Bolton or Newcastle or Aston Villa and win. Then we play in an FA Cup final against Chelsea and a Champions League Final against Real Madrid in Turkey the next weekend!! Are the players robots? There are physical limits and mental ones too and doing this will be disasterous IMO.



SAY NO TO GLOBAL GAMES

Grif SA said:
I'm in Chicago, and I haven't had the opportunity to see a Premiership game unfortunately, or a Premiership team play at all. I'm in favor of the teams going overseas to play games, but not a Premiership game. What I don't understand is why the teams can't just organize a preseason tour of a region, and face other Premiership teams while you're there. You can still face the local opposition, but play a United v Fulham game or something. Playing a Premiership game overseas... Bad idea. Playing a friendly game against another Premiership team overseas, good idea.
Perfect point but remember.........it's the FA who are coming up with this. You know them! The guys in England who always make the right choice and never made a strange decision! :p
 
G

·
carlyluvsunited said:
All this is up to the players themselves anyway ...No it is not
The clubs will ask the players what they think ...No they wont, players have no say in the running of any football club. All decisions regarding the running of clubs are taken by the board or management. They are contracted to play football for whichever team they play for and sign contracts to the effect of " agree to abide by the decisions of the club/management/board".
Then they will vote accordingly ...No, there will be no vote by players, if you think that players sit down and vote on decisions regarding where and who the team plays you are well wrong.

If the players are happy with it - the clubs will be happy with it ....

And it will begin.

Why should we complain if the people involved with this are happy ... ? Are fans not involved in this ? Are fans not people ? Do fans/people have no right to complain about anything ? Answer to all questions...Yes !!
It has nothing to do with us really ... You mean it has nothing to do with you personally, seeing as the nearest you've been to Old Trafford is the Trafford shopping centre and in your own words " never been to Old Trafford or seen a United game live". To the thousands who go to Old Trafford it has got everything to do with us.

OK they go to New York and play a game ...

So what ...

How will this affect any of us ... ? So moving United v Ciddy to New York affects non of us ? How about the thousands who have been going for 50 years no longer being able to go, are they not affected? What about the couple of million in the UK who watch live on tv ? When games will be shown at daft oclock in the morning or during the day when most are at work ? Are they not affected ? If/when it happens i can gaurentee you will be on here saying " bloody stupid times, i have to get up at 3am to see the game and i have work tomorrow. or " crazy buggers, i'm mad because i cannot watch the game because i am working "
What's the big deal ... ?

The players are happy - New York is happy - The FA is happy !

But the fans will moan and moan and moan ...
And to quote your own words ...."for them - the hardcore fans it is not so good".

Exactly.
.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,946 Posts
Oooops ....

Seems they forgot to ask Fergie ... :eek:


While we were told that all 20 Premier League clubs had agreed in principle to
playing an extra Premier League fixture overseas, it appears that most clubs
didn't actually ask the manager's, let alone the player's, opinion before making
their decision.

Fergie is unsurprisingly enraged about this and refused to give his view on the
plan, although he had more to say on his disappointment over being kept in the
dark.

"What disappoints me is (United chief executive) David Gill phoned me and
said 'keep this quiet, we are going to discuss it' and then it's all over the papers
this morning.

'They can't keep their mouth shut down there,†he said
 
G

·
SOLD: FOOTBALL'S SOUL FOR £200 MILLION

Friday February 8,2008

By Bill Bradshaw

February 7, 2008. Remember the date… it could turn out to be the day football finally sold its soul.

Yesterday the Premier League's 20 club chairmen voted unanimously to “further examine†a plan for an ‘international round', in effect a 39th game, with a full programme of 10 games being staged in venues worldwide in exchange for a massive windfall averaging a minimum of £10million per club – a staggering total of £200m.

In so doing, the Greed-is-Good League gave up any pretence of looking after the interests of their own competition. They are looking after the bank vault. Money is all that counts and to hell with the integrity of the Premier League, to hell with the fans and to hell, frankly, with the welfare of our finest players who, we are constantly told, play far too much football already.

The plan revealed by Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore is for the new round of 10 matches to be played over one weekend in January, starting in season 2010-11.

It would be an official 39th fixture with no team enjoying traditional home advantage but three points for a win and one point for a draw as usual.

The League would presumably have to ‘draw' the matches from a hat with suggestions that the strongest sides would be seeded to avoid playing each other.

Nevertheless, this round of games could be title or relegation deciders. Imagine if Manchester United were drawn this year to play whipping-boys Derby whereas Arsenal had to play, say, Newcastle. If Manchester United ended up winning the title by just one point the implications of this bolted-on cash cow are clear. It's a farce.

The old regime of working-class fans knocking off work early for uniform 3pm kick-offs has long gone but yesterday we had the unedifying prospect of matches with effectively no real fans – replaced by packed foreign stadia with millions of overseas TV viewers pouring cash into the Premier League coffers.

Along the way the symmetry of the top clubs playing each other, home and away, will be lost.

The points at stake in far-off cities such as Beijing, Dubai, New York and Singapore could be crucial.

And with the Big Four of United, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool having long wooed foreign markets, they already have large fan bases overseas. So their opponents could effectively be subjected to a 20th “away†game.

Scudamore said: “We believe that an ‘international round' of matches will enhance the strength of the Barclays Premier League as a competition; create extra interest in all 20 Premier League clubs at home and abroad; and allow increased investment in talent development and acquisition, facilities as well as our football development and community programmes.â€

All that is long-hand for “there is a hell of a lot of cash in this lads, too much to turn downâ€.

A programme to implement the idea will be completed by the end of this year. A final decision on whether or not to proceed will be taken by January 2009.

Shame on them. And that was the immediate verdict of fans last night. They know a sell-out when they smell one.

And while the chairmen rubbed their hands, some of their managers will be rubbing their eyes in disbelief when they read the details this morning.

Money talks, some will say. But the talk today is in tongues all right-thinking football people don't understand. It's a bad move. A wrong move.

Even the League admit the project has to be “feasible and practicableâ€. It may be feasible but can it truly be practicable?

It needs strong men in the game to take this idea down while there is still time.

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/34264/Sold-Football-s-soul-for-200-million
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,605 Posts
Discussion Starter · #31 ·
I have heard Fergie is not a happy man, apparently the clubs agreed it without consulting their managers.
 
G

·
PM backs fans on global proposal

The Prime Minister has joined the debate on the far-reaching plans
Prime Minister Gordon Brown has called on the Premier League to listen to the views of the fans before moving ahead with plans to introduce overseas games.
Brown also believes that the money earned from the foreign matches should be used to keep ticket prices down.

"Fans have to come first and you have to listen to their views on this," he told Radio 5 Live's Eamonn Holmes in an interview to be broadcast on Saturday.

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,853 Posts
This is a crap idea. I agree with all of what Sal & and decorativeed said.

I dont see what good can come from it. So no footy one week, have to get up at 3am to watch it the next, then none the next week aswel, in one of the busiest parts of the season aswel. Pointless move, the FA can get lost (not the words i want to use).

Also kinda the same as the point mentioned by redwarf, how is it fair when one team who gets relagated by a point or so has to play Man Utd (etc) THREE times when the team that narrowly avoids relagation gets to play teams likes Derby THREE times. Bit unfair.

rydersonthestorm said:
If this was to happen it would put me off football in a big way and fc united might be getting a new fan.
Agree.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
Grif SA said:
I'm in Chicago, and I haven't had the opportunity to see a Premiership game unfortunately, or a Premiership team play at all. I'm in favor of the teams going overseas to play games, but not a Premiership game. What I don't understand is why the teams can't just organize a preseason tour of a region, and face other Premiership teams while you're there. You can still face the local opposition, but play a United v Fulham game or something. Playing a Premiership game overseas... Bad idea. Playing a friendly game against another Premiership team overseas, good idea.
100% agreed, except 'organise' instead of 'organize'. Silly Americans :D
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
23,699 Posts
Sir Alex Ferguson is furious with Premier League's controversial plans

Source: Mirror


Manchester United boss Fergie branded as "disrespectful" the Premier League's decision to go public with the plan after staging only preliminary talks with clubs about the bold departure.

Fergie called Premier League officials, led by chief executive Richard Scudamore (right), "blabbermouths" for announcing the plan before undertaking a full consultation with managers and players from the 20 Premier League clubs.

Fergie said: "It's absolutely disrespectful to us all that we haven't been consulted before it's become an issue. Some people can't get out their offices quick enough to tell their pals in the Press. They're all blabbermouths at the Premier League.

"If they're going to do these things there should be a proper inquiry and discussion with managers and players before an issue is made of it. There should be internal discussions with clubs about it." Fergie had a blast at United chief executive David Gill, who represented the club at the meeting and is one of the Premier League's representatives on the FA board.

"What disappoints me is that David phoned me and said to keep it quiet," said Fergie. "But they cannot keep their mouths shut down there at the Premier League. Now it's everywhere. In the papers and on the television." Arsenal boss Arsene Wenger said: "I am not against innovation but you have to respect basic criteria, the competitiveness of our League, the fairness of our League, and, as well make sure that it is a promotion for our football.

"If the money is the first priority, forget it, because it will become a circus.

"If it's just to make £5-£6m more it's not worth doing it."


Circus!! Hmmm... familiar.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,467 Posts
Wenger and Keane think its a good idea.....
I think its proper silly.

The article above post30 is a great article....
SOLD: FOOTBALL’S SOUL FOR £200 MILLION- says it all really.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,467 Posts
FA rejects '39th game' proposal

Lord Triesman says the current proposal is unsustainable
The Football Association has rejected the Premier League's initial plans to play matches abroad.
The "39th game" proposal was discussed at a board meeting on Thursday where the FA told the Premier League to rethink its current plans.

"We haven't got what I would call a sustainable plan in front of us," said FA chairman Lord Triesman.

"The whole of the process requires some fresh thinking and some substantive answers to the questions I've posed."


http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/eng_prem/7254528.stm
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,926 Posts
Yes!! Looks like the stupid plans are in tattres now!! Someone saw some sense
and actually realised that they were being stupid, greedy and uncaring. Maybe
now they will realise that football has supporters who really care how the game
is run. Lets hope to hear none of this nonsense again! Eh?

39th game abroad! Ha!
 
21 - 40 of 44 Posts
Top