Also nobody was selected to be in the Premier League.
In the words of Alan Partridge... "they've rebadged it you fool."
In the words of Alan Partridge... "they've rebadged it you fool."
The Disgusting Hypocrisy of Sky Sports and the Premier League
- Thread starter Lentwood
- Start date
To be honest, the opinions of Carragher and Neville aren't those of Sky. Sky are just cashing in on this news circus. Everyone knows they are not much better.
But they are a bit better. This could easily become an arguement about capitalism but one thing we can all agree on is there should be regulations and lines drawn somewhere, most can agree this has crossed the invisible line.
Never mind self selected, that's a whole different type of selection.
Plenty of stories to the contrary.
A few red tops (tabloids) have stories of the PL chiefs blaming TV broadcasters Sky & BT for the PPV shambles.
Ones as bad as the other and all that matters to the lot of them is bottom line profit.
Funny how the executive at UEFA regularly impose nothing more than paltry fines for clubs which they accept have been involved in egregious forms of racist abuse, but when the prospect of a parallel competition is suggested they act with manifest resolve and threaten to banish, with immediate effect, those would-be participants to a life outside the the footballing firmament.
Amazing how inactive they are in applying such sanctions to clubs that regularly transgress where issues that don't have the potential to impact their bottom line are concerned: it's almost like they have a selective sense of moral priority? Who'd have thought?
Amazing how inactive they are in applying such sanctions to clubs that regularly transgress where issues that don't have the potential to impact their bottom line are concerned: it's almost like they have a selective sense of moral priority? Who'd have thought?
As per Lentwoods examples, the PL was and still is a good as a closed shop can be.
Very few of the PL originals have faced relegation, the majority have stayed the course.
Also there's a reason why we see a record number of lower league clubs in administration now, because of the SKY TV deal.
The Premier League’s own statement begs to differ.
“Clubs today agreed this interim solution to enable all fans to continue to watch their teams live,” a Premier League statement read. “The Premier League has worked closely with Sky Sports and BT Sport to provide this arrangement and is grateful for their support.”
Good post although, as bad as they are, Sky really did make the PL what it is today and the PL's growth coming at the time it did was a big factor in United's dominance (the timing of them pushing the PL product + SAF was seismic). I agree Sky, PL, UEFA, FIFA are as bad and corrupt as each other though, the 'enough is enough' moment should have come to a head when Qatar and Russia 'won' the world cups.
I feel like we are being somewhat deliberately diverted by the ESL group of clubs though - they have always known the non relegation part would be a non-starter and that's what all the managers are talking about (which makes us think they are standing up to their club owners) and so the ESL will pretend it is ceding and allow relegation but the founding clubs will still have the ownership income (making it very hard for them to be relegated as they should always have funds for players/coaches). If they scrapped the non relegation part my understanding is, for example, United could join the ESL, be relegated but still receive funds from the ESL?
If this happens, the managers will all save face (they have spoken out, the club has 'listened') & the biggest argument against the ESL formation (the meritocratic element) disappears instantly. Fans will still be pissed but the reaction is immediately tempered. Add in some exciting summer signings and 99% of us will begrudgingly be back onboard.
I feel like we are being somewhat deliberately diverted by the ESL group of clubs though - they have always known the non relegation part would be a non-starter and that's what all the managers are talking about (which makes us think they are standing up to their club owners) and so the ESL will pretend it is ceding and allow relegation but the founding clubs will still have the ownership income (making it very hard for them to be relegated as they should always have funds for players/coaches). If they scrapped the non relegation part my understanding is, for example, United could join the ESL, be relegated but still receive funds from the ESL?
If this happens, the managers will all save face (they have spoken out, the club has 'listened') & the biggest argument against the ESL formation (the meritocratic element) disappears instantly. Fans will still be pissed but the reaction is immediately tempered. Add in some exciting summer signings and 99% of us will begrudgingly be back onboard.
That's just a generic statement about its introduction.
Some people really misunderstand the point of this thread. There is no comparison, or justification for the super league. The point is Sky and the PL objective is stopping the ESL, but our objective must be reforming football in England completely. Otherwise, the whole process of stopping the ESL is just delaying the evitable.
ESL approves of this thread.
This is not new. This was always the case. Arsenal have never been relegated from top flight football.
The majority part is nonsense as well.
Again, people need to understand that the reason this has riled up so many people, including those within the game is because ESL is a league in name only and in reality a monopoly of a few elite cubs who's owners want an increase as well as a steady stream of income.
Saying clubs agreed it.
Both sides agreed, yet Neville only sees fit to blame one. Which is kinda my point.
I don't think it matters either way who decided on it, both were happy to attempt to cash in.
Sky don’t own the product. The Premier League and the clubs do. And it was their idea. Sky lost getting the games for free.
Pardon?
This is the original PL. tell me how the SKY TV deal has anything to do lower league clubs being in administration, I am not saying its ideal but they get money from it. Its no where near a closed shop as each year clubs come up, The ESL proposal is for the founding fecking teams to actually cherry pick who gets to join them. What's wrong with the PL (not an exclusive problem) is outside money being invested. You compare the TV deal in England to say Spain, you will see its pretty evenly spread.
Last edited:
There is a big difference between "good as a closed shop can be" and actually writing it into the fecking rules that teams can't be relegated. Leeds went into the first PL campaign as Champions, got to the Champions League Semi-Finals and got relegated. That is not a closed shop. It's not even remotely comparable. Newcastle finished 2nd then eventually went down, Villa and Forest are European Cup Winners that got relegated. City got relegated to League 1. Blackburn won the PL and went down. What this shitshow is proposing is not comparable.
This is bollocks. 16 of the original 22 have been relegated, and 10 of those are currently outside of the PL.
Well its not nonsense at all.
11 Of the original premier league teams are currently in today's premiership, 6 of them have never been relegated.
I fully understand why folks are aggrieved with the ESL but as Lentwood as matter of fact pointed out the Premier league hasn't exactly been as competitive as many make out.
Also creates a scenario now where the relegated side has a financial advantage over those they're competing with due to the parachute payment. If you don't believe this is happening, How many times have relegated sides came back up since the parachute and larger TV deal? Look at Norwich? WBA? As soon as they are relegated, they have a clear advantage over other Championship sides and almost immediately return back to the PL.
Things got worse when the league dropped to 20 teams, we've seen less competitive nature at both ends of the table.
Its an illusion of a level playing field and every bit as much a closed shop.
This sort of thinking really annoys me. Take one negative thing, make it to be just the same as another negative and "hypocrisy".
I'm not going to bother debating in detail but there is greed and then there is greed above all else. What ESL has done is greed above all else, fundamentally changing the game. What sky/premier league have done in the past are negatives in a system we agree with but have regulatory disagreements.
I'm not going to bother debating in detail but there is greed and then there is greed above all else. What ESL has done is greed above all else, fundamentally changing the game. What sky/premier league have done in the past are negatives in a system we agree with but have regulatory disagreements.
So you mean 16 of the 22 original teams have been relegated from this closed shop?
And the ones that haven't are the historically biggest clubs in the country before the PL formed?
Mostly agree with the sentiment but some of the opinions are not quite on the money.
I don’t think you can overlook the fact that SAFs dominance has contributed highly to the low number of winners in the first decades of the PL.
Also, as currently shown, the PL is as competitive as ever and this is one of the reasons for this ESL move. The fact we have a ‘big 6’ fighting for the top 4 spots to begin with, and then add in Leicester etc and you see why the big clubs have their nose put out of joint.
I don’t think you can overlook the fact that SAFs dominance has contributed highly to the low number of winners in the first decades of the PL.
Also, as currently shown, the PL is as competitive as ever and this is one of the reasons for this ESL move. The fact we have a ‘big 6’ fighting for the top 4 spots to begin with, and then add in Leicester etc and you see why the big clubs have their nose put out of joint.
Great example that Leeds.
Leeds were relegated because they over invested and didn't act in a fiscally responsible manner.
They thought the TV money was a bottomless pit and ultimately paid the price.
That's a by product of Sky TV's premier league cash gone wrong right there.
Of the 22 that started the first Premier League season, 10 of those clubs are not currently in the league. I'm not going to argue the merits or otherwise of having clubs with vastly more financial power than others. As far as closed shop goes though, I don't know how many of the 90-odd professional clubs in England have played in the Premier League, but i'll bet its not that far from half of them.
How are West Ham fans feeling about football today? Or Southampton? Or Everton? etc etc. What does the future look like for these supporters now? What is the point?
That is a dumb argument. That's like blowing a loan and blaming the bank for giving it you.
But I thought this argument was about the PL being a closed shop? Now its about Sky's money?
Not that it even matters, the formation of the Premier League is not even remotely comparable to this. It's clutching at straws to even try.
You are confusing the reasons for things, everything you describe is the same thing that happens in every top flight league, the bigger clubs are richer and have more money and stay up, if anything the PL has more smaller teams who have managed to step up and establish themselves. A I said before name me a second tier league in any country that comes close to The Championship?
They gambled, they gambled on success and didn't reach it, how is that Sky's fault? Its basic mismanagement of the club.
I do think Sky and certain other media outlets are doommongering this a bit in order to get fans panicked and to suit their agenda of not letting it happen. They’re making it seem like the Big 6 joining this Super League means English football will just die on the spot. A lot of those other clubs will still have fans that will attend their games and newer generations will still take interest in them. Heck, these other teams do have billionaires running them so they’ll be fine regardless. The worst that will happen is they’ll get less money as far as I can tell, and a lot of these clubs get plenty of money regardless. There’s some Championship teams chucking a few whack of money on transfers these past few years.
Im willing to bet there’s a few owners outside that Big 6 who have been pocketing more than they need, who are complaining about money being stripped of them and could have easily reinvested it into their clubs. The Coates Family at Stoke City would certainly be up for biggest hypocrites if they piped up about it.
The PL and Sky are more concerned about losing out on money, rather than the integrity of the game and of course they’ll go with the latter to appeal to the general public and reinforce their battle cry. Sky are the unofficial mouthpiece of the PL in some ways. Theyve praised and even glorified the shady billionaires coming in like Roman Abramovich, Carson Yeung, Thaksin Shinawatra, Alexandre Gaydamak etc. Most of these guys are in a jail cell somewhere or hiding from law enforcement. When money-hungry capitalists from the States like the Glazers and Stan Kroenke came in, they shrugged their shoulders at fan concerns and probably just thought it was good exposure in the U.S market.
Im willing to bet there’s a few owners outside that Big 6 who have been pocketing more than they need, who are complaining about money being stripped of them and could have easily reinvested it into their clubs. The Coates Family at Stoke City would certainly be up for biggest hypocrites if they piped up about it.
The PL and Sky are more concerned about losing out on money, rather than the integrity of the game and of course they’ll go with the latter to appeal to the general public and reinforce their battle cry. Sky are the unofficial mouthpiece of the PL in some ways. Theyve praised and even glorified the shady billionaires coming in like Roman Abramovich, Carson Yeung, Thaksin Shinawatra, Alexandre Gaydamak etc. Most of these guys are in a jail cell somewhere or hiding from law enforcement. When money-hungry capitalists from the States like the Glazers and Stan Kroenke came in, they shrugged their shoulders at fan concerns and probably just thought it was good exposure in the U.S market.
Bravo for the SL
Just a shame they couldn't have released a statement earlier during lock down, i can't keep up with all the hysteria...it's like transfer deadline day but every big club is involved. Popcorn watch for sure!
#note i'm not pro SL i'm just enjoying watching it all unfold, no matter how bad the concept is
Just a shame they couldn't have released a statement earlier during lock down, i can't keep up with all the hysteria...it's like transfer deadline day but every big club is involved. Popcorn watch for sure!
#note i'm not pro SL i'm just enjoying watching it all unfold, no matter how bad the concept is
Read my comment again.. 11 clubs in the 92/93 season competed this season.
The 11 are
United, Villa, Liverpool, Spurs, City, Arsenal, Chelsea, Everton, Leeds, Southampton & Sheff United. That's 11.
Of that 11, 6 have never faced relegation...being United, Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal, Chelsea & Everton...
Even those that have been relegated have an advantage with the parachute payment... There's a reason why we keep seeing Norwich bounce right back you know right? They've a distinct advantage over other Championship clubs who can't nor have ever been in the premier league.
Norwich have the luxury of receiving extra PL funding, retaining their players and receiving the PL funds upon relegation that Championship clubs don't have and then can reinvest that summer going into the championship.
As for Everton and Southampton, they didn't bitch about the inception of the premier league in 1992... here's a quote from an Everton legend Tony Cottee to refresh your memory Bilbo.
Just because they are missing out now, doesn't excuse their previous indiscretions in 1992.
Everton and Southampton were complicit in the biggest change to English football in its entire history and largely to blame why many club have gone into administration and put people out of work... two wrongs don't make a right.
Look at this image and the highlighted parts... does it all sound very familiar?
"Break away league", "unfair", "omitted", "top flight would retain all money"..... all buzz words now associated with the ESL.
You would have to laugh at the hypocrisy from sky about it all. I am paying a hundred plus euros a month to watch United games. And sky have the gall to complain about greed.
This is a good thread with a very thorough OP but none of it matters if we do nothing and just keep arguing with each other about the past. Sky are total hypocrites but what’s coming down the line will make sky and the FA/PL look like a picnic. There’s no point arguing about Gary Neville for hours when shit is about to go Disney forever.
If we let the glazers push this through then we are beyond any future intervention and they will be too big and far too entrenched to fail. They are at their most vulnerable now with the nations backlash and people being free to move around again and protest. Join the protests. Don’t say but protesting never works. That’s why it didn’t work before. Too many people sit on the fence worrying they won’t make a difference. Feed into the snowball
Effect and who knows where we will end up. With all the fans of the other 5 clubs serious change could be afoot if we get organised and stop arguing amongst ourselves about stuff we definitely can’t change anymore
If we let the glazers push this through then we are beyond any future intervention and they will be too big and far too entrenched to fail. They are at their most vulnerable now with the nations backlash and people being free to move around again and protest. Join the protests. Don’t say but protesting never works. That’s why it didn’t work before. Too many people sit on the fence worrying they won’t make a difference. Feed into the snowball
Effect and who knows where we will end up. With all the fans of the other 5 clubs serious change could be afoot if we get organised and stop arguing amongst ourselves about stuff we definitely can’t change anymore
They can't gamble with what they don't have.
Of course Leeds are at fault as well, be stupid to suggest otherwise.
There's a reason why we are seeing record breaking numbers of clubs go into administration since 1992.
Connect the dots.
In other words, feck them all!
Blaming Sky is like blaming someone for giving you too much freedom and causing you to do some stupid shit because you can't control yourself.
Not really.
We've seen Sheff have a go but down they go again, but wait and see...they'll have the advantage over the majority of other championship sides and will likely bounce right back. Norwich, WBA are what you term Yo-Yo clubs now... Watford & Bournemouth are two others.
There are currently 3 teams at the top end of the Championship that can bounce right back into the premier league this season... but I've members here telling me there is no gap and no benefit of having Premier league investment......
The evidence is there in what I am saying.
Again, I'm not absolving Leeds of blame.
Of course they are to blame... reality is though without Sky's money Leeds then do go to the levels they do. They simply lost the run of themselves on the back of Skys funding.
The key difference I think is that there isn't a set of 17 permanent clubs who is guaranteed PL status every year with the rest of the football league being on an 'invite' status.
Yes the money has widened the gulf between the top few and the rest and that is lamentable. But the rules for getting into the PL really has not changed compared to the old Division 1. Bottom 3 or 4 in Div 1 down, Top 3 or 4 in Div 2 come up. The challenge to not be shit enough to finish bottom of the league is the same for every team from the start of every season.
Yes the money has widened the gulf between the top few and the rest and that is lamentable. But the rules for getting into the PL really has not changed compared to the old Division 1. Bottom 3 or 4 in Div 1 down, Top 3 or 4 in Div 2 come up. The challenge to not be shit enough to finish bottom of the league is the same for every team from the start of every season.
Well it is nonsense when you said the majority have stayed the course and now contradicted that statement in your own post.
Regardless of that the point is that football has never really been a fair playing field for a variety of reasons. Teams have always had periods of domination. This might shock you but Spurs, Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea and even Everton were rather a big deal before the PL ever came along.
Granted, the money from the PL has made it more uneven but this idea of football utopia has never existed and is entirely different from the idea of a closed shop 'league'.
The way some on here are talking we might as well hand our PL titles back as they weren't won on a 'level playing field'.