The people who go to the games.
The 3pm U.K. Blackout
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
Yeah some of the rationale for the Black-out seems a bit of a stretch.
I think at this stage it's been around so long that people are understandably afraid to imagine English football without it.
The issue is that maintaining the status quo is simply kicking the can further down the road. As the younger, more tech-savvy generation grow up, the number of fans that find streaming to be "too much hassle" is going to rapidly dwindle. You're only going to get less and less casual fans watching local games in the future, regardless of what happens with the blackout rule, to the point that I feel a critical point is inevitable anyway. Makes more sense to start thinking of solutions ahead of time rather than pretending this is sustainable. Especially considering this situation involves a whole load of untapped revenue that could then be filtered back down to the local leagues. The validity of the case for casual fans being essential isn't important. If they aren't, we need an alternative solution right now and if they are, we'll need an alternative solution pretty soon anyway.
I'd be interested in a poll. "If your club's match isn't broadcasted on national TV, do you attend your local club's match instead?" With "always/most times", "sometimes (50-30%)", and "rarely/never" or something along those lines as options.
I'd be interested in a poll. "If your club's match isn't broadcasted on national TV, do you attend your local club's match instead?" With "always/most times", "sometimes (50-30%)", and "rarely/never" or something along those lines as options.
Are there statistics that support any of the arguments?
Where is the evidence for younger people “consuming” less football? Average attendances have only gone up over time almost across the board, even when compared to the last few decades of non all-seaters.
Not really. He's explaining that other countries don't do a TV black-out since they ensure match start times across leagues don't clash. The equivalent solution in England would be to ensure no PL matches are played during the time of the black-out (Saturdays, 2:45 - 5:15 pm).
As long as PL matches continue to be played during that timeslot, the financial evidence provided in the twitter thread and in the article referenced by @Gio suggest that removing the black-out is indeed likely to have a ruinous effect on lower league clubs in the long term.
In this thread, @Gio referenced a research articles looking at lower league matches clashing with CL ties:
And there's some evidence in this Twitter thread as well (I recommend reading it in full, very insightful on a number of related matters):
Why? We have so few 3pm kick offs these days it would surely be something people complained about because they thought they ought to rather than actually being inconvenienced by it.
So presumably the same argument against lifting the 3pm blackout is supportive of banning CL games on the telly? Or indeed any football broadcast at a time that could impact on lower league attendance?
I don’t see why impacting on attendances at 3pm on Saturday is something we need the law to step in to prevent but impacting on attendances for midweek games because we want to sit at home and watch PSG vs Barcelona is something we’re all fine with.
As above I think this falls into the category of something people support because they think they ought to.
If the impact on lower league attendance is the concern then anyone who has ever watched a televised game that’s being broadcast at the same time as fixtures from lower down the football pyramid are being played - who also supports the 3pm blackout - is surely a massive hypocrite?
Last edited:
I imagine it's a cultural thing. I have no idea about the actual numbers, but there may well be more pure economic gain from allowing 3pm game broadcasts. As shown by that article and Twitter thread though, doing so would likely set in motion a domino that would seriously change English lower-tier football, and the entirety of the historical traditions and social dynamics surrounding that.
If those traditions and social dynasmic are considered valuable in and of themselves (moreso than, say, the quality of the football involved or the integrity of the full football pyramid), then surely safeguarding that against uncertainty is worth more than the small inconvenience of the blackout. (I mean, people are missing out on watching a football match on TV. It's no fun I suppose, but it doesn't quite chip away at any aspect of English society.)
This is the excellent twitter thread by @DaleJohnsonESPN mentioned above and basically shows why English football is unique and answers the arguments made for getting rid of the black out......
There's a lot of misinformation out there about the 3pm Saturday TV blackout, so a detailed thread on: - Why it exists - Why other top leagues don't use the blackout - What about illegal streaming / ifollow? - Is it past its sell-by in modern football?
Article 48 of the UEFA Statutes allows any association to decide on 2.5 hours on a Saturday or Sunday, during which any transmission of football may be prohibited within the territory. England (and Scotland) applies this as 2.45pm to 5.15pm on a Saturday.
This isn't done in England (and Scotland) to protect the attendances at top-flight matches, but throughout the football pyramid. England has the deepest pyramid, in terms of attendances, and no other league has such a traditional and sacrosanct time for football for ALL games.
No one seriously expects a season ticket holder at Rochdale or Torquay to stop going because you can watch Man United or Arsenal at 3pm on a Saturday. It's thousands of walk-up, casual fans who keep the turnstiles ticking with new cash.
Remember, season ticket holders pay their money in the summer, there's no residual turnstile spend from them. It's the casual fans who pay their £10-25 on the turnstile, plus other spends, which helps to keep these clubs running. And it's the away fans who travel in numbers.
It's also not about 1 game, or 1 weekend. It's about habit-forming, it's about behavioural patterns. It's about how removing the blackout could, in the long-term, have an irreversible effect on parts of the pyramid. That's the general ethos of the blackout.
On a freezing cold winter's Saturday at 3pm would these floating fans, or away fans, decide to sit at home and watch Man United/Arsenal/Chelsea on the sofa rather than go to the match? Or would they not leave the prematch pub (to pay on gate) if PL is on the big screen?
The answer is, no one knows. But if the fears are right, and live 3pm football is damaging, it will never be rolled back. And the attendance fall might not be significant on one Saturday, but across perhaps 13 Saturdays the funding gap could be marked.
Clubs rely on the Saturday 3pm income as their lifeblood. Midweek gates have always been lower for many reasons, and the EFL's decision to allow red button / ifollow streaming of these matches has hit them even harder. So Saturdays are the money-spinner for all clubs.
Onto the stuff you won't read about: Why the blackout isn't in other top leagues. The key example always used is Germany, and how attendances aren't affected by all Bundesliga games being live on TV at 3.30pm on a Saturday. Simple fact: No one goes up against the Bundesliga.
In Germany, the 2. Bundesliga has its own kickoff slot at 1.30pm on Saturday, when no Bundesliga games are played. 3. Liga is at 2pm on a Saturday, slight overlap with the Bundesliga (3.30pm KO). And the 6 4th-tier regional leagues all avoid direct clashed with the Bundesliga.
In fact, no other top league even qualifies for a blackout. 50% of top 2 divisions must be at same time. England - 3pm Sat - 73% Germany - 3.30pm Sat - 28% (all Bund) France - 3pm Sun - 20% (all Ligue 1) Italy - 3pm Sun - 15% (all Serie A) Spain - no simultaneous LaLiga games
In France, Ligue 2 plays Saturday 7pm when no Ligue 1 games are on. In Italy, Serie B games are played at 2pm on a Saturday (though only a few), which may overlap with a minor Serie A game (3pm). In Spain, games in La Liga and LaLiga are generally spread with no "clustering".
English football just isn't like any other country. Other major leagues have a blackout in another form, by spreading their fixtures to avoid clustering; either giving second tiers their own slot or having a set top-flight fixture time. This would be a hard-sell in England.
English football, of course, goes far deeper than the Championship. The 3pm Saturday kickoff goes right through the pyramid. All the way. It just doesn't exist elsewhere. For example, attendances in League 1 are 42% higher than German 3. Liga - next highest-supported country.
Best I correct the League One vs. German 3. Liga attendance difference stat. It was badly skewed by closed German grounds vs. curtailed League One. 2016-17: 32.86% higher gates in League One 2017-18: 26.27% 2018-19: 7.53%
Lots of people say "everyone knows where an illegal stream is," but that's not really true. Of course, many do, but it's really not an en masse situation. If you think most people (not on Twitter) will know where to find Man Utd v Newcastle on Saturday, you'd be mistaken.
Most using "illegal streams" every Saturday are unlikely to be going to other games, you'd have to think. You probably won't transfer these people from "illegal streams" to pay-for TV. These fans have never been what the blackout is about.
But if you remove the blackout and enable live 3pm matches, you open up the TV option to all the people who watch legally on TV subscriptions, who watch in pubs, who watch round their mates' house. This is the audience that the blackout targets.
The funding EFL clubs get from ifollow is also a fraction of that earned from gates. No doubt some of the biggest clubs in the lower leagues would make additional money off increased ifollow vs. match attendance, but for most clubs lost gate receipts would reduce income.
The smaller clubs get a terrible deal from ifollow, it's hugely weighted in favour of the bigger clubs - especially those with large away followings. Home clubs get 95% of away match ticket sales. But away clubs keep additional ifollow revenue, it's a poor deal for small clubs.
Is the blackout even necessary? All the attention is on Man United v Newcastle and Cristiano Ronaldo's return, while Leicester v Man City is incredibly also at 3pm this Saturday. Of the 7 rounds so far announced, only Oct 23 doesn't feature a "Big Six" team.
In 3 of the 7 rounds, there are 3 Saturday 3pm games featuring one of the "Big Six". The idea that Saturday 3pm is now made up of the so-called smaller teams isn't really true - but remember removing the blackout would enable the live broadcast of other leagues too.
The question for the anti-blackout brigade: if it's so needless, why do the other major leagues create a situation whereby the top division doesn't go up against the rest? Be that by a designated kickoff time for the top division, or spreading all games, it's avoided.
For the Premier League to follow the rest of Europe, and drop the blackout, you would need to have: - No Premier League games at 3pm on a Saturday, or - 10 individual kick-off times (only one at 3pm Sat) Is this acceptable to your match-going Premier League fan? I doubt it.
Also worth pointing out that a lot of season ticket holders/fans of PL clubs watch their smaller local team, when the PL team are away. If the blackout goes, and their PL away games are on TV at 3pm on a Saturday, this has to affect attendances at those local clubs.
An additional point on ifollow and lost income. For example: You have a group of say 4 friends who would go, and pay £20 a ticket plus a pint each. They decide to watch on ifollow. They don't buy 4 ifollow passes. They buy 1. Income of £100 for that club becomes £6.66.
There's a lot of misinformation out there about the 3pm Saturday TV blackout, so a detailed thread on: - Why it exists - Why other top leagues don't use the blackout - What about illegal streaming / ifollow? - Is it past its sell-by in modern football?
Article 48 of the UEFA Statutes allows any association to decide on 2.5 hours on a Saturday or Sunday, during which any transmission of football may be prohibited within the territory. England (and Scotland) applies this as 2.45pm to 5.15pm on a Saturday.
This isn't done in England (and Scotland) to protect the attendances at top-flight matches, but throughout the football pyramid. England has the deepest pyramid, in terms of attendances, and no other league has such a traditional and sacrosanct time for football for ALL games.
No one seriously expects a season ticket holder at Rochdale or Torquay to stop going because you can watch Man United or Arsenal at 3pm on a Saturday. It's thousands of walk-up, casual fans who keep the turnstiles ticking with new cash.
Remember, season ticket holders pay their money in the summer, there's no residual turnstile spend from them. It's the casual fans who pay their £10-25 on the turnstile, plus other spends, which helps to keep these clubs running. And it's the away fans who travel in numbers.
It's also not about 1 game, or 1 weekend. It's about habit-forming, it's about behavioural patterns. It's about how removing the blackout could, in the long-term, have an irreversible effect on parts of the pyramid. That's the general ethos of the blackout.
On a freezing cold winter's Saturday at 3pm would these floating fans, or away fans, decide to sit at home and watch Man United/Arsenal/Chelsea on the sofa rather than go to the match? Or would they not leave the prematch pub (to pay on gate) if PL is on the big screen?
The answer is, no one knows. But if the fears are right, and live 3pm football is damaging, it will never be rolled back. And the attendance fall might not be significant on one Saturday, but across perhaps 13 Saturdays the funding gap could be marked.
Clubs rely on the Saturday 3pm income as their lifeblood. Midweek gates have always been lower for many reasons, and the EFL's decision to allow red button / ifollow streaming of these matches has hit them even harder. So Saturdays are the money-spinner for all clubs.
Onto the stuff you won't read about: Why the blackout isn't in other top leagues. The key example always used is Germany, and how attendances aren't affected by all Bundesliga games being live on TV at 3.30pm on a Saturday. Simple fact: No one goes up against the Bundesliga.
In Germany, the 2. Bundesliga has its own kickoff slot at 1.30pm on Saturday, when no Bundesliga games are played. 3. Liga is at 2pm on a Saturday, slight overlap with the Bundesliga (3.30pm KO). And the 6 4th-tier regional leagues all avoid direct clashed with the Bundesliga.
In fact, no other top league even qualifies for a blackout. 50% of top 2 divisions must be at same time. England - 3pm Sat - 73% Germany - 3.30pm Sat - 28% (all Bund) France - 3pm Sun - 20% (all Ligue 1) Italy - 3pm Sun - 15% (all Serie A) Spain - no simultaneous LaLiga games
In France, Ligue 2 plays Saturday 7pm when no Ligue 1 games are on. In Italy, Serie B games are played at 2pm on a Saturday (though only a few), which may overlap with a minor Serie A game (3pm). In Spain, games in La Liga and LaLiga are generally spread with no "clustering".
English football just isn't like any other country. Other major leagues have a blackout in another form, by spreading their fixtures to avoid clustering; either giving second tiers their own slot or having a set top-flight fixture time. This would be a hard-sell in England.
English football, of course, goes far deeper than the Championship. The 3pm Saturday kickoff goes right through the pyramid. All the way. It just doesn't exist elsewhere. For example, attendances in League 1 are 42% higher than German 3. Liga - next highest-supported country.
Best I correct the League One vs. German 3. Liga attendance difference stat. It was badly skewed by closed German grounds vs. curtailed League One. 2016-17: 32.86% higher gates in League One 2017-18: 26.27% 2018-19: 7.53%
Lots of people say "everyone knows where an illegal stream is," but that's not really true. Of course, many do, but it's really not an en masse situation. If you think most people (not on Twitter) will know where to find Man Utd v Newcastle on Saturday, you'd be mistaken.
Most using "illegal streams" every Saturday are unlikely to be going to other games, you'd have to think. You probably won't transfer these people from "illegal streams" to pay-for TV. These fans have never been what the blackout is about.
But if you remove the blackout and enable live 3pm matches, you open up the TV option to all the people who watch legally on TV subscriptions, who watch in pubs, who watch round their mates' house. This is the audience that the blackout targets.
The funding EFL clubs get from ifollow is also a fraction of that earned from gates. No doubt some of the biggest clubs in the lower leagues would make additional money off increased ifollow vs. match attendance, but for most clubs lost gate receipts would reduce income.
The smaller clubs get a terrible deal from ifollow, it's hugely weighted in favour of the bigger clubs - especially those with large away followings. Home clubs get 95% of away match ticket sales. But away clubs keep additional ifollow revenue, it's a poor deal for small clubs.
Is the blackout even necessary? All the attention is on Man United v Newcastle and Cristiano Ronaldo's return, while Leicester v Man City is incredibly also at 3pm this Saturday. Of the 7 rounds so far announced, only Oct 23 doesn't feature a "Big Six" team.
In 3 of the 7 rounds, there are 3 Saturday 3pm games featuring one of the "Big Six". The idea that Saturday 3pm is now made up of the so-called smaller teams isn't really true - but remember removing the blackout would enable the live broadcast of other leagues too.
The question for the anti-blackout brigade: if it's so needless, why do the other major leagues create a situation whereby the top division doesn't go up against the rest? Be that by a designated kickoff time for the top division, or spreading all games, it's avoided.
For the Premier League to follow the rest of Europe, and drop the blackout, you would need to have: - No Premier League games at 3pm on a Saturday, or - 10 individual kick-off times (only one at 3pm Sat) Is this acceptable to your match-going Premier League fan? I doubt it.
Also worth pointing out that a lot of season ticket holders/fans of PL clubs watch their smaller local team, when the PL team are away. If the blackout goes, and their PL away games are on TV at 3pm on a Saturday, this has to affect attendances at those local clubs.
An additional point on ifollow and lost income. For example: You have a group of say 4 friends who would go, and pay £20 a ticket plus a pint each. They decide to watch on ifollow. They don't buy 4 ifollow passes. They buy 1. Income of £100 for that club becomes £6.66.
TLDR, if they remove the 3pm blackout, lower leagues will suffer because many fans would prefer to stay home and watch PL.
The problem with streams is the toothpaste can’t be back in the bottle. Whilst it’s true not everyone access streams, more and more people are. Once someone has a steady stream on tap with, all games available, for a fraction of the price they’re not going to be easy to win back.
Even if they began to offer all of the games the price mark they would do it at would be many multiples of the cost of VPN + steam.
All games through the method of streaming that someone has been using for a while for £17 a month or the same number of games though official partners for (likely) circa £80+.
It’s a very dangerous game which will increasingly undermine the value of future bidding rounds of current restrictions are in place.
Also dont quite understand how they navigate this issue elsewhere with staggered match times but England is so “unique” that this can’t happen here. Would the Queen combust if they announced PL matches would not be played between 3-5:20 on Saturdays?
The primary reason this is still in place is because to date in recent years it has suited the league as it provides an excuse to restrict supply of games resulting in an artificially high demand (£) for the ‘product’ from domestic broadcasters. BeIn Sport or DAZN would likely have very little interest in showing one in seven United games in the same way BT Sport do and would pay nowhere near the same if that’s all that was on offer. The second it loses its use in this sense is the second it goes or a way around it is found.
If next time the bidders for the rights domestically say they’re not interested unless they can have all the games do we really think the reply is “gosh, but English football is so unique….”? The rule would be gone or kick off times permanently amended as to render it redundant, faster that you could blink
Even if they began to offer all of the games the price mark they would do it at would be many multiples of the cost of VPN + steam.
All games through the method of streaming that someone has been using for a while for £17 a month or the same number of games though official partners for (likely) circa £80+.
It’s a very dangerous game which will increasingly undermine the value of future bidding rounds of current restrictions are in place.
Also dont quite understand how they navigate this issue elsewhere with staggered match times but England is so “unique” that this can’t happen here. Would the Queen combust if they announced PL matches would not be played between 3-5:20 on Saturdays?
The primary reason this is still in place is because to date in recent years it has suited the league as it provides an excuse to restrict supply of games resulting in an artificially high demand (£) for the ‘product’ from domestic broadcasters. BeIn Sport or DAZN would likely have very little interest in showing one in seven United games in the same way BT Sport do and would pay nowhere near the same if that’s all that was on offer. The second it loses its use in this sense is the second it goes or a way around it is found.
If next time the bidders for the rights domestically say they’re not interested unless they can have all the games do we really think the reply is “gosh, but English football is so unique….”? The rule would be gone or kick off times permanently amended as to render it redundant, faster that you could blink
Last edited:
Thanks.
Bad time for Navi to retire 
They ought to trial it in the PL. Have one season where all games are shown. The extra money that Sky/BT/Amazon pay for these games can be given to the lower league clubs who would expect to lose gate money due to fans staying at home.
I still think a netflix style, in house PL streaming service which offers every PL game (plus old PL highlights) would be the way to go. Charge £10 a month and you'd blow the existing TV deals out of the water.
I still think a netflix style, in house PL streaming service which offers every PL game (plus old PL highlights) would be the way to go. Charge £10 a month and you'd blow the existing TV deals out of the water.
You see I just can’t agree. CL viewing figures are free falling in England and across the board in Europe hence the revamp in a few years. To blame that on lower league fans staying home is a bit of a stretch. Surely the simplistic answer is that it’s midweek and it’s easier to get to games at the weekend
If they were allowed to broadcast every PL game it would cost ten times that.
You'd be looking at £10 per game and the people would still illegally stream them, exactly as they do now.
If you offer people the chance, some of them will take it. The problem with Rivers is that you end up having to change it 4 or 5 times, if you've got the money you'll end up just paying especially if you can get a good bundle deal.
I'd say 30% of people would choose to pay and 20% will pay if they have no other choice.
Probably, as greed would come into it. But my point was they could charge people £10 a month and still make more than they're currently doing, because of the uptake in subscriptions that they'd get. I'd say people would happily go to £20 a month too. As a lot of people would then be able to get rid of sky sports and BT sport.
It doesn't seem like it'll happen though, or it would've done already I suspect.
Spotify proved that people will pay a reasonable price for media and Netflix reinforced it. And now there are 100 different streaming services all wanting your money and piracy is back on the rise, it's proven that if it gets too expensive or too complex, people will go back to illegal streaming.
Back of fag packet maths says the PL global rights are worth 9.2 billion over 3 years, so 3 billion a year split between a tenner a month means they need 25 million people to sign up. Globally. That's really not that many.
They just need somebody with the vision to do it.
I'd happily pay £40 a month for PL games if it meant I could get rid of Sky/BT (the only reason I have them is for the footy).
As you say, greed would come into it of course, it's at the heart of top level English football.
That too. But we also have to look at why fans support lower league clubs. That support might have been generated as a kid when, rather than sit in and watch a PL game at 3pm on a Saturday afternoon, they've gone and attended a local team. Or a parent, rather than watch the 3pm game, has gone and brought their child along with them. And loyalty to that club starts to get built and is sometimes retained over a lifetime. There would be different short and long term impacts arising from removing the blackout in my view.
How does that make people massive hypocrites?
You can support something being a law without doing it yourself. I don't smoke, drink alcohol or do drugs but am on board with keeping the first two legal and legalising the latter. I am hugely pro choice but would be incredibly torn about the decision on a personal level.
I also am personally uninterested in watching lower league football but have friends/colleagues who support premier league clubs who do like going to their local clubs if they can't watch the game on TV. More as a social event than anything else.
Is this insulting those clubs fans and suggesting they're not 'hardcore'? Nope. That's a different section of fan. Ultimately though, if they've all paid 10 quid at the turnstiles and bought a drink and a burger, their money is worth exactly the same to the club.
Let people decide for themselves...
If I want to sit home and watch something I should be able to.
Would I rather go and watch Shrewsbury then I can go and do that.
What an utterly stupid rule. People should have a free choice
If I want to sit home and watch something I should be able to.
Would I rather go and watch Shrewsbury then I can go and do that.
What an utterly stupid rule. People should have a free choice
What do you mean? Nobody is saying that falling CL figures in the UK are due to lowe league football, they're saying the opposite. That lower league figures go down when nearby English teams are playing in the CL.
I don't know what TV viewing figures are like in the rest of Europe but they've surely fallen in the UK since BT bought ITV's rights? It was much easier for 'normal' people to watch CL when at least some of the matches were being shown on terrestrial TV. Now you need an often pretty expensive subscription to watch even some games.
Of course, the Man Utd fan who cares enough about their team to sign up to a forum to talk about it will likely just stream it anyway, if they didn't already have BT/Sky. But it totally discourages the casual viewer from watching.
What I’m saying is the falling numbers for CL doesn’t reflect the argument that it attracts all these lower league fans. 3pm aren’t even CL calibre games, it’s more EL on a Thursday night competition.
But the reason that top matches aren't played at 3pm is because they can't be televised. If you remove that rule, there's no reason why United v Liverpool wouldn't be played at 3pm on a Saturday.
Are you talking attendance figures or TV figures? Do you have a source for the falling numbers for CL?
Going back to the 3pm, they don't have to be CL or EL calibre games. @duffer has already spoken of what he and his dad do if they can't watch a Chelsea match sometimes but the reality is most Chelsea fans would rather watch even the shittest Chelsea match on TV if it was available to them rather than going to their local club if the options were available to them. Same for other fans.
It’s not prime time, doesn’t suit foreign tv audiences and a lot of their fanbase would be away watching their own teams
Does everything on here eventually have to end up as some subtle (or not so subtle) dig at England/The UK?
Its something England does differently. Just like Spain allows their youth teams to play in professional leagues against actual proper clubs. Doesn't mean one is right or wrong. They're just different. And that's OK.
Because if you asked match going fans their preferred kick off time the majority would say 3pm on a Saturday.
As for the bolded part. I feel that’s something that could be said about the argument for listing the blackout. Especially when your argument is how easy it is to stream.
But 2 o’clock or 4.30 on a Sunday is and does?
Good news today.
Looks like Canal+ Sport in France have change the match they were going to broadcast live at 3pm UK time this coming Saturday.
Leicester V Man City has been replaced by the United Newcastle match.
RESULT!
Looks like Canal+ Sport in France have change the match they were going to broadcast live at 3pm UK time this coming Saturday.
Leicester V Man City has been replaced by the United Newcastle match.
RESULT!
I'm not sure what you're arguing against here. @Gio quoted that one research article (link again), since it's the one study available. In case it helps, this is its abstract:
The suggestion, then, is that televised 3pm Saturday PL matches might have a similar effect on gate revenue for lower league clubs. I suppose you are saying that the effect would be less, as some of those 3pm matches don't involve top clubs or are otherwise not that interesting?
A nothing reply. Brilliant.
Massive assumption.
If you genuinely believe that the football pyramid is only propped up by a 3pm ban then you're just one of those people who panic at anything. Sky was going to destroy football as well, plenty of people lost their shit over the Premier League.
Going to a match is a completely different experience. I grew up going to non league football and yes, people were still there on a Tuesday night in the pissing rain when the Champions League was on. A season ticket holder who goes to the football with all their mates won't suddenly decide that watching Man United Newcastle is better use of their Saturday than going to ground, watching live, spending time before and after with their mates etc.
Why? Because people care more about their football club than the big ones. Christ, I used to go to Chelsea reserve games because Aldershot was their home stadium and you got good attendances for those which were all evening mod week games when far better football was on TV.
Care to provide any data, evidence or analysis for the bold assertion about what future generations would do? Sounds to me like you're just making it up.
Brilliant.
It continues to exist because it suits the economic narrative of the Premier League to restrict supply in order to artificially increase the value of the rights. The second that stops being the case will be the second it goes.
If tomorrow Amazon pledged to double the current value of the rights in return for 380 live games the 3pm ban will be out the door without touching the sides
If tomorrow Amazon pledged to double the current value of the rights in return for 380 live games the 3pm ban will be out the door without touching the sides
Mental situation. Ronnie is home and I will have to look elsewhere for a stream and from what I understand, it is not illegal to view just to host. Can someone correct me on this if I'm wrong please. If it is definitely illegal then I won't be doing it, I will wait for MOTD. It's mad though because if I do, I will have to pay a Canadian streaming company and a VPN. Pretty sure I won't be the only one that is forced to do this and pretty sure none of that money will go to grass roots English clubs.
Just get a stream from Reddit like everyone else does most weeks.