Rant about the Premier League

[RaidenYeltz]

Sad to see another club go, especially with all these rich clubs around paying 300k a week to players, it's a disgrace ! Sooner or later the bubble will burst and something will be done to help smaller clubs ( probably not in my lifetime )

Surely with what is trying to be achieved with the future of our kids, good football from an early age etc, all this should be looked at from the bottom to the top, it's fairly obvious to get to the top from the bottom these players have to work their way up, so the less non league clubs means where are they supposed to go ?? How many English players do you know in the last few years that have gone through an academy then play in the first team in the premier league, not many, makes my blood boil !

RIP Eastwood Town. Who's next I wonder .......?

Right time for a bit of a rant so apologies in advance.

It has been well documented that this year and in fact seemingly year in year out of late, the TV revenue clubs receive from Sky (and in the future BT?) increases by a vast amount.

Yet where does this extra money end up?

It ends up inflating the wages of players.

I don’t know who on here follows professional football but an example from Albion, Marcus Rosenberg a player who barely figured for us was reportedly on £35k per week. This equates to £1.82 million a year.

The above is what is completely wrong with the game. An average player who seldom plays is able to earn that much.

Then you look at the better player playing for the big clubs. Rooney signed for Utd 2003/4, I believe he started on £100k a week (not 100% certain) £5.2 million a year.

Now, as TV revenue has increased (presumably Utd have more money to do what they wish with) he has just signed a £300k a week deal, £15.6 million a year.

The point I’m trying to make and the point that frustrates and angers me, is why is this extra income from such companies being used to inflate already obscene wages?

Why is it not used to subsidise ticket prices, for me an acceptable price to watch a top flight game is £15 / £20 tops (£20 is pushing it in my opinion).

Why aren’t the FA stepping in and stipulating x amount has to be spent on academies and the wider community.

You look at the German models, they do something similar to what I’ve just stated.

I think it’s absolutely criminal that increasing income for clubs is going straight into the wallets of players. It frustrates me that it’s continuously allowed.

It’s not just wages either the increase in revenue seems to fuelling the rise in transfer fees for players.

I realise chairmen and clubs alike receive this money and it’s their own will to spend it how they wish, but surely governing bodies be it F.A. the Premier League, UEFA or FIFA themselves, should be creating legislation on how clubs spend their riches.

Sorry for the rant, had to get that off my chest.

[Colin Bobble]

You look at the German models, they do something similar to what I’ve just stated.
.....
Sorry for the rant, had to get that off my chest.

Yes, much to be admired in the way German clubs are constituted.

[RobYeltz]

Sad to see another club go, especially with all these rich clubs around paying 300k a week to players, it's a disgrace ! Sooner or later the bubble will burst and something will be done to help smaller clubs ( probably not in my lifetime )

Surely with what is trying to be achieved with the future of our kids, good football from an early age etc, all this should be looked at from the bottom to the top, it's fairly obvious to get to the top from the bottom these players have to work their way up, so the less non league clubs means where are they supposed to go ?? How many English players do you know in the last few years that have gone through an academy then play in the first team in the premier league, not many, makes my blood boil !

RIP Eastwood Town. Who's next I wonder .......?

Right time for a bit of a rant so apologies in advance.

It has been well documented that this year and in fact seemingly year in year out of late, the TV revenue clubs receive from Sky (and in the future BT?) increases by a vast amount.

Yet where does this extra money end up?

It ends up inflating the wages of players.

I don’t know who on here follows professional football but an example from Albion, Marcus Rosenberg a player who barely figured for us was reportedly on £35k per week. This equates to £1.82 million a year.

The above is what is completely wrong with the game. An average player who seldom plays is able to earn that much.

Then you look at the better player playing for the big clubs. Rooney signed for Utd 2003/4, I believe he started on £100k a week (not 100% certain) £5.2 million a year.

Now, as TV revenue has increased (presumably Utd have more money to do what they wish with) he has just signed a £300k a week deal, £15.6 million a year.

The point I’m trying to make and the point that frustrates and angers me, is why is this extra income from such companies being used to inflate already obscene wages?

Why is it not used to subsidise ticket prices, for me an acceptable price to watch a top flight game is £15 / £20 tops (£20 is pushing it in my opinion).

Why aren’t the FA stepping in and stipulating x amount has to be spent on academies and the wider community.

You look at the German models, they do something similar to what I’ve just stated.

I think it’s absolutely criminal that increasing income for clubs is going straight into the wallets of players. It frustrates me that it’s continuously allowed.

It’s not just wages either the increase in revenue seems to fuelling the rise in transfer fees for players.

I realise chairmen and clubs alike receive this money and it’s their own will to spend it how they wish, but surely governing bodies be it F.A. the Premier League, UEFA or FIFA themselves, should be creating legislation on how clubs spend their riches.

Sorry for the rant, had to get that off my chest.

If enough people stopped going, and then cancelled their tv subscriptions football would implode. Problem is, people will not do that.

[Colin Bobble]

Sad to see another club go, especially with all these rich clubs around paying 300k a week to players, it's a disgrace ! Sooner or later the bubble will burst and something will be done to help smaller clubs ( probably not in my lifetime )

Surely with what is trying to be achieved with the future of our kids, good football from an early age etc, all this should be looked at from the bottom to the top, it's fairly obvious to get to the top from the bottom these players have to work their way up, so the less non league clubs means where are they supposed to go ?? How many English players do you know in the last few years that have gone through an academy then play in the first team in the premier league, not many, makes my blood boil !

RIP Eastwood Town. Who's next I wonder .......?

Right time for a bit of a rant so apologies in advance.

It has been well documented that this year and in fact seemingly year in year out of late, the TV revenue clubs receive from Sky (and in the future BT?) increases by a vast amount.

Yet where does this extra money end up?

It ends up inflating the wages of players.

I don’t know who on here follows professional football but an example from Albion, Marcus Rosenberg a player who barely figured for us was reportedly on £35k per week. This equates to £1.82 million a year.

The above is what is completely wrong with the game. An average player who seldom plays is able to earn that much.

Then you look at the better player playing for the big clubs. Rooney signed for Utd 2003/4, I believe he started on £100k a week (not 100% certain) £5.2 million a year.

Now, as TV revenue has increased (presumably Utd have more money to do what they wish with) he has just signed a £300k a week deal, £15.6 million a year.

The point I’m trying to make and the point that frustrates and angers me, is why is this extra income from such companies being used to inflate already obscene wages?

Why is it not used to subsidise ticket prices, for me an acceptable price to watch a top flight game is £15 / £20 tops (£20 is pushing it in my opinion).

Why aren’t the FA stepping in and stipulating x amount has to be spent on academies and the wider community.

You look at the German models, they do something similar to what I’ve just stated.

I think it’s absolutely criminal that increasing income for clubs is going straight into the wallets of players. It frustrates me that it’s continuously allowed.

It’s not just wages either the increase in revenue seems to fuelling the rise in transfer fees for players.

I realise chairmen and clubs alike receive this money and it’s their own will to spend it how they wish, but surely governing bodies be it F.A. the Premier League, UEFA or FIFA themselves, should be creating legislation on how clubs spend their riches.

Sorry for the rant, had to get that off my chest.

If enough people stopped going, and then cancelled their tv subscriptions football would implode. Problem is, people will not do that.

Yes and spend their money through the gates of their local non-league club.

[RaidenYeltz]

I don't blame Sky, they pay their money to air the rights.

I dislike the KO times such as 5:15 on a Saturday, 12:00 Sunday and so on, all due to Sky, but that's a small price to pay for their heavy investment.

My problem is with the authorities and how clubs spend that money from Sky.

In reality, the income from fans and ticket sales is minimal in comparison. I get the feeling most clubs would love it if fans stopped going, less people to cater for.

I honestly don't think fans voting with their feet would ruin football, the clubs would just adapt.

[Colin Bobble]

I don't blame Sky, they pay their money to air the rights.

I dislike the KO times such as 5:15 on a Saturday, 12:00 Sunday and so on, all due to Sky, but that's a small price to pay for their heavy investment.

My problem is with the authorities and how clubs spend that money from Sky.

In reality, the income from fans and ticket sales is minimal in comparison. I get the feeling most clubs would love it if fans stopped going, less people to cater for.

I honestly don't think fans voting with their feet would ruin football, the clubs would just adapt.

I don't think the assertion was to vote with their feet, but to vote by not subscribing to satellite sports channels.

[RaidenYeltz]

I don't blame Sky, they pay their money to air the rights.

I dislike the KO times such as 5:15 on a Saturday, 12:00 Sunday and so on, all due to Sky, but that's a small price to pay for their heavy investment.

My problem is with the authorities and how clubs spend that money from Sky.

In reality, the income from fans and ticket sales is minimal in comparison. I get the feeling most clubs would love it if fans stopped going, less people to cater for.

I honestly don't think fans voting with their feet would ruin football, the clubs would just adapt.

I don't think the assertion was to vote with their feet, but to vote by not subscribing to satellite sports channels.

I got that, it's my opinion though, that Sky isn't the problem. Sky money has helped a lot over the years. Take a look at the stadia now compared to the early 90's...

The money Sky invest can be good, it just needs to be used and regulated correctly by relevant authorities.

In essence I don't think a mass un-subscribe would help. It's a deeper problem than that.

[Noggin]

I got that, it's my opinion though, that Sky isn't the problem. Sky money has helped a lot over the years. Take a look at the stadia now compared to the early 90's...

The money Sky invest can be good, it just needs to be used and regulated correctly by relevant authorities.

In essence I don't think a mass un-subscribe would help. It's a deeper problem than that.

The Premier League is already regulated by what [to the Premier League] is the relevant authorities - the Premier League clubs. The Premier League was originally set up to give a greater share of revenue to the top clubs rather than being shared 92 ways and has continued down the same path

Effectively, the only thing that the FA govern with respect to the Premier League is player suspensions and the recent threat of legal action (albeit withdrawn)over the Andy Carroll sending off suggest that this will be handed over to the PL in due course

[RaidenYeltz]

I got that, it's my opinion though, that Sky isn't the problem. Sky money has helped a lot over the years. Take a look at the stadia now compared to the early 90's...

The money Sky invest can be good, it just needs to be used and regulated correctly by relevant authorities.

In essence I don't think a mass un-subscribe would help. It's a deeper problem than that.

The Premier League is already regulated by what [to the Premier League] is the relevant authorities - the Premier League clubs. The Premier League was originally set up to give a greater share of revenue to the top clubs rather than being shared 92 ways and has continued down the same path

Effectively, the only thing that the FA govern with respect to the Premier League is player suspensions and the recent threat of legal action (albeit withdrawn)over the Andy Carroll sending off suggest that this will be handed over to the PL in due course

The FA have the power to regulate how clubs spend their money?

The FA could say to all professional clubs, x% of income should go on academies and producing home grown talent.

[Westyeltz]

With regard to the comment made to suggest cancelling your Sky subscription, have you considered the impact that would have on the stake holders of the TV rights deal within the UK?

Next to bloody nothing!

Having recently been to Oz via The Far East, I was absolutely amazed at the interest in The English Premier League particularly in Asia - absolutely bonkers, even if games are televised in the middle of the night!

How Hi and To Long on their stools in the back of the Chinese laundry in Hong Kong watching on their 9" black and white telly, really don't give a flying f**k about the likes of HTFC so long as they get their bi-weekly fix of Wayne Rooney and his oppo's.