Jump to content

Recommended Posts

English presence in the top 10 rose from four teams to five, from six to eight in the top 20, and eight to 14 in the top 30. To put that into context, it means Stoke, Sunderland and Swansea all generated more revenue than storied clubs such as Porto, Lazio, Corinthians and Celtic


Edited to add - we should not be proud of this particularly as we all (or most of us) pay for all of this through the Sky rip off subscriptions. No other country settles for the cost of provision.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> No other country settles for the cost of provision.



Not sure what you mean Mick, can you elaborate please?


I thought the TV money was negotiated as a collective by the PL, and then distributed amongst the clubs dependent on TV showings and final league positions, whereas in Spain it's negotiated club by club, meaning Madrid and Barca get the lion's share regardless, thus maintaining their hegemony.

I'm no fan of all the money sloshing around the game at the moment, but I think one upshot is that the PL seems to have become far more competitive with the so called lesser clubs getting this fairer share of the TV money.

Wasn't there a stat last season (the first year of the new Sky deal), that Cardiff, who were relegated, received more ?? than Man Utd did when we won the PL the season before under the old deal?...

That's right RD - its good that's its shared - but when Stoke, who have never won anything to my knowledge, are generating more income than for example Porto, twice European champions and in the champions league on a regular basis makes you wonder who is paying for all of this Stoke money - someone is paying over the market rate somewhere and guess what it's football fans paying through the nose for TV and tickets.


We stupidly accept it and say how brilliant our league is - but we are just paying into the EPL via Sky etc and the clubs pass that money out to overpaid players.


People crow about best league in the world, but that's just us being suckers. The EPL and Sky are together the most expertly marketed product in the world of football, and we are the customer.

The Italian league which was once considered the best has gone downhill. Seems even Milan sold their team bus to save money. The leagues that have the money usually have the best teams. It was more even in the past where most teams were made up of players from their own country as extra money by going abroad wasn't a lure. Television and the money it generates has changed everything.


In the long term it will have an adverse effect as what would be the young supporters of today and the fans of tomorrow find it too expensive to attend games. Crowds will eventually dwindle at matches and too much football on TV will affect advertising revenue as people get bored watching so much football. Half full stadiums don't look good on tele and it will become less attractive to the TV companies as less people watch. We may eventually get back to the stage where players are paid a less than stupid wage and less players go abroad.

The Amex stadium is a 10 minute drive away from me but I couldn?t get tickets


Game was on BT sport so had to watch it in the pub


Couldn?t get in to any pubs in Lewes until gone 3pm ? home and away supporters were out in force and a cracking atmosphere around town


Had to do my old ?watching Arsenal in an away pub? routine from my East Ham days (supporters were friendly ? I just didn?t want to antagonise)


I like Hughton a lot and wanted us to win, but not to inflict reputational damage on him ? so was well pleased by the end of the day

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Does anyone know when the next SNT meeting is? I am fed up with my son being mugged on East Dulwich Grove! 
    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
    • Well, this is very disappointing. Malabar Feast  has changed its menu again. The delicious fish curry with sea bass no longer exists. There is now a fish dish with raw mango, which doesn't appeal. I had dal and spinach instead, which was bland (which I suppose I could/should have predicted). One of my visitors had a "vegetable Biriani" which contained hardly any vegetables. Along with it came two extremely tiny pieces of poppadom in a large paper bag.   This was embarrassing, as I had been singing Malabar's praises and recommending we ordered from there. The other mains and the parathas were OK, but I doubt we will be ordering from there again. My granddaughters wisely opted for Yard Sale pizzas, which were fine. Has anybody else had a similar recent poor (or indeed good!)  experience at Malabar Feast?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...