They are about to have a vote in the US to end the NFL blackout rule over there, granted their blackout is run to different rules but the principle is the same, in this day and age people should not be prevented from watching what they want to watch.
Not only is the blackout for different reasons in the US, but the discussions about changing the blackout rules are occurring for very different reasons.
Wasn't it just last year the game kicked off at 5 UK time and someone scored in the first 15 mins, so the UK audience missed the goal? Which is a fairly major bummer from a viewer experience perspective.
I don't suppose Sky could have the match live on one channel, and then have a red button option on another channel on a 15 minute delay, and show the whole match. Or just have one channel with the game live, and another with the 15 minute delay. The we could watch the whole first half, and quickly switch over for the start of the 2nd half.
If im going to a 3pm that day (which I'm not as my teams playing away) i'd be happy that I got an extra 15 minutes to get to the pub and watch it. Clearly you live right next to the ground?
That doesn't happen, or at least didn't last time there was a 5pm kickoff in La Liga, as the game is joined live 15 minutes in, thereby missing the start, and on occasion missing a goal. Also no, I don't live right next to the ground. Another assumption from you.
That would A - clearly affect attendances AT ALL LEVELS of football
Once again, where is the evidence of this? It's the same claim trotted out time and again by supporters of the blackout rules and I am yet to see any proof. I am happy to be proven wrong if you can provide any. I have commented on the Capital One Cup and how attendances are not affected there by live football being on TV, and at a later time. That says to me that without evidence to the contrary, I will remain of the stance that this is a solution looking for a problem and has been built on nothing but baseless speculation.
Not only is the blackout for different reasons in the US, but the discussions about changing the blackout rules are occurring for very different reasons.
So to make any comparisons at all is impossible.
True. With that, I was referring to the quote from FCC chairman Tom Wheeler that "we at the FCC shouldn't be complicit in preventing sports fans from watching their favorite teams on TV." - in my opinion the same can be said for the blackout rules over here, even with them being applied for totally different reasons. The sentiment for why they need to be scrapped is the same.
Also no, I don't live right next to the ground. Another assumption from you.
Nope just sarcasm.
Once again, where is the evidence of this? It's the same claim trotted out time and again by supporters of the blackout rules and I am yet to see any proof
So because YOU haven't seen any proof its not good enough? Ever thought the people who made the ruling have the proof?
I support the right of fans to choose when it comes to tv coverage and attending local games, however I do think it's disingenuous to claim that completely abandoning the blackout window wouldn't effect lower attendance. I know there's many people that would never consider going to local games regardless of what's on tv, however there's also a lot of casual fans who would think twice if it meant missing their Premier League team's game on the box.
I sometimes think twice about attending the local non-league team just because it means I will miss soccer saturday!
The blackout is there for good reason. If it didn't exist, there would be a 3pm live premier league game without question. That would A - clearly affect attendances AT ALL LEVELS of football and B - mean anyone that does attend a 3pm game wouldn't be able to watch it.
The armchair Premiership fans know this deep down, they just don't care. Some people think that football in England should be run entirely for the benefit of about 4 or 5 teams.
I wouldn't support any weakening of the blackout rules because as soon as you take one step down that road (like allowing the Classico game to go on 15 minutes early) the armchair fans would move on to demanding the next concession, the next weakening of the blackout.
Once again, where is the evidence of this? It's the same claim trotted out time and again by supporters of the blackout rules and I am yet to see any proof. I am happy to be proven wrong if you can provide any. I have commented on the Capital One Cup and how attendances are not affected there by live football being on TV, and at a later time..
Some quick google stats -
Millwall v Southampton Attendance 6,014 (2013-14 Average Attendance 10,581)
Bournemouth v Northampton Att 5,250 (AA 13-14 9,114)
Derby v Charlton Att 16,367 (AA 13-14 24,933)
Birmingham City v Sunderland 11,245 (AA 13-14 15,457)
The armchair Premiership fans know this deep down, they just don't care. Some people think that football in England should be run entirely for the benefit of about 4 or 5 teams.
I wouldn't support any weakening of the blackout rules because as soon as you take one step down that road (like allowing the Classico game to go on 15 minutes early) the armchair fans would move on to demanding the next concession, the next weakening of the blackout.
Millwall v Southampton Attendance 6,014 (2013-14 Average Attendance 10,581)
Bournemouth v Northampton Att 5,250 (AA 13-14 9,114)
Derby v Charlton Att 16,367 (AA 13-14 24,933)
Birmingham City v Sunderland 11,245 (AA 13-14 15,457)
NEXT
But you are comparing the attendance of an evening match in a Cup competition (and not even the most important cup competition at that) to the average attendance of all matches. Some are going to be lower than others, thats why its an average.
But you are comparing the attendance of an evening match in a Cup competition (and not even the most important cup competition at that) to the average attendance of all matches. Some are going to be lower than others, thats why its an average.
I quoted a post that said league cup.
Indeed and that average will include all manor of games (Including a lot of night games.) There are always going to be different variables hence why I took an average.
Wasn't it just last year the game kicked off at 5 UK time and someone scored in the first 15 mins, so the UK audience missed the goal? Which is a fairly major bummer from a viewer experience perspective.
I don't suppose Sky could have the match live on one channel, and then have a red button option on another channel on a 15 minute delay, and show the whole match. Or just have one channel with the game live, and another with the 15 minute delay. The we could watch the whole first half, and quickly switch over for the start of the 2nd half.
That's what I'd do.
This to me is the most simple solution.
In fact I would simply show the match with the delayed 1st half "as live" (it's not as though you're likely to hear / see any spoilers). With a little planning, it would then be easy enough to switch to the live 2nd half.
Seems a bit too easy though. Has this been tried / failed?
Comparing an unloved cup competition with league attendances has to be one of the most desperate things I've seen on here in a long time.
Blackout should go, full stop. It should at least be trialled. If there is absolute cast iron proof it severely damages attendances then maybe it could be reinstated.
To be honest the fact that the price of a lower league game these days is nearly half of a months sky subscription doesn't help the lower league's cause. And of course if you're a committed and loyal fan of course you're going to go to your teams games if you can, not stay at home watching PL matches.
It's such a shame that the PL and FL are shackled by this, and I'm most surprised that Sky especially haven't tried to fight the ruling more vigorously.
Bournemouth v Northampton being a low attendance (compared to the average or not) is hardly a shock as it's Championship v L2 and not a particularly interesting game in the slightest. Even if it'd have been the only game at any level in the world that night, the attendance would have been similar to what you quoted.
So taking your first example to see if I have understood this correctly:
Millwall v Southampton played each other in a midweek evening LC match and the gate was 6,014.
The average gate at Millwall for ALL matches that season was 10,581.
If so, then you have no evidence whatsoever that the reason for the 6k attendance was "because there was football on the telly so people didnt bother showing up", you are merely assuming that was the reason. Its more likely to be the fact that its the third most important competition, played in the evenings when people don't have the whole day to themselves, and people only have a certain amount of money to spend on going to matches.
So taking your firstly example to see if I have understood this correctly:
Millwall v Southampton played each other in a midweek evening LC match and the gate was 6,014.
The average gate at Millwall for ALL matches that season was 10,581.
If so, then you have no evidence whatsoever that the reason for the 6k attendance was "because there was football on the telly so people didnt bother showing up", you are merely assuming that was the reason.
Its more likely to be the fact that its the third most important competition, played in the evenings when people don't have the whole day to themselves, and people only have a certain amount of money to spend on going to matches.
I should first say I laughed a lot at the underlined and highlighted part.
Secondly I agree. There are ALOT of different factors from the league cup to the league. Yes its an unloved competition but that's partly then compensated by clubs reducing ticket prices.
What I can't have is people suggesting that of the 4,000 average millwall fans that didn't turn up to the game against Southampton, a percentage - regardless of how big or small - didn't turn up because Man Utd we're also on TV and they could just stay at home saving themselves from the expense and potential cold wet south london evening.
And that would be further exacerbated for league games on a Saturday afternoon.
And that would be further exacerbated for league games on a Saturday afternoon.
Unlikely. If anything, the situation would probably improve. As Ginger Daddy pointed out, Saturday is a day where a large percentage of people have the day off, to do what they want with the whole day. 3pm is a better time to get to the match and back, especially when the night games involve having been at work for a number of people attending them and having to plan travel around that.The league games are also of a higher standard than the cup, so are more likely to be attractive to attend.
It was a competition a poster mentioned. So its not desperate is it. Just a reply.
I should first say I laughed a lot at the underlined and highlighted part.
Secondly I agree. There are ALOT of different factors from the league cup to the league. Yes its an unloved competition but that's partly then compensated by clubs reducing ticket prices.
What I can't have is people suggesting that of the 4,000 average millwall fans that didn't turn up to the game against Southampton, a percentage - regardless of how big or small - didn't turn up because Man Utd we're also on TV and they could just stay at home saving themselves from the expense and potential cold wet south london evening.
And that would be further exacerbated for league games on a Saturday afternoon.
I think you're significantly underestimating the difference in appeal between a Saturday 3pm kick off and a midweek evening game. For some fans it's not even technically possible to get to a midweek game without taking time off work.
Unlikely. If anything, the situation would probably improve. As Ginger Daddy pointed out, Saturday is a day where a large percentage of people have the day off, to do what they want with the whole day. 3pm is a better time to get to the match and back, especially when the night games involve having been at work for a number of people attending them and having to plan travel around that.The league games are also of a higher standard than the cup, so are more likely to be attractive to attend.
Also people can drink on a Saturday and not have to worry about going to work the next day.
Indeed, people spending hundreds of pounds on 23 matches dont want to be paying more for secondary cup matches.
It's more than that. Season ticket holders are recorded as part of the attendance regardless of whether they turn up to league games or not. That's not the case with cup games. It easily adds a few hundred, if not thousand, to games on occasions.
Comments
Not only is the blackout for different reasons in the US, but the discussions about changing the blackout rules are occurring for very different reasons.
So to make any comparisons at all is impossible.
I don't suppose Sky could have the match live on one channel, and then have a red button option on another channel on a 15 minute delay, and show the whole match. Or just have one channel with the game live, and another with the 15 minute delay. The we could watch the whole first half, and quickly switch over for the start of the 2nd half.
That's what I'd do.
Once again, where is the evidence of this? It's the same claim trotted out time and again by supporters of the blackout rules and I am yet to see any proof. I am happy to be proven wrong if you can provide any. I have commented on the Capital One Cup and how attendances are not affected there by live football being on TV, and at a later time. That says to me that without evidence to the contrary, I will remain of the stance that this is a solution looking for a problem and has been built on nothing but baseless speculation.
True. With that, I was referring to the quote from FCC chairman Tom Wheeler that "we at the FCC shouldn't be complicit in preventing sports fans from watching their favorite teams on TV." - in my opinion the same can be said for the blackout rules over here, even with them being applied for totally different reasons. The sentiment for why they need to be scrapped is the same.
Nope just sarcasm.
So because YOU haven't seen any proof its not good enough? Ever thought the people who made the ruling have the proof?
I sometimes think twice about attending the local non-league team just because it means I will miss soccer saturday!
Deleted
Erm, OK?
The armchair Premiership fans know this deep down, they just don't care. Some people think that football in England should be run entirely for the benefit of about 4 or 5 teams.
I wouldn't support any weakening of the blackout rules because as soon as you take one step down that road (like allowing the Classico game to go on 15 minutes early) the armchair fans would move on to demanding the next concession, the next weakening of the blackout.
Some quick google stats -
Millwall v Southampton Attendance 6,014 (2013-14 Average Attendance 10,581)
Bournemouth v Northampton Att 5,250 (AA 13-14 9,114)
Derby v Charlton Att 16,367 (AA 13-14 24,933)
Birmingham City v Sunderland 11,245 (AA 13-14 15,457)
NEXT
I wrote something foolish and deleted it. It wasn't based at yourself.
Agree 100%.
But you are comparing the attendance of an evening match in a Cup competition (and not even the most important cup competition at that) to the average attendance of all matches. Some are going to be lower than others, thats why its an average.
I quoted a post that said league cup.
Indeed and that average will include all manor of games (Including a lot of night games.) There are always going to be different variables hence why I took an average.
This to me is the most simple solution.
In fact I would simply show the match with the delayed 1st half "as live" (it's not as though you're likely to hear / see any spoilers). With a little planning, it would then be easy enough to switch to the live 2nd half.
Seems a bit too easy though. Has this been tried / failed?
Blackout should go, full stop. It should at least be trialled. If there is absolute cast iron proof it severely damages attendances then maybe it could be reinstated.
To be honest the fact that the price of a lower league game these days is nearly half of a months sky subscription doesn't help the lower league's cause. And of course if you're a committed and loyal fan of course you're going to go to your teams games if you can, not stay at home watching PL matches.
It's such a shame that the PL and FL are shackled by this, and I'm most surprised that Sky especially haven't tried to fight the ruling more vigorously.
Millwall v Southampton played each other in a midweek evening LC match and the gate was 6,014.
The average gate at Millwall for ALL matches that season was 10,581.
If so, then you have no evidence whatsoever that the reason for the 6k attendance was "because there was football on the telly so people didnt bother showing up", you are merely assuming that was the reason. Its more likely to be the fact that its the third most important competition, played in the evenings when people don't have the whole day to themselves, and people only have a certain amount of money to spend on going to matches.
It was a competition a poster mentioned. So its not desperate is it. Just a reply.
I should first say I laughed a lot at the underlined and highlighted part.
Secondly I agree. There are ALOT of different factors from the league cup to the league. Yes its an unloved competition but that's partly then compensated by clubs reducing ticket prices.
What I can't have is people suggesting that of the 4,000 average millwall fans that didn't turn up to the game against Southampton, a percentage - regardless of how big or small - didn't turn up because Man Utd we're also on TV and they could just stay at home saving themselves from the expense and potential cold wet south london evening.
And that would be further exacerbated for league games on a Saturday afternoon.
I think you're significantly underestimating the difference in appeal between a Saturday 3pm kick off and a midweek evening game. For some fans it's not even technically possible to get to a midweek game without taking time off work.
Also people can drink on a Saturday and not have to worry about going to work the next day.
Indeed, people spending hundreds of pounds on 23 matches dont want to be paying more for secondary cup matches.
It's more than that. Season ticket holders are recorded as part of the attendance regardless of whether they turn up to league games or not. That's not the case with cup games. It easily adds a few hundred, if not thousand, to games on occasions.