Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

IGNORED

Crowd today.


Bristol Rob

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, One Team said:

On the lash? 

Not at all. It was a good **** you to Sky in my view.

Not sure I agree tbh. 

Whatever sport Sky cover their coverage is excellent. The F1 coverage in particular is superb.

Sky Sports has been great for football in this country. We now have a top division which is the most popular in the world, it has some of the world's best players playing in it. We now have some of the best stadiums in the world.

Whilst I understand the gripes about kick off times etc when you balance it out Sky Sports has been great for the Premier League.

In recent years they have been paying more and more attention to the Championship and that I think can only be a good thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Andy082005 said:

I'd say he isn't far wrong. What do you think it is?

I think with the racist abuse that’s happened in the last couple of weeks - plus our own fans playing a role in smashing up a local pub - I’m really not sure any problems Sky are the root of are particularly pertinent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Redinthehead said:

I think with the racist abuse that’s happened in the last couple of weeks - plus our own fans playing a role in smashing up a local pub - I’m really not sure any problems Sky are the root of are particularly pertinent.

The discussion here is why crowds are taking a hit and why people chose to stay at home. 

The point the chap was making is that sky have so much football now, people choose to save their money and watch it at home 

I'm not sure many of the people who stayed away last night stayed away because of fear of racism . Or because a pub got smashed up the other week....

Sky TV coverage is great don't get me wrong ....however it is killing lower level football. The latest idea of this red button is another idea that will kill attendances at grounds.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Take about 5000 off that for actual attendance 

Rows Of empty seats 

I’d estimate the ST holders seatsaround me about 2/3 occupied

Glad I went , enjoyable game , decent performance and one of the better atmospheres this season

Me and the boy are season ticket holders,  but we didn't go cos I'm hanging with man flu.  If it hadn't pissed it down all day we might have gone. Got the hump though cos my now tv packed up so I couldn't watch it, and it sounds like our best game in a while. Bugger. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Andy082005 said:

The discussion here is why crowds are taking a hit and why people chose to stay at home. 

The point the chap was making is that sky have so much football now, people choose to save their money and watch it at home 

I'm not sure many of the people who stayed away last night stayed away because of fear of racism . Or because a pub got smashed up the other week....

Sky TV coverage is great don't get me wrong ....however it is killing lower level football. The latest idea of this red button is another idea that will kill attendances at grounds.

 

Ok - I missed the point - apologies. I don’t think people stayed away for those reasons just that they’re a bigger problem right now than anything Sky are contributing to but accept that probably wasn’t the point being made.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Redinthehead said:

Ok - I missed the point - apologies. I don’t think people stayed away for those reasons just that they’re a bigger problem right now than anything Sky are contributing to but accept that probably wasn’t the point being made.

Yeah there are problems agree, however I will play devil's advocate and say the problems you touch on are being sensationalised by the British media and PC brigade . That's for another topic though ...

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Andy082005 said:

Yeah there are problems agree, however I will play devil's advocate and say the problems you touch on are being sensationalised by the British media and PC brigade . That's for another topic though ...

I wouldn’t call that playing devil’s advocate but yes let’s leave that for another thread 😀

Link to post
Share on other sites

My favourite sky/prem lie is that the money is needed in the game so that we attract the biggest stars😂

Who cares? Johnny Vaughn had a great rant about it the other, he supports Chelsea and cheers every goal no matter who’s playing.

It’s irrelevant who scores it. 

Because nobody watched Celtic until they signed Henrik Larson😂

Boro played in front of practically no one until they signed junihino and didn’t really get behind Brian clough or Bernie slaven.

Liverpool were near irrelevant until 1992😂

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

i left the tap and barrel there was about 50/60 city fans in there not one of um went to the game sky tv is ruining  football

I’m sure that millions of football fans would disagree with you

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Robbored said:

I’m sure that millions of football fans would disagree with you

Do you really believe that?

Viewing figures are shrinking for sky at present. 

I would also suggest that the vast majority disagreeing are not what I would define as a football fan and just a tv viewer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Andy082005 said:

It's certainly ruining the match day experience . Attendances drop and atmospheres are effected by it

 

 

Disagree. Most prem clubs do not need gate receipts at all to survive and I’m sure more and more championship clubs are in the same boat.

So reduce prices significantly. Most fans love live football but too many can not afford POTD prices.

I believe City could reduce S/T prices and POTD and add 3K to every game - the small amount they may lose on the gate will be made up easily on merchandise and drink sells.

Clubs are greedy and pricing out some fans unnecessarily

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, 054123 said:

Do you really believe that?

Viewing figures are shrinking for sky at present. 

I would also suggest that the vast majority disagreeing are not what I would define as a football fan and just a tv viewer.

Sky is a divisive subject largely between those that subscribe and those that don’t.

I subscribe and think Sky is well worth it      :dunno:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that they are top of the league but 1300+ Norwich fans on a Saturday night for a game that was on TV was impressive. It's a soul sapping journey at the best of times, I hope they all got through storm Deidre safely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Neo said:

Disagree. Most prem clubs do not need gate receipts at all to survive and I’m sure more and more championship clubs are in the same boat.

So reduce prices significantly. Most fans love live football but too many can not afford POTD prices.

I believe City could reduce S/T prices and POTD and add 3K to every game - the small amount they may lose on the gate will be made up easily on merchandise and drink sells.

Clubs are greedy and pricing out some fans unnecessarily

Or to put a different angle

If we hadn’t signed Marley Watkins , his fee alone could have saved each of us season ticket holders £65 each 

:laughcont:

 

Ticket prices have a very limited effect on our budget - All the season ticket money only meets about %25 of our wage bill alone

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, JamesBCFC said:

Most of whom would be ones who have rarely, if ever, actually gone to a game of the team they 'support'.

Where do you get that stat from?

I watch shed loads of football, rugby, cricket etc etc on sky but still go to the gate for both football and rugby and I don’t know anybody at work who is not a subscriber who also  does not go and watch their team at least occasionally and a few we are talking driving up to Leeds, Wolves and one unfortunate mate was off on Friday to drive up to Sunderland.

I think you are talking nonsense with that statement from my experience of sky sport subscribers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Sky is a divisive subject largely between those that subscribe and those that don’t.

I subscribe and think Sky is well worth it      :dunno:

I think that’s fair enough.

I just don’t really think Sky has been an overall positive experience. 

The prem should have realised years ago that it held the cards, rather like the NFL have done so well in the states.

Sky exploited a weak league and created the problems it promised to solve.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

I know that they are top of the league but 1300+ Norwich fans on a Saturday night for a game that was on TV was impressive. It's a soul sapping journey at the best of times, I hope they all got through storm Deidre safely.

Absolutely - it’s around a 4.5 hour drive from Norwich and in dreadful weather. A very impressive following given the match was live on Sky.

Doesn’t exactly support the argument that Sky is ruining football.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Neo said:

Disagree. Most prem clubs do not need gate receipts at all to survive and I’m sure more and more championship clubs are in the same boat.

So reduce prices significantly. Most fans love live football but too many can not afford POTD prices.

I believe City could reduce S/T prices and POTD and add 3K to every game - the small amount they may lose on the gate will be made up easily on merchandise and drink sells.

Clubs are greedy and pricing out some fans unnecessarily

Sky created the problem that it now professes to solve, in respect of spiralling costs in the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Neo said:

Where do you get that stat from?

I watch shed loads of football, rugby, cricket etc etc on sky but still go to the gate for both football and rugby and I don’t know anybody at work who is not a subscriber who also  does not go and watch their team at least occasionally and a few we are talking driving up to Leeds, Wolves and one unfortunate mate was off on Friday to drive up to Sunderland.

I think you are talking nonsense with that statement from my experience of sky sport subscribers.

Clarify exactly what you think my statement is.

You seem to think I'm saying most Sky subscriber don't go to games, which is distinctly different to what I was actually saying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 054123 said:

Sky created the problem that it now professes to solve, in respect of spiralling costs in the game.

I think the Bosman ruling created the spiralling wage demands and sky money enabled clubs to meet those demands.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 054123 said:

I think that’s fair enough.

I just don’t really think Sky has been an overall positive experience. 

The prem should have realised years ago that it held the cards, rather like the NFL have done so well in the states.

Sky exploited a weak league and created the problems it promised to solve.

I’d argue that Sky saw an opportunity to make money by buying up the tv rights and they’ve e done a terrific job imv. 

What problems have they caused that they promised to solve?     :dunno:

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Absolutely - it’s around a 4.5 hour drive from Norwich and in dreadful weather. A very impressive following given the match was live on Sky.

Doesn’t exactly support the argument that Sky is ruining football.

Sorry Robbo, but I believe they would have been close to filling the away end for a 3pm non-televised game. They have always travelled in numbers and especially when they are going well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Neo said:

I think the Bosman ruling created the spiralling wage demands and sky money enabled clubs to meet those demands.

Interesting take on it. I could exchange the word enabled for fuelled.

Players can ‘demand’ all they want. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...