Jump to content

Spiderpig

Season suspended till further notice

Recommended Posts

Sky are getting a discount for games not played in the 2019/20 season apparently, so they aren't being completely generous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ohwulliewullie said:

You would like to think that in these “unprecedented times” that all parties (clubs, broadcasters...) could find a way to make this work for everyone. It just seems bonkers to cap the number of streams, in other words... limit customers who are able to buy from you. All clubs have fans outside Scotland, or who are otherwise unable to get to games regularly, who are inclined to support their club and pay for streams somehow. I know Sky in particular have commercial considerations, but being seen to do the right thing in difficult times could generate loads of goodwill. Surely revenue sharing could be worked out somehow? If anything limit the timeframe (ie while fans can’t get to games) but not the numbers. Imagine Sky really got behind (for all clubs) a “buy your season ticket now, and get to see the game, online or in person”. I reckon most teams would have a big increase in season ticket sales, just when it’s needed most.

I wouldn't imagine that Sky or the individual clubs will be wanting to let the genie out the bottle too much. Once people can see it works there could be a clammer to make this  a normal offering. That would affect Sky revenue and each clubs gates.  I expect its a fine balance they need to strike here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many questions to be answered about online access to games. Do season ticket holders like me, with  no subscription football packages, get access to all / most of our games?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

Many questions to be answered about online access to games. Do season ticket holders like me, with  no subscription football packages, get access to all / most of our games?

I've seen nothing to suggest this is tied to a Sky subscription, so you'll have access to all/most home games. Not clear yet whether it will just be accessed via the existing MFC TV website, though, or whether Sky will want to manage the access and numbers by streaming the games from their own website.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Toxteth O'Grady said:

Perhaps I have missed this, but how do we get to see away games?

Currently, we don't. Remains to be seen whether clubs will be allowed to sell individual "tickets" to home and away fans as well, but would've thought that would have been announced at the same time if Sky were going to allow it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Andy_P said:

When you then begin to compare things with the likes of the Premier League and Championship in England then some questions arise.  You consider the fact that the BBC (part funded by licence payers in Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland as well as England of course) have managed to nab themselves something like 25 live games to help "boost the spirits of the nation".

I'm not sure if that's a dig at the BBC or not, but I think there's a few understandable reasons for that.

Excluding Rangers vs Celtic and their occasional games vs City clubs, sadly there's probably far more interest in the English game in Scotland than there is in the Scottish game in Scotland.  The same will apply to Wales and Northern Ireland.  So in fact, the BBC have bought a product which does have 'appeal' across all four nations. 

Aye, BBC Scotland could look to purchase games but Sky have already got all the games that would generate decent viewing figures. With a limited regional budget, it's maybe not justifiable spending licence player money on the cost of televising games which may only be watched by a few thousand folk. 

Thinking as a neutral , would I rather watch St Mirren vs Livingston over Crystal Palace vs Aston Villa? Absolutely, however I know I'm well and truly in the minority there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, CoF said:

I'm not sure if that's a dig at the BBC or not, but I think there's a few understandable reasons for that.

Excluding Rangers vs Celtic and their occasional games vs City clubs, sadly there's probably far more interest in the English game in Scotland than there is in the Scottish game in Scotland.  The same will apply to Wales and Northern Ireland.  So in fact, the BBC have bought a product which does have 'appeal' across all four nations. 

Aye, BBC Scotland could look to purchase games but Sky have already got all the games that would generate decent viewing figures. With a limited regional budget, it's maybe not justifiable spending licence player money on the cost of televising games which may only be watched by a few thousand folk. 

Thinking as a neutral , would I rather watch St Mirren vs Livingston over Crystal Palace vs Aston Villa? Absolutely, however I know I'm well and truly in the minority there. 

Yep, go into most football orientated pubs up here and the interest is in the top Premier league teams down south. The standard of football is just so much higher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is a streaming service and not linked to a TV subscription such as Sky. Sky will still show their 48 live games on TV as planned but ST holders will get online access to home games via Tablet. laptop, smart TV etc. I guess Motherwell will issue ST holders with a code allowing them to access Motherwell TV for free.  Scope might exist for one off payment to other Clubs to enable us to watch away games. That would provide much needed  “away fan” income to all Clubs.  I think Sky are only mentioned because, as they have Exclusive Broadcasting rights, they have to give permission for games to be broadcast live on other Platforms within the UK.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, CoF said:

I'm not sure if that's a dig at the BBC or not, but I think there's a few understandable reasons for that.

Excluding Rangers vs Celtic and their occasional games vs City clubs, sadly there's probably far more interest in the English game in Scotland than there is in the Scottish game in Scotland.  The same will apply to Wales and Northern Ireland.  So in fact, the BBC have bought a product which does have 'appeal' across all four nations. 

Aye, BBC Scotland could look to purchase games but Sky have already got all the games that would generate decent viewing figures. With a limited regional budget, it's maybe not justifiable spending licence player money on the cost of televising games which may only be watched by a few thousand folk. 

Thinking as a neutral , would I rather watch St Mirren vs Livingston over Crystal Palace vs Aston Villa? Absolutely, however I know I'm well and truly in the minority there. 

Part observation. Part dig/mischief making. Part genuine point.

I will declare before going further I have a general lack of trust in the BBC and so fully accept my views on them could be (up to others to determine if justified or not) written off as simply being bitter and twisted and that would be fair enough.

It rankles with me a fair bit the sums that are involved in say Match of the Day in comparison to what ends up being spent on Scottish football coverage.  I'm happy to concede they have made some good strides such as some of the excellent documentaries they've produced and the live coverage of the early rounds of the Scottish Cup.

And whilst I fully accept that the interest in Scottish football across the UK will be much reduced in comparison to the English top flight but when the BBC come into the equation there's the "public service broadcaster" commitments card that gets played by the BBC  whenever it suits them, also comes in to play for me.

Realistically I know it would be folly on my part to expect them to come up a host of live games but delayed transmission of all games via their BBC Scotland channel?  Extended highlights at a more appealing slot than generally 24 hours after the bulk of games have finished? Is that so unreasonable to ask?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, the only part of the BBC that seems to be fulfilling its charter obligations as a "public service broadcaster" is Alba. In the past few years they have been responsible for the majority of coverage of our game. It almost made me learn Gaelic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the BBC is when they try and do something Scotland specific, like the BBC Scotland Channel, it is an absolute disaster. The viewing figures have apparently been eye wateringly bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Pepper said:

The problem with the BBC is when they try and do something Scotland specific, like the BBC Scotland Channel, it is an absolute disaster. The viewing figures have apparently been eye wateringly bad.

There's plenty of eye wateringly bad programming on most channels including the BBC's bigger brother down south. A lot of that is down to budgets, though, as when programmes for nationwide viewing are made in the Glasgow studio they are usually fine - at least in production values - and get decent audience figures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/4/2020 at 10:06 AM, Kmcalpin said:

Many questions to be answered about online access to games. Do season ticket holders like me, with  no subscription football packages, get access to all / most of our games?

The problem I'm seeing many fans having is being able to separate this streaming option from the confines of traditional ways we watch football. TV won't be involved at all most likely, outwith the contracted games they would have been showing live anyway. 

All home games will be shown on a streaming website. You'll most likely be issued with log-in details for that, and you'll log in shortly before kick off time and watch live on your laptop or tablet etc.

Season ticket holders will have access to every home game via the streaming service, while fans will hopefully still be able to "buy" a matchday ticket to watch individual games via stream. 

I imagine that's how away fans will be able to tune in. You'd pay a ticket fee and get access to the home clubs streaming platform for the game of your choice.

The only interesting thing will be seeing if Sky implement any kind of restrictions to clubs when they're showing a game live. For example, will punters be able to buy a matchday pass for a stream of the Aberdeen vs Rangers game if Sky are showing it live? If so, will that entice some fans to not bother with a sky sports subscription?

Personally, I think we're looking at the way football will be moving forward. These streaming services won't go away if and when fans are allowed back into grounds. We will likely end up with a hybrid. You can either go to the game, buy a physical season ticket, or you can buy a matchday streaming pass or "virtual" season ticket and watch from home or wherever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/4/2020 at 12:02 PM, Andy_P said:

Part observation. Part dig/mischief making. Part genuine point.

I will declare before going further I have a general lack of trust in the BBC and so fully accept my views on them could be (up to others to determine if justified or not) written off as simply being bitter and twisted and that would be fair enough.

It rankles with me a fair bit the sums that are involved in say Match of the Day in comparison to what ends up being spent on Scottish football coverage.  I'm happy to concede they have made some good strides such as some of the excellent documentaries they've produced and the live coverage of the early rounds of the Scottish Cup.

And whilst I fully accept that the interest in Scottish football across the UK will be much reduced in comparison to the English top flight but when the BBC come into the equation there's the "public service broadcaster" commitments card that gets played by the BBC  whenever it suits them, also comes in to play for me.

Realistically I know it would be folly on my part to expect them to come up a host of live games but delayed transmission of all games via their BBC Scotland channel?  Extended highlights at a more appealing slot than generally 24 hours after the bulk of games have finished? Is that so unreasonable to ask?

Without doing the maths I think that proportionately, the coverage is probably reasonable when you include ALBA and the radio programmes. That said, while we're on different sides of the fence when it comes to general thoughts the BBC, but I'll always agree with someone who wants more Scottish football on council TV.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No thanks.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52941423

Quote

Rangers & Celtic B teams in Ibrox club's 14-14-18 SPFL plan
    
By Tom English

BBC Scotland

Rangers and Celtic's B teams would be in the third tier as part of the proposal
Rangers and Celtic would both have 'B' teams in the bottom tier of a 14-14-18 league set-up being proposed by the Ibrox club for next season.

Kelty Hearts and Brora Rangers would also be invited into the SPFL to make up an expanded League One, with the "innovation paper" also suggesting Hearts and Partick Thistle avoid their respective relegations.

Both Old Firm B sides would immediately pay a £125,000 joining fee, with further payments to be made in each of the following three campaigns.

That money would go to third-tier clubs and would reduce by £25,000 each term across a four-year deal, with the entire plan worth a total of £1.2m of "new finance".

What else is in the 'innovation paper'?
Rangers and Celtic B teams can only get promoted as high as the Championship;
Their players will have an age limit of 21;
The Old Firm will purchase at least 200 tickets at a cost of £15 for each away game, with the money paid in advance;
They will also pay £1000 to stream each of those matches, should facilities be in place
Other Premiership clubs can apply to have 'B' teams starting in the Highland and Lowland leagues - replacing Kelty and Brora - with a joining fee of £25,000;
Alternatively, they could forge strategic partnerships with lower-league outfits that would allow up to six players, plus one coach to be loaned by the Premiership club;
Those partnerships would have a minimum three-year commitment and would cease if the lower-league club reaches the top flight.
How would the divisions work?

Teams
Hearts and Inverness Caledonian Thistle would be added to top 12;
League would split into a top six and bottom eight after 26 matches;
Top six would play home and away (total 36 games) as would the bottom eight (total 40 games);
One team would be relegated, and another would face a play-off as currently.
Table
Raith Rovers, Falkirk, Airdrie, Montrose, East Fife and Dumbarton would be moved up;
League would split into a top six and bottom eight after 26 games;
Top six would play home and away (total 36 games) as would the bottom eight (total 40 games);
One team would be promoted, plus three more would make play-offs as currently;
Bottom two would be relegated, with the 12th-placed team in play-off.
League One
Teams would meet twice each season;
Top two would be guaranteed promotion, with teams in third, fourth, fifth and sixth in play-offs to decide who would face off with 12th team in Championship;
Bottom side will enter play-off with Highland or Lowland League play-off winner as currently;
There is scope for second bottom team to also become part of play-offs.
Why are Rangers proposing it?
The Ibrox club say their objectives are to ensure no club is worse off as a result of the coronavirus pandemic and to inject "new finance" into the "vulnerable" lower leagues to improve standards.

Furthermore, Rangers say they want to achieve the "freshness" that reconstruction would bring while making sure "the pyramid is respected" and keeping each club's share of prize-money distribution the same.

Another plank is to tackle the "player transition challenge" with a "menu" of options for different-sized clubs ranging from B teams to the existing loan agreements and reserve league.

What happens next?
It is unclear how much support exists for the proposals, although it is understood Celtic do back them.

All Premiership clubs are aware, and will have had the full document presented to them by Rangers by Tuesday. Furthermore, the Scottish Football Association and SPFL have both been briefed, and other lower-league outfits have been sounded out.

There is also thought to be broad support for the strategic partnerships - an idea initially suggested by Stenhousemuir chairman Iain McMenemy.

Were the plan to go to a vote, it would need 32 of the 42 clubs to support it. Seventeen of those would have to be in the Premiership and Championship, with 11 of them in the top flight.

While Rangers are aiming for this to be introduced next season, they recognise that will be difficult and are prepared to adapt elements once they have consulted more widely.

Further stumbling blocks are that, while Stranraer would technically avoid the relegation from League One meted out after the early curtailment of last season, they would still end up in the bottom tier.

Clyde, Peterhead and Forfar Athletic would be in a similar situation, while Cove would stay in the bottom tier despite winning League Two last term.

Earlier this week, SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster wrote to clubs asking if they would back a 14-team Premiership for next season and, if not, how might their objections be overcome.

That followed Hearts' owner Ann Budge's failed attempt to gain support for a 14-14-14 structure for the next two seasons.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah so now the gruesome twosome have sensed an opportunity to push their agenda. Hopefully this rehashed Ann Budge/Sevco Celtic colt plan is consigned to the bin PDQ. Its now time  for the SPFL to show some balls and draw a line under reconstruction for the foreseeable future. Its now time for them to make a decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need fewer OF teams in the leagues, not more.

  • Like 7
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I can see some merit within this plan, I find it quite despicable that the old scum have seized this opportunity to further their own self interest at this time.

They have dressed up their previously thrown out attempt to get their colt teams into the league as a saviour plan, guilting it with promises of riches for the lowest level clubs and the potential of partnering to other clubs (an idea I feel has merit proposed previously) but all only if they - and they alone - can get their teams straight into the lower tier. Any other SPFL team wishing to do the same would need to start in the highland/Lowland leagues and work their way up. 
Hopefully this will be thrown out and then a working group can take the ideas within it - minus the colt team idea - discuss it, refine it and present an unbiased plan to be considered at a future date. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Season tickets for next year purchased. Decided to hold off until the early bird deal had expired as I wanted the club to get that wee bit more money and lucky enough that I can afford it. Can’t wait for the season to get back going and to hopefully get back in Fir Park before the end of the season.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So a decision will be taken tomorrow on whether Sevco's latest proposal will go to a vote or not. Not surprisingly Hearts are supporting it. I suspect they'll support any new plan, irrespective of what it is, that involves them not being relegated.  The question is if Sevco's plan falls, will yet another plan materialise?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, this is a genuine question but somewhat unrealistic and pointless in asking, I know.

As someone in my thirties who doesn't remember anything about football before Italia '90, all I've ever known is the Old Firm dominating and controlling Scottish football.  Despite a spectacular implosion thanks to dodgy tax deals, the gap between them and the rest has widened and widened and widened...

We changed the rules to allow Rangers to return because they were too big to lose and all the ARMAGEDDON that would ensue.

We're maybe going to change the rules again because Hearts are too big a team to lose from the top flight (anyone claiming to have the interests of Partick or Kelty is simply lying).

If our league only exists for the benefit of a handful of teams, what is the point?

If we have a competition with relegation but only if one of the 'big' teams aren't relegated (if that happens, we just change the competition rules) then what is the point?

If we have a league that it is impossible to win, unless you are one of the Old Firm, what is the point?

I'm not just moaning here.  I know that's how it's always (last thirty years) been. I'm genuinely asking, though.  What is the point?  Not in supporting Motherwell or buying a ticket; what is the point in 'competing'?

Keith Wyness said this was the time to really rip things up and start from scratch and get Scottish football to be competitive again.

Is there any conceivable way that Motherwell fans join with St Mirren fans and Ross County fans and Elgin fans and Peterhead fans and Dunfermline fans (and so on) to put pressure on our boards and collectively say "Enough is enough"?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think many are buying into the emergency reconstruction that's being proposed here. Even those that are open to reconstruction are saying they are willing to listen to arguments over the course of next season and planing it properly instead of rushing something through.  I'd be amazed if they garner anything like enough votes for this latest proposal.

Having said that, I understand the frustrations of teams that are being relegated without completing the league competition (although I have more sympathy for Thistle than I do for Hearts). This is an unprecedented situation and if it was us instead of Hearts in the same position I hope our Board would be trying to maintain our league status too.

The reason Rangers and Celtic wield do much power is, in large part, down to the significant number of Directors and Chairmen in other clubs who are either OF fans themselves or who believe their existence as a club depends on OF revenues.

For all that, pre Italia-90, the league wasn't dominated by the Old Firm. As well as Aberdeen and Dundee Utd winning titles and cups and having great European runs, a Rangers/Celtic one-two in the league was pretty rare.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stu said:

Is there any conceivable way that Motherwell fans join with St Mirren fans and Ross County fans and Elgin fans and Peterhead fans and Dunfermline fans (and so on) to put pressure on our boards and collectively say "Enough is enough"?

I've always found the way that TV money and coverage is dealt with pretty unfair, and wished our club and others showed more resistance against it.

I don't know the specifics of how the money gets split but I would imagine the OF get the bulk seeing as it is them that brings the subscriptions in and are most frequently on live. This I have no problem with. What I take umbrage with is that, in my 15-ish years as a fan (ST holder for all but 2) I can't think of an occasion where a home game against the OF has kicked off at 3pm on a Saturday.  Yes we get exposure and some TV money, but at the expense of reduced home gates and home fan inconvenience. To me it just seems incredibly unfair, especially given OF fans are never inconvenienced in this way while at the same time are also pocketing all of the TV money from their own in-house TV channels.

This might seem like a minor thing, but surely is something that should be getting discussed as part of any future reconstruction? If we're talking about what is fair and best for Scottish football, how is the current scenario (two teams pocket bulk of money, supplement with additional money that is not shared with other clubs, fans of all other clubs inconvenienced, lost match day revenue for all other clubs, etc, etc) working for anyone outwith the OF? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@weeyin, my point wasn't about reconstruction or believing in it.  I thought I was fairly clear in suggesting it's only being mooted as a way to save Hearts.  I don't believe for a second anyone would be making such a song and dance 'standing up' for the Particks and Keltys if St Mirren were the team in 12th place and not Hearts.

And my point wasn't just about this reconstruction but the inequality gap, the 11-1 vote, the need to have four Old Firm games, the... Ach, I'm not going to list them all here.

I'm missing the point of Aberdeen winning the league in the 80s unless you're trying to suggest things are cyclical and the New Firm's time of dominance is coming soon?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

Twitter @MotherwellFC

×