While Sky has had an impact it would be nice if DL stopped banging on about the bad and commented on the good. Sky have helped spread the game world wide, people who had never ever heard of football can now watch and enjoy it. How many African stars has Sky helped create without intention? Your own side has benefited from such a person over the last decade and his millions have gone to help his community back home. The likes of Wigan would never of won a FA Cup or spent years as a PL club. Fulham are another that have found success in the Premier league and Sky era. You talk about football pre Sky like it was something special. One club dominated to an extent not even united can compare, clubs spent big money on players ( who in many cases were unfit and drunks ). Being a thug was an advantage, fans twatted each others every Saturday afternoon causing chaos across the UK and much more. it wasnt perfect and the football was often ****. I know you are ignoring me DL but it would be interesting to hear your views on the positives of Sky
I will give a proper analysis tomorrow. Not ignoring you for good just felt it was best until we could be civil to one another as it was ruining threads
Positives: - English Football was virtually in decline in the 80s due to a number of reasons: Hooliganism, economic downturn, rave/drug scene, Heysel & Hillsborough. There was no money in English Football and all the top players were playing abroad. Sky helped generate interest in English Football and in turn it usurped La Liga and eventually Serie A. - We now have a better product, better football on display. Better football matches and better quality of footballer. - Football has now become a sport watched by everyone, encapsulates a wider audience. That's about all the positives i have Negatives: - Uneven distribution in terms of money up and down the league meaning PL clubs now earn far more than their Football League counterparts thus widening the gap and making all other leagues redundant, - Power out of the hands of football fans/clubs and into the hands of corporations like Sky (i.e Manipulation of the fixtures) - Uneven marketing of football clubs thus creating an Oligopoly (hence the term "Sky 4") My problem is not so much with Sky, but the knock on effect they have had. UEFA/FA/Government are the root problem
An English club won the European cup in 7 out of the 8 seasons prior to Heysel. English club football was in better health than the rest of Europe.
prior to Heysel Dippers lifted it in 84. English football went downhill in the 80s, attendances had been going down before Heysel too. By the late 80s, serie a was in ascendancy
I agree Serie A was in ascendancy in the late 80's, partly because English clubs were banned from European football and so couldn't continue to dominate in the way they had done for almost a decade. The fact is prior to Heysel English clubs had won 7 of the previous 8 European Cups, a national dominance unprecendented since the questionable Real Madrid era at the inception of the competition. I was disputing the latest ill informed comment from the forum's resident sage that English football was in decline in the 80's. Relatively speaking, prior to Heysel, it was in rude health. Yes attendances dipped for periods but that wasn't exclusive to England. The mid to late 70's and much of the 80's were hardly a day at the beach for most match going fans.
Do the European cup wins hide the deeper level of problems in English football at the time: violence racism lowest ever attendances etc
I think Sky have massively improved the game with their financial support, marketing and ability to bring it to a wider audience. The 70's and 80's were a time dominated by one club more than any in the history of English football. Not only did they dominate here but they were by far the best side in europe for the most part of that period. I mean the European Cup was a bit of a joke compared to what it is now and Liverpool played some teams that I think are amatuer these days but still, they dominated it all. So if you think how is bad, imagine back then. Even the Liverpool fans were bored. So bored they grew caterpillars on their faces and perms the planks.
The first time Liverpool played a really good team, Juve, they lost. Dippers were lucky that Spanish and Italian football was weak.
Depends who you support. I'd argue Sky has benefitted my club, Chelsea, more than any other club bar United. Prior to Sky, United and Liverpool were the only clubs with a global fanbase. They were and still are big clubs globally, whereas Chelsea were non-existent and only really relevant domestically. Sky have given my club an opportunity to grow thus attracting investment such as RA's which has in turn allowed us to win things. Unless you support a founder member of the PL, Sky hasn't been a good thing though. Look at clubs like Swindon and Oxford.
German teams were OK, but Bayern had fallen apart. Those legendary European nights at Anfield are a myth, Unless you count Liverpool beating Dunndalk 100-0 in front on 15,000 legendary.
Some of the teams Lafferpool played to win their EC were of ridiculously poor quality. Some where such Euro giants that they are no longer in existence. Classing the EC the same as the CL is ridiculous. Lafferpool are nothing but a mid level club now. The odd League Cup is all they can hope for.
RAwK Reminds me of the scouse boom bust cycle every time. Also i think we have established Rafa is **** at both his jobs.
Don't have twitter but I do like to look at the RAWK meltdown page, actual quotes from RAWK absolutely hilarious.
