Ye Olde Premier League Pub

[Sexylubb1]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/10/10/premier-league-urged-scrap-ppv-planas-fans-piling-pubs-could/

Spoiler

Sitat

Premier League urged to scrap its PPV plan as fans piling into pubs could cause coronavirus spike

Pubs and clubs would be exempt from the £14.95 fee for games not previously selected by broadcasters for October and the start of November.

The Premier League is under pressure to scrap its £15-a-game pay-per-view plan amid warnings it could compound the spike in coronavirus cases by driving fans into pubs.

The revolt against the decision to charge supporters to watch matches it had previously given away intensified on Saturday after it emerged pubs and clubs would be exempt from the £14.95 fee for games not previously selected by Sky Sports and BT Sport for the rest of this month and start of next.

The combination of what has been branded an excessive charge for those who ordinarily would stay at home to watch matches with the on-going giveaway to pubs and clubs was criticised by a leading public health expert and a member of Parliament’s digital, culture, media and sport select committee.

Prof Gabriel Scally, a key member of the Independent Sage group which holds the Government’s scientific advisory group to account, told Telegraph Sport: “It would be a very bad substitute to have fans gathering indoors.

“It does certainly appear to be a situation that would encourage fans to put themselves potentially at risk. We do know that a significant proportion of transmission is associated with the hospitality industry and pubs in particular.”

Steve Brine, the Conservative MP and member of the select committee, said: “These are the worst of times and the Premier League has done much to lift spirits but this is not their finest hour. It will encourage people to gather together and that’s just not the spirit of right now in my opinion.”

Members of the world’s richest league and their broadcast partners had no plans on Saturday night to reverse their decision to charge £14.95 for half of the games from next weekend until at least the beginning of next month.

Premier League clubs, who are losing millions of pounds a week from playing behind closed doors, believe they have been left with no other option than to monetise those matches at a time they are being asked by the Government to bail out the English Football League.

The Telegraph has been told those clubs discussed on Friday giving any pay-per-view profits to the 48 clubs in League One and League Two – as the row over the responsibility for who should rescue the EFL continues. During the meeting at which the pay-per-view question was discussed, a number of clubs are said to have proposed that revenue from games sold individually should be put towards the bailout.

Speaking in favour were said to be Vinai Venkatesham, the Arsenal chief executive, and Steve Parish, the Crystal Palace chairman. Christian Purslow, the Aston Villa chief executive, said Premier League clubs should not profit from the pay-per-view matches.

There is an acceptance that clubs will have to save their counterparts in the two bottom divisions of the professional game while they remain at loggerheads with those in the Championship. Top-flight teams were told by broadcasters they had to make a decision on Friday for the technology to be in place for the next round of fixtures. They have yet to make any final decision on how the revenue will be dispersed.

Club executives maintain they could not continue simply giving away free content to the main UK broadcasters, Sky and BT, as well as Amazon and the BBC, now there is little prospect of fans returning to stadiums until March.

The price was set in relation to the EFL’s iFollow pass, which costs £10 per live game. The Premier League offering was considered superior because of higher production values.

 

 

Endret 11. oktober 2020 av Sexylubb1

[Danielzu]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/10/11/world-exclusive-man-utd-liverpool-driving-project-big-picture/

 

Liverpool og united med en fremtidig plan "protect big picture " for pl

-18 lag i pl 

-drop ligacup og community shield 

-playoff-kamp for tredje nederst i pl

- kun topp seks pluss longtimers west ham, Southampton og Everton får stemmerett 

-max 20pund for bortebarnebillett.

 

Kan også leses om det her

https://www.liverpool.no/nyheter/2020/10/liverpool-og-manchester-united-staar-bak-forslag-om-enorme-regelendringer/

Endret 11. oktober 2020 av Danielzu

[Snikpellik]

Både gode og dårlige ting. Vil sikre de største klubbene mer makt, samtidig er den økonomiske biten nødvendig for å sikre at klubber ikke går under, spesielt nedover i systemet. 

Jeg mener det er helt feil av de største klubbene å bruke pandemien til å sikre seg mer makt i fotballen, men noe av dette er også bra og klokt.

Noen flere ting er at de vil redusere play-off plassene i Championship, og dermed gjøre det vanskeligere å rykke opp til Premier League.

- 25% av overskuddet i PL-klubbene skal gå nedover i systemet til EFL-klubber
- 6% skal gå til stadionutbygging til klubber nedover i systemet ned til fjerde nivå

Og de vil fjerne fallskjermen klubber får når de rykker ned fra PL, og heller fordele summene jevnere på klubbene i EFL.

[Danielzu]

 

[blured]

Fikk ikke tilgang til artikkelen pga betalingsmur hos Telegraph. Men ifølge (denne) posten på reddit er dette alle de foreslåtte endringene:

Spoiler

Rescue Fund

• An immediate rescue fund of £350,000,000 to the English Football League and Football Association for lost revenues of 2019/20 and 2020/21

• For the EFL:

£50,000,000 to cover 2019/20 EFL matchday losses;

Up to £200,000,000 available to cover 2020/21 EFL matchday losses;

Money will be advanced to the EFL from increased future revenues.

• For the FA:

£100,000,000 in grants, made up of £55,000,000 to cover operational losses, £25,000,000 for clubs below the EFL, £10,000,000 for the Women’s Super League and Championship, £10,000,000 for grassroots

Funds to be made available by the Premier League through loans guaranteed by the clubs.

Infrastructure Plan

• Infrastructure funding of 6% of Premier League gross revenues to be distributed annually to the top four divisions.

• Each club will receive £100 per seat annually.

• Infrastructure funding can only be used for stadia and fan experiences.

Fan Charter

• A cap of £20 on Premier League away ticketing (adjusted every 3 years for inflation)

• Subsidised Premier League away travel

• Safe-standing sections at the discretion of each club, subject to government permission.

• Away sections must provide at least 3,000 or 8% of capacity, whichever is higher.

Annual Good Causes

• An increase of 66% in annual contributions to good causes in England.

• A total of 5% of Premier League gross income to be contributed annually to good causes and grassroots football, to include focus on combatting racism and discrimination.

Redistribution of Media & Sponsorship Revenues (three possible options)

• Option A: 50% equal, 25% current-year merit, 25% previous 3-year merit

A greater emphasis will be placed on merit in both the Premier League and the Championship with half of payments reflecting positions over the past four years.

• Option B: Current Premier League distribution scheme (50% equal, 25% by merit and 25% by facility fees) but newly promoted clubs must holdback £25m of first two years in the Premier League to mitigate risk of relegation.

• Option 😄 Current Premier League distribution scheme, but newly promoted clubs receive 25% of their allocated Facility Fees for first 3 years in league.

For all above options:

• Excluding parachute payments and including new infrastructure payments, solidarity from the Premier League to the English Football League would increase from 4% to 25%.

• Premier League and English Football League domestic and international media rights will be collectively sold by the Premier League.

• Compensation payments to The EFL and FA, infrastructure monies and related borrowings are deducted prior to determination of distributable revenues.

Pyramid structure

• The Premier League, originally formed to house 18 clubs,would be reduced from 20 to 18 clubs.

• This would free up the calendar and, with fewer teams and an end to parachute payments, provide additional resources to the EFL.

• Reduction from 38 to 34 rounds of matches will also aid the national team.

• Championships, League One and League Two to all be made up of 24 clubs

Promotion and relegation

• Premier League relegation. At least 2 clubs automatically relegated annually

• Championship promotion: 1st and 2nd automatically promoted.

• Club finishing 16th in the Premier League joins four team Championship play-off tournament with teams who finish 3rd, 4th and 5th. Semi-finals would be 16th place PL team vs 5th place Championships team nad 3rd place Championship team against 4th place Championship team.

• Championship relegation – 3 clubs

• Leagues One and Two: promotion of 3 clubs. Relegation of 4 clubs

Club media

• All Premier League clubs have the exclusive rights to sell eight live matches a season directly to fans via their own digital platforms in all international territories.

• All Premier League and Championship clubs allowed to show limited in-match highlights on their own digital platforms.

• No more than 27 games per club will be shown live in UK per season

• Saturday 3pm broadcast blackouts remain to help protect EFL attendance

Other competitions

• League Cup and Community Shield discontinued;

• Establishment of a new independent league for the Women’s professional game, not to be owned by the Premier League or The Football Association;

• FA Cup replays retained but there will be no replays in the winter break;

• Premier League begins later in August and pre-season friendlies extended;

• No more than two weeks between the end of the Premier League and the Champions League final;

• Premier League clubs must participate at least once every five years in the Premier League summer tournament.

Other structural changes

• Elite Player Performance Plan funding is included in the revenue received by EFL clubs;

• Clubs in League One and below are no longer required to have an academy;

• Clubs permitted to have up to 15 players out on loan domestically at any time, including up to four in a single English club. Introduction of one month loans for players under 23, an ability to recall loanees in the event of managerial change, incentivise loanee clubs through payments based on future performance or sale of loaned players;

• Remove the scholarship clause permitting players to terminate at any stage.

Cost Controls & Related Party Income

• Financial Fair Play rules that align with Uefa to ensure English clubs are not at a disadvantage in Europe;

• A £50 million cap per annum on all related party transactions and a more stringent ‘related party’ definition;

• Premier League executive provided with full access to clubs accounting information to investigate cost control

• A joint Premier League and Championship body will monitor cost controls.

• The English Football League will introduce hard salary caps.

Governance

• All material matters relating to the business of the Premier League will require shareholder approval, except that the Board will decide whether to approve a new owner;

• All votes will require more than two-thirds majority to be approved;

• All other votes for the operation of the Premier League will be one-club, one-vote except those provided for under ‘Special Voting Rights’

Special Voting Rights

• Each of the nine clubs who, at any time of determination, have been members of the Premier League continuously for more seasons than other clubs will be considered a ‘Long-Term Shareholder’.

• Two-thirds of the long-term shareholders can cause to be adopted without approval from the other clubs:

i) the election or removal of the CEO and/or a member of the board;

ii) amendments to cost control rules and regulations;

iii) contracts for the sale of league broadcasting and media rights

• Two-thirds of the long-term shareholders can prevent from being adopted resolutions to:

i) change the distribution rights of the sponsorship, commercial and broadcasting rights sold centrally;

ii) change the distribution to clubs from other PL centralised rights or assets

c) alter in a material way the nature of the competition

• Two-thirds of the long-term shareholders can veto the Premier League board’s approval of a proposed new owner.

Ikke bare dårlige forslag.

Men synes det blir helt feil at de ni klubbene som har vært lengst i PL skal få en ekstra maks gjennom såkalt "special voting rights", spesielt når de inkluderer mye av det viktigste (som "contracts for the sale of league broadcasting and media rights" og "change the distribution rights of the sponsorship, commercial and broadcasting rights sold centrally"). 

Edit: I tillegg så er dette et helt latterlig dårlig forslag, og vanner ut de vanlige tv-rettighetene, og er i praksis en måte for de store klubbene å sikre seg mer inntekter direkte, uten at de må dele det med noen andre:

• All Premier League clubs have the exclusive rights to sell eight live matches a season directly to fans via their own digital platforms in all international territories.

Endret 11. oktober 2020 av blured

[Whiteshit]

Har forstått det sånn at man city heller ikkje er blant dei 9?

ikkje at det betyr noke, men morsom anekdote isåfall

[ProphetSe7en]

Joda

De ni klubbene vil være Manchester United, Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal, Manchester City, Tottenham, Everton, Southampton og West Ham

 

 

 

[Tåkefyrste]

Liker ikke om PL reduseres fra 20 til 18 klubber. Det er trist for alle egentlig.

[jjkoggan]

Tåkefyrste skrev (2 timer siden):

Liker ikke om PL reduseres fra 20 til 18 klubber. Det er trist for alle egentlig.

Fordi?

[Gjest Slettet+3165]

Ser ut som en "hostile takeover" signert de største klubbene, forkledd som en redningspakke for de mindre klubbene.

Ikke noe fan, og heldigvis, sliter jeg med å se hvordan noen av de mindre klubbene vil stemme for dette.

[bshagen]

jjkoggan skrev (11 minutter siden):

Fordi?

Færre kamper? Det er jo fotball som er gøy - ikke "ikke mer fotball"

[Tåkefyrste]

12 minutes ago, jjkoggan said:

Fordi?

Mindre kamper selvfølgelig.

Og ikke minst at alle rekorder og diverse ville blitt redusert i verdi. Ville blitt litt sånn: "joda fin rekord, men så var det 38 kamper i ligaen den gangen også da". Kjipt.

Endret 12. oktober 2020 av Tåkefyrste

[jjkoggan]

Tåkefyrste skrev (6 minutter siden):

Mindre kamper selvfølgelig.

Og ikke minst at alle rekorder og diverse ville blitt redusert i verdi. Ville blitt litt sånn: "joda fin rekord, men så var det 38 kamper i ligaen den gangen også da". Kjipt.

Blir det mer kamper/lag på EFL?  MAO hva skjer med de 2 lagene?

[Jakobk]

jjkoggan skrev (1 time siden):

Blir det mer kamper/lag på EFL?  MAO hva skjer med de 2 lagene?

Nei, ikke flere lag i lagere divisjoner, så 2 ekstra lag må vel rykke ned fra hver divisjon.

[bshagen]

Skuffet over United (og Liverpool) her som legger opp til en "gutteklubben grei" der de kan kontrollere Premier League som en egen eksklusiv elite på 6 lag. Det er litt vantro må jeg innrømme, og ikke de verdiene jeg trodde United besatt  

[Jotun]

Hehehe.... Sånn har det nå vært i en årrekke.... 

Både i pl og i Europa 🤷‍♂️ de store bestemmer. 

[bshagen]

Jotun skrev (1 minutt siden):

Hehehe.... Sånn har det nå vært i en årrekke.... 

Både i pl og i Europa 🤷‍♂️ de store bestemmer. 

Dette gjør det IKKE bedre og skaper enda større skille. I dag så kreves det 14 stemmer for at større endringer skal gå igjennom, men om det kun er de 6 som trenger å bestemme, så vil jo dette dramatisk forandre hvordan ting fungerer. Fjerning av Ligacupen er også en ting som kun gangner de som har "for mange" kamper pga PL/EL, mens de mindre lagene gjerne ser på dette som gode og nødvendige penger. Jeg er svært skeptisk til dette forslaget

[Snikpellik]

Ikke bare United og Liverpool, men alle de 9 klubbene (minus West Ham som har gått ut mot forslaget). 

Dessverre virker EFL-sjefen å være for dette også, og han virker optimistisk på at mange av de 72 klubbene støtter opp.

Noe må åpenbart gjøres, men dette er ikke riktig måte. Forslaget inneholder mye som er veldig bra, men at makten skal konsentrere seg mer hos de største klubbene (ikke bare topp 9, men hele PL) er helt feil måte å gjøre det på. 

[Jotun]

bshagen skrev (16 minutter siden):

Dette gjør det IKKE bedre og skaper enda større skille. I dag så kreves det 14 stemmer for at større endringer skal gå igjennom, men om det kun er de 6 som trenger å bestemme, så vil jo dette dramatisk forandre hvordan ting fungerer. Fjerning av Ligacupen er også en ting som kun gangner de som har "for mange" kamper pga PL/EL, mens de mindre lagene gjerne ser på dette som gode og nødvendige penger. Jeg er svært skeptisk til dette forslaget

Har heller aldri sagt det gjør ting bedre 🤷‍♂️

Det var kun en kommentar til din naive tro på hva som er drivkreftene i pengeklubben Manchester United..... 

[bshagen]

@Snikpellik
Kom over denne: https://www.vg.no/sport/fotball/i/M3Ra8E/storklubbene-vil-ta-makten-gigantenes-ekstreme-frekkhet

Sitat

Men ser man nærmere på detaljene i hva som faktisk foreslås her, forsvinner nisseluen fort fra direktørkontorene i Manchester og Liverpool. Her handler det nemlig om å sikre seg selv mest mulig makt. Konsekvensen av et system som foreslås vil øke forskjellene mellom de aller største og resten i Premier League, og går ikke utelukkende ut på altruismen det søkes å skape et inntrykk av.

Helt sentralt står det nemlig å gå bort fra prinsippet om at det kreves 14 Premier League-klubber for å få gjennom substansielle forslag, noe som for eksempel stod sentralt i forhandlingene om hvordan restarten etter corona skulle skje. I stedet skal makten etter planen konsolideres hos de største, eller hos såkalte «long term shareholders», hva gjelder innflytelse når det stemmes over store temaer. Ja eller nei til en ny potensiell eier hos en konkurrerende klubb, er et eksempel på et tema der de seks med mest å beskytte kan ha store egeninteresser i økt stemmemakt.

Her snakker vi om de seks store, altså Liverpool, to Manchester-klubber og tre fra hovedstaden. I tillegg skal Everton, Southampton og West Ham visstnok også gis en form for posisjon i varmen. Men stemmeregler innad blant eliten tilsier at de aller største uansett vil sitte med bukta og begge endene, da seks stemmer kan sikre et utfall, for eksempel om prinsipper for individuelle inntektsmuligheter. 

Hva tenker du om dette? For om det er slik, så er det ikke mye demokratisk i alle fall