England On Tv?

[tinman-is-god]

Your point? Almost everything that is wrong with our country emanates directly from the The Sun newspaper.

Market leader in what sense? It certainly isn't based on number of people watching their channels. They get pathetic viewing figures.

The Premier League is partly responsible for the decline in English football at every level. The England team is worse; Sunday League football struggles to get officials because players and parents think "having a go" at the officials is the norm i.e.they react like Premier League footballers.

PS Also, stop taking the Sky propaganda. The Premier League simply doesn't have the "biggest stars". They all play in Spain.

He has a monopoly on England away games. I have no where else to go (legally) to watch England. You'd think an astute business man would appreciate some competition...

Being "an incredible astute and in touch businessman" doesn't mean he isn't a "Distorter of society, money grabbing, greedy peice of 5h1t". In my experience, on the whole, they are one and the same.

I would say market leader because Sky subscriptions can be found in over 9m homes - http://www.satbuy.co.uk/Market_Share_Latest_Subscriber_Figures_Sky_Virgin_BT_Vision - and is clearly a fantastic product, hence why it is so successful. Not quite sure what viewing figures are, but if its in that many front rooms, and people pay for it, I presume they watch it too.

I would agree that the Premier League has had a negative effect on one part of football - the national team - but I'd say its had a broadly positive effect all round. Personally I couldn't care less about England and would far rather we had one of the top leagues in the world than a good national side, and the emphasis of a league should not be to produce a good national side, look at how that approach has served Scotland. Also, remember when we had the foreigners ruling for European competitions in the 90s? That hardly produced a great England side...

The Premier League was by far and away the biggest representative at the World Cup and though Madrid and Barca have many, many stars, so do we, with the top six (inc. Man City and Spurs) boasting fantastic squads.

I would agree with you that petulance and dissent has risen, and this is a negative. Kids do copy Rooney etc and their conduct isn't particularly responsible at times but I would still have the Premier League of today rather than that of 10 years ago - and thats what it comes down to for me, the quality of football is now sublime - and the money is inextricably linked to the improvement in play.

[CliftonCliff]

Typical of the hypocrisy and the way the tabloids and press work in this country, is the whole Rooney affair. The Notw paper is full of Tit's and Ass and adverts for Porn etc...it thrives on that kind of stuff. Yet they decide to bring the 'Rooney' story out, during the middle of an important International campaign. Do you not think, they knew of this 'Scandal' before? They have decided when to bring out this Story. They know it will make the biggest news and disruption at this very time. In fact, they want England to fail. They actually want it. Bad news sells more papers. They have no interest in the welfare of this country, it's wellbeing or happiness. These Editors and Journalists and media owners are scum, who just want to line their own pockets.

I'm glad you made this point, Spud. Bang on. My first thought when the story broke was "Oh thanks very much, tabloids. That helps the England team no end." It instantly struck me that the timing was very fishy and that if they had the interests of the national team at heart at all they'd at least have held it for 24 hours or so. They get more newspaper sales out of mocking the team and the manager than out of straight, responsible football reporting. The only thing I'd feel compelled to add to your post would be to pose the question of what this says about the readership. People buy this rag in their thousands, which is depressing.

At least one good thing emerged. If they were trying to undermine the manager, the side in general and Rooney in particular, it didn't work. Rooney put in a bloody good shift, which took some bottle in the circumstances. Fair play to him and the team for a good performance in what could have been a very tricky fixture.

[Will Rollason]

S W P My god he is priceless, How did he become a professional footballer?, Why does Crapello pick him?.

Yeah, watch a few replays of him trying to square a ball to Bent after they beat the offside trap late on. Didnt matter i know but............ truly for a professional footballer not to be able to square a ball 15yds to an unmarked team mate beggars belief.

Also was it me or was Barry's only contribution fouling people unnecessarily and giving the ball away before struggling to get back?

[CliftonCliff]

Yeah, watch a few replays of him trying to square a ball to Bent after they beat the offside trap late on. Didnt matter i know but............ truly for a professional footballer not to be able to square a ball 15yds to an unmarked team mate beggars belief.

Also was it me or was Barry's only contribution fouling people unnecessarily and giving the ball away before struggling to get back?

SWP's selection continues to puzzle me, too. On last night's showing, of the players who can play wide, Milner and Johnson look to me to be well ahead of the rest. (I do like Walcot, not least because exceptional pace is always a valuable asset at any level of the game, but the poster whe said that Johnson is smarter in his use of the ball is right: he looks an intelligent player). That would put Walcot third in line and SWP who knows where. The incident you refer to was an absolute shocker for a supposedly international class footballer. Certain goal-scoring opportunity wasted and in a tighter game it would have cost us. I'd almost rather have old man Beckham out there: at least he'd have delivered the ball to within about half an inch of Bent's right boot.

[Pezo]

Typical of the hypocrisy and the way the tabloids and press work in this country, is the whole Rooney affair. The Notw paper is full of Tit's and Ass and adverts for Porn etc...it thrives on that kind of stuff. Yet they decide to bring the 'Rooney' story out, during the middle of an important International campaign. Do you not think, they knew of this 'Scandal' before? They have decided when to bring out this Story. They know it will make the biggest news and disruption at this very time. In fact, they want England to fail. They actually want it. Bad news sells more papers. They have no interest in the welfare of this country, it's wellbeing or happiness. These Editors and Journalists and media owners are scum, who just want to line their own pockets.

How utterly disgraceful but so so true, all the papers have done it for years. They get a story and sometimes sit on it for years to wait for the perfect moment to release it, there's usually a little "political blackmail" along the way as well - they are not interested in releasing news and informing the public, they are interested in selling papers and lining there pockets - papers sell for scandal so they hype up scandal as much as possible. I know she is mega hot but if anyone can honestly tell me Cheryl Cole wasn't artificiality built up by the papers in the run up to her spat with Cashley then you quite clearly can see the forest for the trees.

[Roger Red Hat]

Carl Fogarty (of Superbike fame) did a hell of a lot to bring back our love of the George Cross in the 90s.

He refused to use the Union Flag.

Never heard of him.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

How utterly disgraceful but so so true, all the papers have done it for years. They get a story and sometimes sit on it for years to wait for the perfect moment to release it, there's usually a little "political blackmail" along the way as well - they are not interested in releasing news and informing the public, they are interested in selling papers and lining there pockets - papers sell for scandal so they hype up scandal as much as possible. I know she is mega hot but if anyone can honestly tell me Cheryl Cole wasn't artificiality built up by the papers in the run up to her spat with Cashley then you quite clearly can see the forest for the trees.

I think you will find that the real person too blame is the one and only Max Clifford, I would suggest that the timing is all of his making, He has almost certainly been auctioning this story to the highest bidder for a while and had the dear old NOTW not taken it another paper would have.

Blaming the press is another cop out for the overpaid, pampered pussies who really believe that money is a get of jail card for any offence, misdemeanour or indiscretion. I know that poor little Wayne is'nt the sharpest tool in the box, But having been caught out once for knobbing grannies, You might think that even he might think twice about shagging prostitutes ( the clue is in the name here) basically a woman who will do anything for money and I don't mind betting that when she arrived in lil' Waynes hotel room that night her first thought was 'pension fund', After all Wayne is quite recognisable and that's the point here, The giant sized ego's of these chavs who really really believe that even the smallest indiscretion won't eventually leak out is beyond belief.

What I do agree with is private life is private life, However not if you are an A, B, C or even a Z list so called celeb, That is the price you pay for the mega riches you get paid and as long as you have TV and celeb magazines willing to print 'Coleen my Wayner agony' next week and pay her even more money, **** em all.

By the way, I never read or never would read any of these salacious stories, But you can't miss the headlines.

[Red-Robbo]

I would say market leader because Sky subscriptions can be found in over 9m homes - http://www.satbuy.co...irgin_BT_Vision - and is clearly a fantastic product, hence why it is so successful. Not quite sure what viewing figures are, but if its in that many front rooms, and people pay for it, I presume they watch it too.

Successful because it concentrated on buying sports rights then blackmailing sports fans into paying £40 a month for stuff that used to be free to view. If the BBC, ITV and C4 never made any home grown programmes and relied on filling their schedules entirely with imported US cack (and losing the rest of their public service obligations) then they might have been able to fight off this very cynical market move. Of course, now Murdoch has claws in ITV as a major shareholder the idea that the free-to-air channels combine to fight the might of the Sky - they have a bigger budget almost than the next two biggest players - has been lost.

And while his papers lambast all manners of lumpen proleteriat 'scroungers' and 'skivers' it's important to realise that NewsCorp - the parent company of Murdoch's UK empire - uses every tax dodge possible to pay no UK tax at all.

If other people like paying for things that used to be free, then I think they are off the rocker. It'll be a cold day in hell when I get a Sky dish fitted.

To admire Murdoch because he 'took on the print unions' is a bit like saying Hitler was great because he made the trains run on time!

[Pezo]

I think you will find that the real person too blame is the one and only Max Clifford, I would suggest that the timing is all of his making, He has almost certainly been auctioning this story to the highest bidder for a while and had the dear old NOTW not taken it another paper would have.

Blaming the press is another cop out for the overpaid, pampered pussies who really believe that money is a get of jail card for any offence, misdemeanour or indiscretion. I know that poor little Wayne is'nt the sharpest tool in the box, But having been caught out once for knobbing grannies, You might think that even he might think twice about shagging prostitutes ( the clue is in the name here) basically a woman who will do anything for money and I don't mind betting that when she arrived in lil' Waynes hotel room that night her first thought was 'pension fund', After all Wayne is quite recognisable and that's the point here, The giant sized ego's of these chavs who really really believe that even the smallest indiscretion won't eventually leak out is beyond belief.

What I do agree with is private life is private life, However not if you are an A, B, C or even a Z list so called celeb, That is the price you pay for the mega riches you get paid and as long as you have TV and celeb magazines willing to print 'Coleen my Wayner agony' next week and pay her even more money, **** em all.

By the way, I never read or never would read any of these salacious stories, But you can't miss the headlines.

All true - they are all as bad as each other. My issue is that they portray this nonsense that they are there for the good of the people when all they are actually interested in is lining there own pockets. My other issue on the subject is people flaunting themselves to the press with no dignity or class in sight. so yes you have hit both the nails right on the head. Oh for the days when you have to have something special to be a role model.

[Red Ass]

Don't care to be honest, Sky is the best package around, so many HD Channels, Dolby Digital surround sound.

We love our Sky HD 1gb BOX £50 a month is nothing, I bet most of you pi55 that against the wall on a Saturday night?

[Esmond Million's Bung]

All true - they are all as bad as each other. My issue is that they portray this nonsense that they are there for the good of the people when all they are actually interested in is lining there own pockets. My other issue on the subject is people flaunting themselves to the press with no dignity or class in sight. so yes you have hit both the nails right on the head. Oh for the days when you have to have something special to be a role model.

The unfairness of this is the prostitute will make money out of this of course, But hey nothing compared what the media will pay Mrs Rooney to poor her poor scouse heart out.

[Pete1975Legend]

To be fair until Sky there wasn't much football on tv anyway. We should be grateful to have the choice.

Also fair play to sky for producing an outstanding programme whether it be football or cricket or darts or snooker. Sky know how to produce a program and at £1.50 a day you can't moan.

[bcfcbs20]

<br />Don't care to be honest, Sky is the best package around, so many HD Channels, Dolby Digital surround sound.<br /><br />We love our Sky HD 1gb BOX £50 a month is nothing, I bet most of you pi55 that against the wall on a Saturday night?

It is good value for what you get I got sky any room put in my bedroom a few weeks ago all I pay is £10 a month for every single channel

[tinman-is-god]

Successful because it concentrated on buying sports rights then blackmailing sports fans into paying £40 a month for stuff that used to be free to view. If the BBC, ITV and C4 never made any home grown programmes and relied on filling their schedules entirely with imported US cack (and losing the rest of their public service obligations) then they might have been able to fight off this very cynical market move. Of course, now Murdoch has claws in ITV as a major shareholder the idea that the free-to-air channels combine to fight the might of the Sky - they have a bigger budget almost than the next two biggest players - has been lost.

And while his papers lambast all manners of lumpen proleteriat 'scroungers' and 'skivers' it's important to realise that NewsCorp - the parent company of Murdoch's UK empire - uses every tax dodge possible to pay no UK tax at all.

If other people like paying for things that used to be free, then I think they are off the rocker. It'll be a cold day in hell when I get a Sky dish fitted.

To admire Murdoch because he 'took on the print unions' is a bit like saying Hitler was great because he made the trains run on time!

When were 92 live top flight games, as well as football league games, available free to air? Not pre-92 on ITV and BBC that's for sure! How does it 'blackmail' you into buying it? You buy it if you want to watch the games they offer, which were never on terrestrial TV in the first place. I pay £40 for phone, internet, and Sky with the Sports Package. If I had Virgin Media I'd be paying the same, so I think it is fair value for money.

The NOTW and The Sun are publications I would not purchase, but the people get what the people want - no one forces them to buy The Sun either. I don't admire him, personally, but I think it is hard to argue that Sky don't offer a great product at a fair price.

[Barrs Court Red]

Sky HD > Anything else

Love the comment about cricket - Ask the people in the game if they'd want to lose millions so people can watch a test match free.

[Red-Robbo]

When were 92 live top flight games, as well as football league games, available free to air? Not pre-92 on ITV and BBC that's for sure! How does it 'blackmail' you into buying it? You buy it if you want to watch the games they offer, which were never on terrestrial TV in the first place. I pay £40 for phone, internet, and Sky with the Sports Package. If I had Virgin Media I'd be paying the same, so I think it is fair value for money.

The NOTW and The Sun are publications I would not purchase, but the people get what the people want - no one forces them to buy The Sun either. I don't admire him, personally, but I think it is hard to argue that Sky don't offer a great product at a fair price.

England internationals (and test matches) were certainly all free-to-air.

And incidentally, I pay £25 for a Virgin package that includes phone, high-speed broadband and 200+ telly channels. Better deals are out there.

[RD1860]

Yeps and it annoys me more than I can take, its whored out to scum like Murdoch, our game OUR BIRTHRIGHT has been robbed.

Murdoch is responsible for most of the worlds problems, he's an evil petty criminal. Distorter of socelty, money grabbing, greedy peice of 5h1t, I wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire. Screw his money, it only goes on players wages and you pay for it via your £40 a month subscription. and most of the 5h1t on Sky is adverts, why are you paying to watch adverts? Are you crazy? Murdoch gets paid a fortune to boraodcast them, then gets paid another fortune from us to watch them...gotta hand it to the guy, he's got brains to pull that one off. he's mugging us off.

Football would still be football without that crook, so the players wouldn't be on £100k per week, well boo bloody hoo, guess we'll just have to put up with players doing it for the love of the game, not money. Thats a future I want to see.

[tinman-is-god]

England internationals (and test matches) were certainly all free-to-air.

And incidentally, I pay £25 for a Virgin package that includes phone, high-speed broadband and 200+ telly channels. Better deals are out there.

It isn't Sky that decide what is free-to-air, it is a panel of experts - http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/front_page/8358364.stm - if they decide that it is in the best interest of the sport to maximize funds then maybe that is the way forward - just look at the success of the cricket team and cricket in general since C4, C5 and Sky have had the rights. It is a case of balancing out the positive impact money has on the grassroots and the public interest - and I accept that some events should remain free-to-air, but it isn't Sky's fault if the panel decide to sell the rights of a sport to the highest bidder is it?

Also, take out Sky Sports from my package and mine would cost around the same amount. I'm guessing in that £25 you don't have the sports channels, hence why it is cheaper.

[CiderHider]

Quite agree Tinman.

Murdoch is not evil, he is just a very astute businessman and, as you say, you don't have to buy his products.

Don't forget this is the guy who cracked the London newsprint unions, who (at the time - mid 80's) were resisting change to newspaper production methods, they actually wanted to carry on manually setting individual metal type faces into frames to print the papers and half the payroll were doing nothing all day.

One of my heroes I am afraid Ciderhider, but I loved your several rants on this subject !

Hero?! Do you find yourself watching 007 films, cheering for the villans by chance?

No, he is evil and not only that, he's a bit of a genius too - a deadly combination if your also warmongering shit stirring *****.

I'm a big supporter of free media, and would not want it any other way, but FOX/Sky News are an utter disgrace to news broadcasting and journalism.

He's no philanthropis either, in it for the power, influence and money. Some say he gets a hard time becasue hes rich and famous, thats bullshit. I dont see haters around Stephen Hawking, or James Dyson for instance.

So we buy Sky becuase we have no alternative, he has us by the balls. If you want to watch Football your buggered, out of the loop without it. This is just wrong, its our game and belongs to us, why is it we have to pay this scumbag money to watch it?

British football is the best football in the world, we dont have shitbin Murdoch to thank, all Sky do is film it, its not hard pointing a camera at a pitch is it?. How are they all of a sudden sacred and guardians of British football? ..And all the money the Premier League brings in? dont make me laugh, 90% of it goes on players wages and gets pissed away, none gets filtered down to grass roots.

Anyways, Screw the Premier league, I can live without it, but my Country's team playing in a qually game is outrageous to be deprived of.

[Barrs Court Red]

Where where rants when Englang games were on Setanta?

[CotswoldRed]

Never heard of him.

A huge British following and watched annually by the largest gathering for a sporting event in the UK year after year.

Regularly over 120,000 at Brands Hatch to watch World Superbikes (yet hardly a mention inside these shores).

Not (then) on terrestrial TV but a huge profile among many, nonetheless.

[Red-Robbo]

It isn't Sky that decide what is free-to-air, it is a panel of experts - http://news.bbc.co.u...age/8358364.stm - if they decide that it is in the best interest of the sport to maximize funds then maybe that is the way forward - just look at the success of the cricket team and cricket in general since C4, C5 and Sky have had the rights. It is a case of balancing out the positive impact money has on the grassroots and the public interest - and I accept that some events should remain free-to-air, but it isn't Sky's fault if the panel decide to sell the rights of a sport to the highest bidder is it?

Innocent little James Murdoch - hardly his fault his company uses massive capital raised on the open market to outbid the BBC (which is forbidden by charter from doing so) for the rights to all sorts of lucrative sporting events

I think these so-called 'bodies of experts' may discover that limiting the viewing of various sports to 9m out of the UK's 32m households is not in the various sports' long-term interests. Boxing has found that to its cost. Followed by millions in the 60s and 70s when bouts appeared on BBC and ITV, an early adopter of the pay-TV concept and now you'd be hard-pressed to find many folk on the high street who could even name more than one non-retired British boxers. Even Frank Warren has acknowledged this has been a mistake and the sport is beginning a limited comeback on free-to-air.

Of course, most of these so-called experts won't be around to see interest in the sports they claim to represent decline - as long as Ashley Cole can afford his 9th Ferrari, eh?

The huge injecton of TV money into the Premier League (along with the invidious rise of agents) is one of the major factors that has warped it, distorted and weakened English football and warped the mentality of many who play the game.

[tinman-is-god]

Innocent little James Murdoch - hardly his fault his company uses massive capital raised on the open market to outbid the BBC (which is forbidden by charter from doing so) for the rights to all sorts of lucrative sporting events

I think these so-called 'bodies of experts' may discover that limiting the viewing of various sports to 9m out of the UK's 32m households is not in the various sports' long-term interests. Boxing has found that to its cost. Followed by millions in the 60s and 70s when bouts appeared on BBC and ITV, an early adopter of the pay-TV concept and now you'd be hard-pressed to find many folk on the high street who could even name more than one non-retired British boxers. Even Frank Warren has acknowledged this has been a mistake and the sport is beginning a limited comeback on free-to-air.

Of course, most of these so-called experts won't be around to see interest in the sports they claim to represent decline - as long as Ashley Cole can afford his 9th Ferrari, eh?

The huge injecton of TV money into the Premier League (along with the invidious rise of agents) is one of the major factors that has warped it, distorted and weakened English football and warped the mentality of many who play the game.

Without Sky, darts would have died a death by now, and the cricket money has been vital to the sport's progression and re-invention following the Twenty20 format.

The question you have to ask yourself is why do Sky have such buying power? Could it be as simple as the fact that they are good, offer a great product, people buy it, Sky's capital increases and they are thus a more powerful broadcaster? You can get Sky Sports on Virgin and BT Vision but Sky subscriptions are still rising - it's not because Murdoch is evil or twisted or has us 'over a barrel' it is simply that they offer by far and away the best product out there, hence it's success.

That body of experts know more about sport broadcasting than me, you or anyone else on this forum. I trust them to make fair decisions, and believe, on the whole they have. The whole concept that we should be able to watch everything for free, without paying, frustrates me. It ties into our culture of expecting something for nothing, and if that panel believe Cricket is better off with Sky money and investment then maybe it is. Don't you trust people like Angus Fraser to make the right decisions? I do.

[wayne allisons tongues]

Didn't the Sunday mirror run the same story Sunday as the notw and was it also because the injunction got overruled with the timing. Man utd allegedly knew about this for 6 months but tried to keep it quiet, isn't this the reason why Rooneys not been offered a contract yet by man utd and only has less than 2 years left and appears fergie maybe making him sweat on it.

[Roger Red Hat]

Didn't the Sunday mirror run the same story Sunday as the notw and was it also because the injunction got overruled with the timing. Man utd allegedly knew about this for 6 months but tried to keep it quiet, isn't this the reason why Rooneys not been offered a contract yet by man utd and only has less than 2 years left and appears fergie maybe making him sweat on it.

Rooney may well decide he's going to move abroad next summer as a way of avoiding the press intrusion into his private life, and who could blame him. Personally, I don't give a flying f..... what he gets up to or where he goes.

[CiderHider]

He's really not.

Sorry mate, but he is. OK, lets look at this...An example are the 50 or so insignificant no mark red necks from Florida who decided to burn the Koran on 911....Not a news story really, but now causing international outrage globally.

The first news of this was a local paper in Florida condemning it as dangerous, just 2 hours later....guess who jumps on it..FOX SCUM NEWS here is the link...

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/08/13/fla-pastor-defends-koran-burning-plan/

They almost encourage it, not one word of condemnation, just seeming support.. by the end of the day its all over every single FOX network in the USA and has filtered into the wider world, BBC everyone.

Now every single high ranking person in the world feels it necessary to come and condemn it, The Pope, Obama, Blair...FFS, is it just me who can see what a piece of shit striing plankton Murdoch and his agenda are?

He should be locked up and FOX and Sky should be taken off the Air. The Iraq invasion would not have happened if it was not for Murdoch, his sensationalism and agenda of bias reporting did it.

[Barrs Court Red]

Would you rather your news told people how to think?

[redcityman]

Without Sky, darts would have died a death by now, and the cricket money has been vital to the sport's progression and re-invention following the Twenty20 format.

The question you have to ask yourself is why do Sky have such buying power? Could it be as simple as the fact that they are good, offer a great product, people buy it, Sky's capital increases and they are thus a more powerful broadcaster? You can get Sky Sports on Virgin and BT Vision but Sky subscriptions are still rising - it's not because Murdoch is evil or twisted or has us 'over a barrel' it is simply that they offer by far and away the best product out there, hence it's success.

That body of experts know more about sport broadcasting than me, you or anyone else on this forum. I trust them to make fair decisions, and believe, on the whole they have. The whole concept that we should be able to watch everything for free, without paying, frustrates me. It ties into our culture of expecting something for nothing, and if that panel believe Cricket is better off with Sky money and investment then maybe it is. Don't you trust people like Angus Fraser to make the right decisions? I do.

Such a pity, IT'S NOT A SPORT, it's a game, like ludo, dominoes and the like, sports are about physical prowess and stamina, not really something you can say about darts is it!

[CiderHider]

Would you rather your news told people how to think?

Thats what Murdoch wants. Unfortunately people makes decision based on what they read in joke papers like the Scum, NOTW and all the dreadful shit that gets published in the States.

Americans are generally a stupid bunch and will believe anything you tell them especially if you say their security is at stake or something to that effect.

[Barrs Court Red]

No different to trash like the Mirror and the Morning Star.

If you want to watch something different from Sky, watch Russia today. Pravada lives. Now THATS something that has a display of unashamed bias.