Top clubs consider overseas games
by Rob Sallnow » Fri Feb 15, 2008 10:23 am
Sepp Blatter has said that it won't take place whilst he is in charge of FIFA.....resulting in the weird feeling that I want him gone yesterday but there for the rest of time!!!
-
Rob Sallnow - Posts: 33
- Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 8:29 pm
- Location: Devon
by 66-1112520797 » Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:51 am
JoeTerp wrote:NBA in Europe
5 reasons for the idea
Get it through your thick skull, this isnt America, this isnt the NBA, this is ENGLISH FOOTBALL.
If you like the whole idea I suggest you do one and watch your own sports then.
- 66-1112520797
by NANNY RED » Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:06 pm
Bl.oody hell Saint are you sure you not Rick Parry hes echoin the same thoughts that you said alot earlier in this thread about playing one team three times.
Cough Cough
Rick Parry: 39th game is a step too far
Feb 16 2008
RICK PARRY today described Premier League proposals for an international round of fixtures as “a step too far”.
Liverpool’s chief executive believes the plans, if introduced, would seriously damage the integrity of the competition and could even damage the reputation the Premier League has built up around the world.
The idea for a 39th league fixture has been given short shrift by fans’ groups who are concerned that the game is being taken away from them.
Now Parry has joined with team manager Rafa Benitez to throw more cold water on the plans, announced last week by Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore.
He said: “My biggest concern is for the integrity of the game but I think there are also several other concerns.
“Firstly, it could be illogical from the point of view of the fixture calendar with international games, cup competitions and replays to fit in, so to suggest adding another game – with extra travel – is strange.
“I think the integrity of the competition is a major issue. I simply cannot get my head around the idea of a situation in which you can play the same team three times in one season.
“You also have to bear in mind the popularity of the Premier League abroad. It is so popular because it is the Premier League in England and nowhere else.
“Whichever way I look at it I think it is a step too far.”
Parry raised such concerns at last week’s Premier League meeting and is now hoping common sense will prevail.
And he also dismissed suggestions that the idea had to be put forward because Liverpool and the other three members of the Big Four would have done it anyway.
“We certainly weren’t,” insisted Parry. “At the moment our biggest concern is building a new stadium and filling that. We certainly hadn’t considered that as a club.”
Benitez has already nailed his colours to the mast on this issue, telling reporters he quite simply does not like it.
He said: “To play another game in another country is not right for the competition.
“You must play here in England with the same opportunities for everyone.
“I’ve spoken with Rick Parry about it and we both think the idea is not the best.”
Parry added: “I have the same view as Rafa on this and our opinion is that the integrity of the competition is of the utmost importance.”
Cough Cough
Rick Parry: 39th game is a step too far
Feb 16 2008
RICK PARRY today described Premier League proposals for an international round of fixtures as “a step too far”.
Liverpool’s chief executive believes the plans, if introduced, would seriously damage the integrity of the competition and could even damage the reputation the Premier League has built up around the world.
The idea for a 39th league fixture has been given short shrift by fans’ groups who are concerned that the game is being taken away from them.
Now Parry has joined with team manager Rafa Benitez to throw more cold water on the plans, announced last week by Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore.
He said: “My biggest concern is for the integrity of the game but I think there are also several other concerns.
“Firstly, it could be illogical from the point of view of the fixture calendar with international games, cup competitions and replays to fit in, so to suggest adding another game – with extra travel – is strange.
“I think the integrity of the competition is a major issue. I simply cannot get my head around the idea of a situation in which you can play the same team three times in one season.
“You also have to bear in mind the popularity of the Premier League abroad. It is so popular because it is the Premier League in England and nowhere else.
“Whichever way I look at it I think it is a step too far.”
Parry raised such concerns at last week’s Premier League meeting and is now hoping common sense will prevail.
And he also dismissed suggestions that the idea had to be put forward because Liverpool and the other three members of the Big Four would have done it anyway.
“We certainly weren’t,” insisted Parry. “At the moment our biggest concern is building a new stadium and filling that. We certainly hadn’t considered that as a club.”
Benitez has already nailed his colours to the mast on this issue, telling reporters he quite simply does not like it.
He said: “To play another game in another country is not right for the competition.
“You must play here in England with the same opportunities for everyone.
“I’ve spoken with Rick Parry about it and we both think the idea is not the best.”
Parry added: “I have the same view as Rafa on this and our opinion is that the integrity of the competition is of the utmost importance.”
HE WHO BETRAYS WILL ALWAYS WALK ALONE
-
NANNY RED - >> LFC Elite Member <<
- Posts: 13334
- Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 12:45 pm
by The Manhattan Project » Fri Feb 22, 2008 2:23 am
This plan seems dead in the water.
china syndrome 80512640 reactor meltdown fusion element
no uniquely indefinable one 5918 identification unknown 113
source transmission 421 general panic hysteria 02 outbreak
foreign mutation 001505 maximum code destruction nuclear
reflection 01044 power plutonium helix atomic energy wave
no uniquely indefinable one 5918 identification unknown 113
source transmission 421 general panic hysteria 02 outbreak
foreign mutation 001505 maximum code destruction nuclear
reflection 01044 power plutonium helix atomic energy wave
-
The Manhattan Project - >> LFC Elite Member <<
- Posts: 5416
- Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 7:22 am
- Location: Reactor Number Four
by ruskiy playmaker » Mon Feb 25, 2008 7:59 am
Even thought I live in USA and don't get to see much football, I would absolutely hate to see the matches played here or outside of UK. I think it would be disgraceful and insulting to the fans of the English teams. I really cant stand the FA, they have a bunch of greedy, money grabbing morons running the show. This idea would definitely do major harm to the premier league in the long term.
[img]http://i42.tinypic.com/lkw42.gif[img]
-
ruskiy playmaker - Posts: 2159
- Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 8:29 pm
- Location: USA
by LFC2007 » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:43 am
ruskiy playmaker wrote:Even thought I live in USA and don't get to see much football, I would absolutely hate to see the matches played here or outside of UK. I think it would be disgraceful and insulting to the fans of the English teams. I really cant stand the FA, they have a bunch of greedy, money grabbing morons running the show. This idea would definitely do major harm to the premier league in the long term.
It's the Premier League's proposal, not the FA's. The FA expressed their reservations over the proposal.
-
LFC2007 - Posts: 7706
- Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 9:21 pm
- Location: London
by JoeTerp » Thu Apr 10, 2008 7:03 am
Spanish and German leagues back '39th step'
LONDON, April 9 (Reuters) - The Premier League's controversial 'international round' concept was backed on Wednesday by leading officials from the Spanish and German leagues.
Earlier this year the Premier League proposed to play an extra international round of fixtures, in five cities around the world from the 2010/11 season but after a widespread opposition and a rejection from the FA, plans seemed to have been put on the back-burner.
However, those behind it may dig out their plans for a 39th round of matches again after being given rousing support from representatives of some of the rest of Europe's major leagues, who jealously look on at the Premier League's enormous global reach and income.
Speaking at the Soccerex Forum at Wembley Stadium, Francisco Roca Perez, CEO of the Spanish league, said: 'I thought it was a great idea, it seemed quite natural.
'I was really surprised by the reaction and many of the criticisms were misunderstandings of what the objectives are.
'I think this first step has reached a mass opposition but eventually it will become normal as this league and these teams are so well liked all over the world.'
Tom Bender, director of marketing for the Bundesliga, also backed the plan but said it had been badly presented.
'I think it was very good example of how a good idea can be ruined in three seconds,' he said.
'It was not sold very well. I think it's a great idea, commercially fantastic, but the repercussion was tremendous and they (the Premier League) did not fight back.
'Some things make sense in marketing but you have to be careful how you tell people about them.'
Bender said that German clubs had been reluctant to get involved in overseas expansion plans until money was waved in front of them.
'All our clubs say they want to get into the overseas market but when we approach the individual clubs they say 'no thanks',' he said.
'We have had to change our approach, make money available and some teams came forward and they have played friendlies in places like Poland and China as representatives of the Bundesliga.'
The fourth edition of the Soccerex Forum, a series of seminars and 'networking opportunities' attracted representatives of more than 100 clubs representing 25 nations, together with hundreds more delegates from all aspects of the football industry.
LONDON, April 9 (Reuters) - The Premier League's controversial 'international round' concept was backed on Wednesday by leading officials from the Spanish and German leagues.
Earlier this year the Premier League proposed to play an extra international round of fixtures, in five cities around the world from the 2010/11 season but after a widespread opposition and a rejection from the FA, plans seemed to have been put on the back-burner.
However, those behind it may dig out their plans for a 39th round of matches again after being given rousing support from representatives of some of the rest of Europe's major leagues, who jealously look on at the Premier League's enormous global reach and income.
Speaking at the Soccerex Forum at Wembley Stadium, Francisco Roca Perez, CEO of the Spanish league, said: 'I thought it was a great idea, it seemed quite natural.
'I was really surprised by the reaction and many of the criticisms were misunderstandings of what the objectives are.
'I think this first step has reached a mass opposition but eventually it will become normal as this league and these teams are so well liked all over the world.'
Tom Bender, director of marketing for the Bundesliga, also backed the plan but said it had been badly presented.
'I think it was very good example of how a good idea can be ruined in three seconds,' he said.
'It was not sold very well. I think it's a great idea, commercially fantastic, but the repercussion was tremendous and they (the Premier League) did not fight back.
'Some things make sense in marketing but you have to be careful how you tell people about them.'
Bender said that German clubs had been reluctant to get involved in overseas expansion plans until money was waved in front of them.
'All our clubs say they want to get into the overseas market but when we approach the individual clubs they say 'no thanks',' he said.
'We have had to change our approach, make money available and some teams came forward and they have played friendlies in places like Poland and China as representatives of the Bundesliga.'
The fourth edition of the Soccerex Forum, a series of seminars and 'networking opportunities' attracted representatives of more than 100 clubs representing 25 nations, together with hundreds more delegates from all aspects of the football industry.
-
JoeTerp - Posts: 5191
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:38 am
- Location: Boston, MA
by JoeTerp » Thu Apr 10, 2008 7:04 am
Five ways that the 39th step could be good for the Premier League
The knee-jerk reaction to a 39th game for Premier League teams was an expected bad one. Most reporters and pundits see it as a brazen attempt to generate more cash for the clubs, and they aren't wrong, but that is not necessarily an evil thing. The way the exercise happens is key to its success.
Most fans have an enigmatic view of club revenues, it is a necessary evil for buying players - but any unusual attempts to raise revenues (bond schemes, naming rights, paid-friendlies) are derided as money-grabbing. The clubs have to get money from somewhere - is tapping into a foreign market not better than fleecing the paying regulars?
In terms of revenue, if Manchester United are paid £1m plus expenses for a testimonial, then an average of £5m per game, this scheme must be achievable and still allow the organisers a profit. The Premier League is all about money, and how it is raised - so without concerning ourselves with the morals of the matter, here are five ways to make this thing work.
1. Play competitive games
The initial proposal dealt with a need for the top five sides to be seeded to keep them apart - but how would that help? If the games were played between teams next to each other in the table then they would be more competitive and therefore unbalance the league less. If Arsenal play Derby but Fulham play Reading and Manchester United play West Ham, there is an obvious imbalance. Surely it would be better if Arsenal played Manchester United and Derby played Fulham - both games would be competitive and surely that is a fairer basis to start.
2. Spread the revenue evenly
The Premier League, for all its faults, is far fairer than Serie A or Primera Liga in terms of distributing television revenue and prize money. The Spanish system almost guarantees the Barca/Real duopoly and Juve/Inter/Milan use their own TV season tickets to embed bigger revenue streams. If all the proceeds from these game were shared evenly, then the possibility of £2.5m per club for a one-off game would boost the smaller clubs more than the bigger ones. It might then actually tighten the division up.
3. Return some cash to English fans
On the basis of £2.5m per club, if the clubs used half of this money to reduce Premier League ticket prices then every top flight club could reduce prices by £1 - £3 per game; this is one way that match going fans could actually benefit.
4. Being first
While other sports have played league games on neutral grounds (Rugby League has, as usual, pioneered this idea to extend its geographical reach); football hasn't. If the Premier League doesn't try it then Serie A or Primera Liga will, and then English football may have to play catch-up using rules decided elsewhere. And playing catch-up will probably be less lucrative and less beneficial. Make no mistake, the most nervous people in world football about this idea are the movers and shakers at the likes of Milan and Madrid.
5. Euro Super League
A European Super League is a bad thing; it would denude the domestic game of the top teams and best players and leave the rump fighting it out for a devalued competition. This measure would be a step that might avert a bigger break-away and still increase revenue. One game away is not too bad considering most top flight teams try to get their players away for a week or two over the tough winter months (some teams even play lucrative friendlies).
(Publication Date: 14/03/2008)
The knee-jerk reaction to a 39th game for Premier League teams was an expected bad one. Most reporters and pundits see it as a brazen attempt to generate more cash for the clubs, and they aren't wrong, but that is not necessarily an evil thing. The way the exercise happens is key to its success.
Most fans have an enigmatic view of club revenues, it is a necessary evil for buying players - but any unusual attempts to raise revenues (bond schemes, naming rights, paid-friendlies) are derided as money-grabbing. The clubs have to get money from somewhere - is tapping into a foreign market not better than fleecing the paying regulars?
In terms of revenue, if Manchester United are paid £1m plus expenses for a testimonial, then an average of £5m per game, this scheme must be achievable and still allow the organisers a profit. The Premier League is all about money, and how it is raised - so without concerning ourselves with the morals of the matter, here are five ways to make this thing work.
1. Play competitive games
The initial proposal dealt with a need for the top five sides to be seeded to keep them apart - but how would that help? If the games were played between teams next to each other in the table then they would be more competitive and therefore unbalance the league less. If Arsenal play Derby but Fulham play Reading and Manchester United play West Ham, there is an obvious imbalance. Surely it would be better if Arsenal played Manchester United and Derby played Fulham - both games would be competitive and surely that is a fairer basis to start.
2. Spread the revenue evenly
The Premier League, for all its faults, is far fairer than Serie A or Primera Liga in terms of distributing television revenue and prize money. The Spanish system almost guarantees the Barca/Real duopoly and Juve/Inter/Milan use their own TV season tickets to embed bigger revenue streams. If all the proceeds from these game were shared evenly, then the possibility of £2.5m per club for a one-off game would boost the smaller clubs more than the bigger ones. It might then actually tighten the division up.
3. Return some cash to English fans
On the basis of £2.5m per club, if the clubs used half of this money to reduce Premier League ticket prices then every top flight club could reduce prices by £1 - £3 per game; this is one way that match going fans could actually benefit.
4. Being first
While other sports have played league games on neutral grounds (Rugby League has, as usual, pioneered this idea to extend its geographical reach); football hasn't. If the Premier League doesn't try it then Serie A or Primera Liga will, and then English football may have to play catch-up using rules decided elsewhere. And playing catch-up will probably be less lucrative and less beneficial. Make no mistake, the most nervous people in world football about this idea are the movers and shakers at the likes of Milan and Madrid.
5. Euro Super League
A European Super League is a bad thing; it would denude the domestic game of the top teams and best players and leave the rump fighting it out for a devalued competition. This measure would be a step that might avert a bigger break-away and still increase revenue. One game away is not too bad considering most top flight teams try to get their players away for a week or two over the tough winter months (some teams even play lucrative friendlies).
(Publication Date: 14/03/2008)
-
JoeTerp - Posts: 5191
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:38 am
- Location: Boston, MA
Return to Premiership - General Discussion
-
- Related topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- Net spending - clubs - Since jan 1992
by babu » Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:29 am - 5 Replies
- 1414 Views
- Last post by account deleted by request
Thu Nov 22, 2007 11:57 am
- Net spending - clubs - Since jan 1992
-
- Biggest clubs in england
by account deleted by request » Sun Jul 23, 2006 9:53 am - 3 Replies
- 988 Views
- Last post by Big Niall
Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:42 pm
- Biggest clubs in england
-
- English clubs out in front
by anfieldadorer » Mon Jun 21, 2004 12:47 pm - 11 Replies
- 1553 Views
- Last post by stmichael
Wed Jun 23, 2004 4:14 pm
- English clubs out in front
-
- The bundeslige... - ...underused by premiership clubs?
by JC_81 » Sat Dec 29, 2007 9:29 pm - 10 Replies
- 1376 Views
- Last post by maguskwt
Tue Jan 01, 2008 12:07 pm
- The bundeslige... - ...underused by premiership clubs?
-
- Stevens inquiry names clubs
by maguskwt » Fri Jun 15, 2007 6:40 pm - 0 Replies
- 709 Views
- Last post by maguskwt
Fri Jun 15, 2007 6:40 pm
- Stevens inquiry names clubs
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests
-
- Advertisement