[JohnG]

Who made the decision to have the Northern clubs travel down to Wembley on the Sunday? Do these people know what public transport is like on a Sunday? It's not good the rest of the week but these people will struggle to get a train back to the North with the stupid 4PM kick off.
Surely it would have been better to have the London clubs there on a Sunday and the other semi on a Saturday.
What a bunch of ******s the FA are

[Scholes18]

Its in the contract the FA have with the company that own wembley that semi finals of the cup will be played down there.

As usual with the incompetents at soho square its all about money.

[domtheone]

Originally Posted by Scholes18

As usual with the incompetents at soho square its all about money.

I was chatting to my mate the other day abou this.

He's an Everton supporter.

Why the cannot hold the tie an Anfield/Villa Park is beyond me.

Money first, fans second.

[yojay]

Its just the FA wanting to make money!

[Noggin1980]

Did they make the decision to have the 2 northen clubs play on Sunday? or was it the case that the first 2 names out the hat were tie 1 and therefore would take place on Saturday?

If its the later then they are doing the right thing and they shouldn't do what you want.

Of course the tie's being played at wembley is a different arguement with both sides haveing positives and negatives. It does devalue the competition some what but also makes good use out of the stadium we spent so much on and also makes it much more likely that the fans of smaller clubs will get a magic day out at wembley.

[Steven]

An £800 million stadium that went over-budget does not pay by itself you know

[jonneymendoza]

Originally Posted by LFC_SL

An £800 million stadium that went over-budget does not pay by itself you know

its not ours and the english teams problem mate

[Croker]

I'm an Everton season ticket holder, and I'll be going to Wembley for the semi-final. However, I'm angry that it's a) at Wembley at all and b) on a Sunday.

As has been pointed out here already, what purpose does it serve for the North West teams to play on the Sunday? The Saturday would surely be more appropriate, particularly as the other semi-final is being contested by 2 bloody London clubs. Secondly, I honestly believe that we should be playing the tie at Villa Park. It just cheapens the whole experience of getting to Wembley when you aren't in a final, I think.

Still, at least I can see how many thousands of pounds it'll cost me to get a pie and a pint at half-time, like.

[Reepicheep]

I think that the semi-finals should be held at alternative neutral venues, like they did in the past.

The fact that only the final was held at Wembley made it more of a special occasion.

I do feel for the northern team fans that have to make their way all the way to London on a Sunday - and then have to make the journey again for the final!
Watching live football is expensive enough as it is without burdening the fans with this extra cost.

[domtheone]

Might send out a powerfull message if fans boycotted the game

Would never happen though as the FA know that fans will roll over and accept anything whether it's for better or worse

[Iccz]

I thought a large number of Man U fans were from down south anyways?

Sucks for Everton though.

[johnscarlet]

Originally Posted by Iccz

I thought a large number of Man U fans were from down south anyways?

Thats so old , when I was a kid Liverpool were the side everyone supported. That not even this century , or even the last decade of the last century. Wow thats a long time

[Rorifett]

Didn't wanna start a new thread but what's everyone's thoughts on the semi's this weekend? Reckon I'd prefer Arsenal to beat Chelsea and of course for Everton to beat Man Utd.

Been reading about Man Utd's team and seems as if the journo's think it's gonna be a young team Fergie puts out. Not sure how much shuffling around Moyes is gonna be able to do for Everton but sure the boys'll pull through! Also kinda hoping that if Fergie is serious about wanting Moyes to take over the helm eventually that he'll help us to win a trophy Glesga united an orrat

[reddevil63]

Man Utd to win it......end of.

[jonneymendoza]

Originally Posted by Rorifett

Didn't wanna start a new thread but what's everyone's thoughts on the semi's this weekend? Reckon I'd prefer Arsenal to beat Chelsea and of course for Everton to beat Man Utd.

Been reading about Man Utd's team and seems as if the journo's think it's gonna be a young team Fergie puts out. Not sure how much shuffling around Moyes is gonna be able to do for Everton but sure the boys'll pull through! Also kinda hoping that if Fergie is serious about wanting Moyes to take over the helm eventually that he'll help us to win a trophy Glesga united an orrat

my thoughts is that WHY in gods name is the arsenal game on SETANTA

[Rorifett]

Maybe some sort of deal with Setanta and Arsenal due to that Arsenal TV channel. Don't know if it's linked with Setanta but when I used to hawk Sky to the pubs and clubs all the club channels barring manutv were included in the Setanta package so don't know if they got some back-scratching done for helping get the channel launched or broadcast here or something.

[hdsport]

Re the TV situation.

Nothing to do with Arsenal TV being on Setanta.

The rights gave ITV first pick and they (predictably) chose Man U V Everton because (like with the Champions League) United bring them a guaranteed audience. There's also the story element of that tie...possible upset or United continue in their bid to win it all cue plug for the Fa Cup final and the Champions League on ITV.

[jonneymendoza]

Originally Posted by hdsport

Re the TV situation.

Nothing to do with Arsenal TV being on Setanta.

The rights gave ITV first pick and they (predictably) chose Man U V Everton because (like with the Champions League) United bring them a guaranteed audience. There's also the story element of that tie...possible upset or United continue in their bid to win it all cue plug for the Fa Cup final and the Champions League on ITV.

why cant ITV show both games? its the semi's for christ sakes plus chelsea vs arsenal will pull a bigger audience then manu vs everton. two big teams in one match agains a big team againts an average side

setanta has ruined live football IMO. if you want to watch any live game you got to have sky sports plus sentanta

[johnscarlet]

Because the FA sold out to an ITV/Setanta deal , rather than BBC/SKY. Same as with the England matches

[jonneymendoza]

yea and that sucks as before it was actually cheaper for most people to watch all live tv games as all you needed was sky sports. now you need setanta AND sky sports to have the priveledge

[hdsport]

Both semis haven't been live on terrestrial tv since 1992 so it's nothing new.

We should also remember they never used to be live anyway...with all the Hillsborough reflections this week 20 years ago they both kicked off on Saturday at 3pm, thus we had the BBC interrupting the snooker to cross over to Motson who there for MOTD as was Des Lynam/Jimmy Hill who were there to record links although as it turned out they were back in London for the actual show.

[jonneymendoza]

Originally Posted by hdsport

Both semis haven't been live on terrestrial tv since 1992 so it's nothing new.

We should also remember they never used to be live anyway...with all the Hillsborough reflections this week 20 years ago they both kicked off on Saturday at 3pm, thus we had the BBC interrupting the snooker to cross over to Motson who there for MOTD as was Des Lynam/Jimmy Hill who were there to record links although as it turned out they were back in London for the actual show.

Your second part is irrelevent because we could say the same on lots of things that how back the day it was blah blah.

My point is how live football is beginning to spread on multiple subscription channels which = more money for us to pay to watch these games

Thats my definining point mate. imagine if the f1 was in bbc, setanta AND sky sports. how would you feel?

[hdsport]

Originally Posted by jonneymendoza

My point is how live football is beginning to spread on multiple subscription channels which = more money for us to pay to watch these games

Thats my definining point mate. imagine if the f1 was in bbc, setanta AND sky sports. how would you feel?

But how can you justify allowing one PAY tv network but not two (or three if ESPN are serious), you can't stifle competition, if SKY are ok then you have to allow Setanta to (attempt) to compete. Setanta has actually created an 'entry-level' for people into the premium sports TV market which could be argued is a good thing.

It comes down to a choice FTA albeit less comprehensive coverage and less money (don't expect English clubs to compete in Champions League against other leagues with PAY-TV deals), or the mixed model we have.

What gets me (and why I mentioned how deals used to be) is that people are surprised/outraged about the tv coverage. This particular deal was announced just over 2 years ago and we have had well over a decade of similar tv deals.

As for F1 on multiple channels, wouldn't happen for economic reasons except in a RTL/Premiere or RAI/SKY Italia arrangement. Personally (although I don't know why I matter) I subscribe to both SKY and Setanta so would be ok with that...I don't mind subscribing either, we may be paying more but then we are getting more.

[jonneymendoza]

Originally Posted by hdsport

But how can you justify allowing one PAY tv network but not two (or three if ESPN are serious), you can't stifle competition, if SKY are ok then you have to allow Setanta to (attempt) to compete. Setanta has actually created an 'entry-level' for people into the premium sports TV market which could be argued is a good thing.

It comes down to a choice FTA albeit less comprehensive coverage and less money (don't expect English clubs to compete in Champions League against other leagues with PAY-TV deals), or the mixed model we have.

What gets me (and why I mentioned how deals used to be) is that people are surprised/outraged about the tv coverage. This particular deal was announced just over 2 years ago and we have had well over a decade of similar tv deals.

As for F1 on multiple channels, wouldn't happen for economic reasons except in a RTL/Premiere or RAI/SKY Italia arrangement. Personally (although I don't know why I matter) I subscribe to both SKY and Setanta so would be ok with that...I don't mind subscribing either, we may be paying more but then we are getting more.

how are we getting more? when it was just sky or normal tv, they combined showed the same amount of live tv games that are shown now mate.

on saturdays they show only two games at present from both sky and setanta combined(premiership games) one at 12:45 and another at 5:15. Sky use to show both games back in the day

Same on all the other days. if we had the option to watch all saturday games live from different channels then i can understand it being a benefit of following this business model but atm all it is, is that sky has "shared" some of there live games to setanta

BTW arsenal lost 2:1 thanks to wengers bizarre team choice

[hdsport]

Originally Posted by jonneymendoza

how are we getting more? when it was just sky or normal tv, they combined showed the same amount of live tv games that are shown now mate.

Two Things

1.) It depends watch you watch, there is life beyond the Premier League...not supporting a league team I'm delighted coverage of the Blue Sq Premier has shot up dramatically on Setanta.

2.) The amount coverage we get now (of football and indeed sport in general) is fundamentally down to pay-tv ie SKY and the main subscription driver, Premier League football.

My argument is that if (as it seems) you are happy for SKY to bid you can't start saying that Setanta shouldn't be allowed to. You are either in favour of pay tv sport or against. If you're against say goodbye to the level of coverage (of all leagues) we get along with a lot the top players.

EDIT One more thing, the games that Setanta are showing is effectively 46 of the 50 Prem Plus games, there are in fact 4 more games on normal SKY Sports than before and the new deal (starting 2010) gives SKY even more (23 of Setanta's 46) assuming they don't PPV them.

[jonneymendoza]

Originally Posted by hdsport

Two Things

1.) It depends watch you watch, there is life beyond the Premier League...not supporting a league team I'm delighted coverage of the Blue Sq Premier has shot up dramatically on Setanta.

2.) The amount coverage we get now is fundamentally down to pay-tv ie SKY and my argument is that if (as it seems) you are happy for SKY to bid you can't start saying that Setanta shouldn't be allowed to. You are either in favour of pay tv sport or against.

yea i know what you mean but still sky and setanta get most of there reveneues from big events such has fa cups, premier league, champions league etc not from the Blue Sq Premier.

[hdsport]

Originally Posted by jonneymendoza

yea i know what you mean but still sky and setanta get most of there reveneues from big events such has fa cups, premier league, champions league etc not from the Blue Sq Premier.

Quite, and that's my point, having a competitor to SKY has lead to and increase in coverage, although we have had to pay more as I said we are getting more.

If Setanta (or whoever) were not allowed to bid for the Premier League/FA Cup etc (the big subscription drivers) then coverage of other leagues (not financially viable for the a broadcaster on their own) would suffer.

[JohnG]

It's Joe Public who suffers at the moment having to pay 2 different companies for ppv football.

[jonneymendoza]

Originally Posted by JohnG

It's Joe Public who suffers at the moment having to pay 2 different companies for ppv football.

exactly. not many are interested in the lower leagues. why not make a channel specificly for lower league sports?

[hdsport]

Originally Posted by jonneymendoza

exactly. not many are interested in the lower leagues. why not make a channel specificly for lower league sports?

Because it probably wouldn't be sustainable (see ITV Digital) for a pay broadcaster in this country it's top flight football that drives subscriptions, the rest whilst an important part of the business model is almost as much about maintaining subscriptions (e.g. cricket over the summer) than creating new ones.

PS As for not that many being interested in the lower leagues check out 4th place football league for total attendance last season...I've also put the Blue Square Premier in as a comparison...

Total Attendance 2007/08

Premier League 14,810,500
Bundesliga 11,957,256
La Liga 11,067,120
Football League Championship 9,396,144
Serie A 8,808,400

Blue Square Premier 913,898