That is a good point. The team coming up and then usually going back down would benefit much more from this than the likes of the top 5 teams, who probably earn a disproportionate amount from TV.
Actually, I think we (Liverpool, and you could add Spurs to that) were shown more because our Europa involvement meant we ended up playing on a Sunday a lot
On more than one occasion I have complained about radio coverage to the BBC and have had replies from the producers. I'll give you a specific. Arsenal were away to Burnley and the match was broadcast live on BBC radio 5live and BBC radio London at the same time. 5live Xtra did not have any broadcast that afternoon and BBC London's analogue signal also did the Burnley V Arsenal game. My complaint was that at the same time West Ham were playing Tottenham and Chelsea were playing Fulham. Now 5live has national covarage and I didn't say anything to them other than do you actually compete with other BBC stations to which I got no reply. BBC radio London told me they broadcast the match they believe most football fans want to hear, to which I replied 'Burnley V Arsenal' on a local BBC station with two premiership London derbys on' , to which was a stony silence. Since then this same thing has happened again and again. I am convinced even given restraints on the BBC by rights issues (they still have a stake in Sky so get preference) the matches picked for broadcast are purely a producers choice and at times they pick a personal preference. The BBC is a network of private fiefdoms where producers do compete to climb the career greasy pole and the public do get the short straw at times, which of course they deny and pretend to only make decisions with the public at heart.
you should be thanking man united its because of us that attracts so much money for other clubs. we should be able to sell our own tv rights then lets see how much your crying
the tv fixtures have long been a joke...spurs played newcastle away at 5.30pm on a surday night...sod all chance of getting home by public transport! I'm sure every team can come up with equally stupid examples...and probably worse...1 year we were forced to play away at chelsea on a saturday at 12.30 due to sky demands even though we played a uefa cup 1/4 final on the thursday night in spain leaving us just 36 hours between one game ending and the other starting...I guess if you take skys money you dance to their tune no matter how **** it sounds
Since I wrote this thread, I've been reading that next year there is some sort of redistribution going to happen, with the bottom placed Clubs getting an increase in TV funding. Not sure what it all means, but if it takes from the big Clubs and gives to the small, it can't be a bad thing. Still think whoever is running the show should divide the money equally between all teams. They all participate equally in making the PL what it is.
Interesting. So if all the extra money that comes into the PL because of Utd and Liverpool having the most fans watching games around the world should be distributed equally, shouldn't the money that Abramovich, Mansour, Fernandez et al pump into their clubs also be distributed equally? Utd will earn around £5 million more than Chelsea from TV money, and about £20 million more than Reading when you consider TV fees and merit payments, but Chelsea get hundreds of millions of pounds more than Reading from their owner. If you're after all clubs being equal, then shouldn't that be the first place to start?
I'm not about all Clubs being equal, in fact I have said over and over that organisations like FIFA and EUFA cannot legislate to make clubs equal. But with the deal someone has obviously signed up to with the TV Companies, there is an inbuilt unfairness in the distribution to the Clubs, all of which make the PL the competition it is, and not just he top 5 or 6. Just want a level playing field, and currently,I can't see how it is.
Actually the TV deal in the PL is the fairest in Europe, with 80% of total revenue distributed absolutely evenly between the clubs regardless of finishing position and times shown on TV. The only 'unfair' elements are the merit payments and the facilities fees. The merit payments are based on the position you finish in the league, and the facilities fees are the smallest element of the overall package, and mainly intended to cover the costs to the club of hosting live games and the fact that live televised games often attract fewer fans so clubs earn less from ticket sales. If you're after a fair playing field in TV revenue then you should be more concerned about the merit payments than the facility fees as they are the main difference between the top and bottom earners. The amount of times each club is shown on TV makes next to no difference at all. And that's ignoring the fact that we have a far more level playing field in the TV revenue than any other league in Europe. As I said before, if it's a level playing field you're after then the money pumped in by owners distorts the playing field infinitely more than TV money ever could.
