Premier League officials in talks with cyber-security experts to block illegal streaming of matches


Status
Not open for further replies.
Spot on. Don't know how many times this point has to be made before the thick c8nts at Sky and the Premier League listen. I don't care about watching any other game than SAFC ones, I'd watch an SAFCTV channel 24/7 probably.
Even if it was just an away game season pass I d be happy. I don't have sky and would only consider getting it if this was the case
 
I think it's reasonable for several reasons to allow away games to be broadcast but people need to get off their lazy arses and get themselves over to home games. The youth of today......:rolleyes:



Technology man........bloody technology....
We'll just stream the home games from a foreign source.
 
I binned sky as it was shite we are never on it. Id happily pay for SAFC TV live matches as i cant get to many games.
 
I said this last season that they would put a stop to it(or have a damned good try) and was roundly laughed at.

It's pretty easy to do you just flood the servers with requests and they fold under the pressure. I doubt they'd use this approach as other server users would be effected but a more sophisticated DOS would be my bet.
 
Depends how you do it tbh. Why not just say that all matches can be broadcast as part of your sky subscription (similar to how you can watch any champions league match). They continue to move the "big" games to other slots so that people can watch their club and the big top of the table clashes and so that the foreign viewers can still see all of the big clubs regularly rather than having to choose which one to watch, but just make all the 3pm games available on the red button. No individual selling of rights but if you want to watch Sunderland you simply select our game from the list. The main issue you'd have is dividing up which broadcaster shows which of the 3pm games since BT are involved too, but no reason why it's not workable.

The argument against it is always that it might affect lower league attendances but I don't agree with it. I think if you're a chesterfield fan you'll want to watch then regardless of what other game is on tele, I'd be dragging my bairn to the SoL regardless of what league we're in. Equally if you're a Liverpool "fan" in Southend, I seriously doubt you'd be the type to attend lower league games anyway. Plus, why is it that the clubs are getting protection from the ever growing commercial appeal of the prem by ensuring coverage is limited whilst fuck all is done to prevent us fans from suffering from it?

I have an ST but watch a few aways and the ones I can't get to online unless I have owt else planned. I rarely make special plans to watch matches not involving SAFC that are on Sky.

If I am in and there's a match on I might watch it, I might not so on that basis I can't see it affecting the attendances of other clubs because footy is on that much now the novelty has disappeared.

The 'big' teams are on that often now that I bet you can watch about half their games from your armchair anyway.
 
Why don't the PL offer the Premier League Pass to UK customers? Sell it to the public through an interactive channel like BT Sports do with the Champions League? Offer a discount to season ticket holders. The Saturday and Sunday games could be still exclusive to BT and Sky. I'd have no problem paying say £50 a month for a sports package if PL pass was added. But I can't justify paying the money Sky and BT the money they want now. Very rarely I'll watch a game if it's not us.

They must have thought of this before because it's easy money. I do think the clubs would shit themselves that no-one would turn up to certain matches though.
 
Sorry but I disagree totally with you.

He is right though. Regardless of if you like it or not, the games are available on streams. With your model, people who can't or won't attend games watch dodgey streams generating money for criminals. If the model where the Premier League provides streams, the money generated goes to the clubs and some into grass roots football. Which do you think is the most sensible option.

I am certainly in a position where even if the games were free then I would not be able to go to more than say 5 or 6 games per season. My dad for medical reasons would not go to any. The demand is there, it is just currently being fulfilled illegally.

Has anyone mentioned about 'protecting' lower league clubs with the 3pm 'blackout' yet :rolleyes::neutral:

Either move all PL games to a Sunday or ignore the issue.

How many people here attend lower league games if Sunderland are not playing? I really don't think it will make much difference.
 
What I don't get is, its paid for anyway by the broadcaster. So why would the premier league care. Surely its the TV companys who need to stop it, not the league.

Because the next contract will be worth next to nowt if they can't guarantee exclusivity to the winning bidder?
 
Simple

Pay per view
£4-5 quid a game

On ya sky/bt/virgin box or account

Postcode / geo restricted so that you can't purchase within say, 30 miles of ground match is being played at

He is right though. Regardless of if you like it or not, the games are available on streams. With your model, people who can't or won't attend games watch dodgey streams generating money for criminals. If the model where the Premier League provides streams, the money generated goes to the clubs and some into grass roots football. Which do you think is the most sensible option.

I am certainly in a position where even if the games were free then I would not be able to go to more than say 5 or 6 games per season. My dad for medical reasons would not go to any. The demand is there, it is just currently being fulfilled illegally.



Either move all PL games to a Sunday or ignore the issue.

How many people here attend lower league games if Sunderland are not playing? I really don't think it will make much difference.

Thats what I'm saying. It's not an issue any longer. It's was designed late 80s/early 90s. It's from a bygone era and has no relevance today. So it shouldn't be used as an excuse
 
Because the next contract will be worth next to nowt if they can't guarantee exclusivity to the winning bidder?
I think the money will peak with this deal. In three year technology will have improved again. I'm surprised the Premier League haven't launched its own tv channel and streaming services. Therefore they can charge the customer directly and cut the broadcasters out.
 
I think the money will peak with this deal. In three year technology will have improved again. I'm surprised the Premier League haven't launched its own tv channel and streaming services. Therefore they can charge the customer directly and cut the broadcasters out.

I think it will be much less. I think it was Clive Tyldsley (or some other footie commentator) who said as much on Talksport a few weeks ago. He said all the youngrer generation are watching streams on dodgy boxes (even dropped his own sons in the shite) and it would mean that SKY would never again pay the massive amount they've just paid.

Good.
 
Has anyone mentioned about 'protecting' lower league clubs with the 3pm 'blackout' yet :rolleyes::neutral:

Aye, that's always been their priority as seen by the way they filter down the cash. It really narks me when they say that as a Hereford Utd fan is as passionate about seeing his team as an Arsenal one and wouldnt miss it to watch us V Palace, for example. It's really pompous of the PL to even think that.
 
I think it will be much less. I think it was Clive Tyldsley (or some other footie commentator) who said as much on Talksport a few weeks ago. He said all the youngrer generation are watching streams on dodgy boxes (even dropped his own sons in the shite) and it would mean that SKY would never again pay the massive amount they've just paid.

Good.
The irony is the android boxes are killing the pubs now. A season or two back my mate who has a pub was rubbing his hands on match day and it was the pubs getting the blame for the drop in attendance. Now everyone is watching at home and not even going to the local.
 
He is right though. Regardless of if you like it or not, the games are available on streams. With your model, people who can't or won't attend games watch dodgey streams generating money for criminals. If the model where the Premier League provides streams, the money generated goes to the clubs and some into grass roots football. Which do you think is the most sensible option.

I am certainly in a position where even if the games were free then I would not be able to go to more than say 5 or 6 games per season. My dad for medical reasons would not go to any. The demand is there, it is just currently being fulfilled illegally.

Two points......the whole issue we are discussing on this thread is the possibility that the authorities are going to try to stop illegal streams. I'm talking about an alternative should that scenario occur.

Secondly, you say the PL is missing a trick by not offering the likes of yourself the option of purchasing the product.......yet you state that the streams are out there for free anyway.....why would anyone pay for them if they're available for nowt.
 
I think the money will peak with this deal. In three year technology will have improved again. I'm surprised the Premier League haven't launched its own tv channel and streaming services. Therefore they can charge the customer directly and cut the broadcasters out.

Thr NFL does it and that seems to be the model the league want to follow - razzmatazz and heavy on the adverts.

Simple

Pay per view
£4-5 quid a game

On ya sky/bt/virgin box or account

Postcode / geo restricted so that you can't purchase within say, 30 miles of ground match is being played at



Thats what I'm saying. It's not an issue any longer. It's was designed late 80s/early 90s. It's from a bygone era and has no relevance today. So it shouldn't be used as an excuse

Absolutely spot-on and exactly what me and my mates were on about - the radius of the ground thing
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top