I read the above article with interest, The paragraph below is very interesting, I've highlighted what I consider to be the very interesting pieces. First let me say, I think Harvey is purposely trying to turn the other clubs against Leeds by calling the meeting, was there any need for it untill Leeds/Cellino actually took action to get the right to do their own TV deals with SKY. Secondly, It sounds like, based on the way the report was written, that the SKY TV deal was done by Harvey on behalf of the league clubs, without their input or agreement/disagreement, and may be, or could be part of the reason Harvey is worried. Please NOTE, I said "maybe" and "could be". "Sources say executives were stunned as Harvey explained that such a challenge might theoretically destroy the league's current five-year broadcasting deal with Sky, currently in its first year. There would be no guarantee of a Cellino legal victory, but no guarantee either he would fail either. Leeds are arguably the 'biggest' club, in multiple ways, currently outside the Premier League. If they won the right to do their own TV deals, then they would expect to hugely increase the share of TV money they receive each season from around £2m to perhaps tens of millions. Other 'bigger' clubs might follow suit and the majority would be left facing a financial deficit. Those with knowledge of Thursday's meeting say executives from rival Championship clubs vented their fury at the Leeds representatives at the meeting - the new executive director, Paul Bell, in his first weeks in his new job, and a Leeds lawyer. Cellino was not present. Sources say Bell launched a passionate defence of Leeds's position, saying they had games moved for live TV unfairly often. Leeds's position has attracted some sympathy - albeit limited - among other clubs". I can to a certain point understand the lower leagues concern about their TV game payments however, if Cellino won his right to negotiate his own TV game deals, then other clubs, as well as the lower league clubs would be in the same boat, the penny for them would eventually drop. As one poster on the above link pointed out, "ferret21, santiago chile, a day ago And what right have Sky to move fixtures for their own profit!" and another, "Glenn Hayes, Leeds, United Kingdom, a day ago As a proud lifelong Leeds fan there are many things that I disagree with Massimo Cellino on. However, on this issue I agree with his stance 100%. It is quite obvious to anyone that regularly watches the football league on TV that Leeds United have had their matches broadcast disproportionately this season than any other club. Although that's great for armchair fans, the constant rescheduling of matches this season has put a massive burden on our loyal travelling supporters that are being asked with increasing regularity to find ways of getting to games on limited budgets whilst trying to hold down a job. This situation is completely the fault of the greedy Football League and SKY especially that have undoubtedly decided to use Leeds as a cash cow to compensate for the loss of their Champions League income stream. I'm glad we're standing up against this corporate greed and I for one hope fans of other clubs can see where we're coming from. MOT!"
But he has every reason to complain about how our matches are continually being rescheduled with the backing of Harvey and Co.
It's called collective bargaining and IMO is better than every man for themselves as it gives a leveler playing field..... Look at Spain as an example of what individual contracts do to leagues..... Jeez scum already have enough of an advantage over here. Leicester and Spurs couldn't challenge without tv money distributed as per a collective agreement.
Firstly, WJ has already pointed out a statement on the OS dismissing all of this. Second we wouldn't get a larger share, we would get no share, Sky would say screw you and not feature any home games so we would go from £2m to zero
I understand collective bargaining is beneficial in a lot of instances chippy, inside and outside football, but if Harvey did do the deal on behalf of the clubs, without their agreement/disagreement, what right did he have to do that? more so, why is he worried if the contract/agreement is rock solid. Would SKY tell Cellino and the other bigger clubs in Championship and L1 to get stuffed, we're not going to televise your games? how much revenue would SKY lose from overseas if they did do that?
IT NEVER HAPPENED The official Leeds site dismisses this.. Loving the letter Elland posted on the morning thread, shows what kind of guy Cellino is and raises some very valid points. Game set and match for the anti Cellino brigade...
What makes you think that Leeds are against collective bargaining? You're worse than the rags! Read the club statement - and realise that it remains unchallenged by the other 71 clubs represented at the meeting .... I would like to make it clear that Leeds United is not seeking, nor has it taken legal action, to dismantle the collective selling of TV rights as has been suggested. This model has proven extremely successful for some of the biggest leagues around the world, none more so than the Premier League. The revenues received by all clubs from the sale of their domestic broadcast rights and overseas broadcast rights are vital to the long-term health and survival of clubs. The club has, however, made it clear to both Sky and the League that it opposes the degree of control exercised by Sky over the league fixture list, and seeks transparency as to how these rights have been sold. Read line 4 for the real reason - much more verifiable than your hysterical guesswork.
Unfortunately the statement above only came out once the mad **** had been outed for his hissy fit. It's too late to climb down once busted. Jeez how many times has he done it now.
WJ. Classic lawyer wriggling double speak to me. Read the last paragraph, sounds like a challenge to me.
And to the fl legals......... Hence the injunction after Cellino threatened the tv deal with his antics AGAIN.
WTF are you talking about? As I've stated elsewhere, all 71 of the other attendees at the meeting have not repudiated the statement. They've not been slow to have a go at Leeds before, so if he's telling lies or changing his story, they'd be all over him like a rash. Think it's time you got the professional services of LeedsLover. Your 'Cellino sickness' is escalating horribly.
Leeds United believe it or not have a big global following, why not set up a season ticket price to watch the home games live to these supporters and the money goes straight into the club.
Probably WJ...but there are a lot of supporters who aren't lucky enough to live a snots shot from the ground and I'm sure the club would get a nice bit of revenue if a deal could be done. Maybe the rights to show the games could only be shown outside of the UK.
We have simipar problems here with the Rugby League. The Grand Final used to be played on a Saturday afternoon, then it was switched to Sunday. Now, it's Sunday evening. Why? Because Channel Nine who own the TV rights, wanted it played at a time that suited them. This is a big country and people have to travel long distances to see their teams play. Getting from, say, Sydney back to Townsville (some two and a half thousand Ks) on a Sunday night in order to start work on Monday morning can only be done by air. Not everyone can afford that. Does Channel Nine consider that? No bloody way. They even control the kick-off time. You can see the ref looking to the sidelines until he gets the go ahead to blow his whistle. Here in Queensland we see the Brisbane Broncos play nearly every week on a Friday night. Rarely do we see another game as, if the Broncos' game wasn't being shown, then no-one would watch. The Australian Rugby League (ARL) are hand in glove with Channel Nine, I guess they have to be for the money, but that's the problem isn't it? The money.
