Topic: LFC argue for fairer distribution of overseas media rights.

[graffspider]

Yeah, helped Sheffield united, Birmingham, Watford et all didnt it? That money isn't to give an advantage, it's to stop the club from collapsing under wages that were based on a premier league income. And even if it didn't, how does that justify anything? This whole debate has been full of 'oh things are bad so lets make them worse' arguments that hold no justification for taking even more money off these clubs.

Taking even more money off these clubs? There was I thinking it would be coming from broadcasters in countries like China, India and Indonesia. And, even if I accepted that we were taking money off these clubs, I fail to see where the "even more" bit comes from - haven't they been getting vastly more than they otherwise would have done due to the generous agreement that has been in place for the last 20 years?

We would not be pillaging the coffers of small clubs, we would be indirectly selling the rights to our own matches to our own fans. There is nothing in the least bit unethical or unfair about it. The other clubs in the league have a right to an equal share of the money under the current agreement, that is all.

[-Q-]

^ What he said

[Gnurglan]

So by your logic, they should divide it equally across all divisions then?

I'm sure most clubs would like that! No need to go to such an extreme, but I prefer a more even distribution of money. I think the PL policy, to have a more even distribution than for instance Serie A and La Liga, plus a financial safety net for those who drop down a division, makes sense.

[Red Genius]

.....It's just how it has to be. If you want real sport, then football is no longer your game. But for the love of LFC and what it means to us, we must embrace change.

Is the bottom line, the whole sport "football" has been changing over the last 20 years and for a large proportion of that, Liverpool - haven't. Which is i think generally accepted as to have been a big achilles heel to us. Now we have a board and owners who want to embrace the opportunties that have been created through the change in football in order to give us the revenue streams that will give this club a fighting chance we as fans demand to win trophys and yet the fanbase is still divided.

I think we as fans have to ask ourselves what it is that we really want, but i also think a lot of fans have to recognise the world football exists in now, it no longer just a sport, we cannot afford to reminisce some of the principles of old in a modern day equivilant of the game because they are two very different beasts. To compete we need more resources, to acquire those resources we as a club are exploring as many avenues as possible, quite natural behaviour. If you don't like this side of the game, i'd suggest the best thing to do is ignore it and focus on just supporting the lads on match day, because no matter how much you hate it... this is the reality of what football is today.

Nice guys get left behind, winners innovate and stay infront of the competition.

[kopitecrash]

Taking even more money off these clubs? There was I thinking it would be coming from broadcasters in countries like China, India and Indonesia. And, even if I accepted that we were taking money off these clubs, I fail to see where the "even more" bit comes from - haven't they been getting vastly more than they otherwise would have done due to the generous agreement that has been in place for the last 20 years?

Oh sky deal is generous now. There was me thinking sky had ruined football with that deal, brokered by big, greedy clubs looking to cash in.

[Gnurglan]

My point was about us supposedly having a responsibility to other clubs when those clubs wouldn't feel the same if the shoe was on the other foot.

Of course. It's natural that the club try to get as much income as possible. I don't think the club's main view should be to help others. Clearly, other clubs were not lining up to help LFC last season and we shouldn't expect them to. 

Overall though, I believe the FA should try to benefit as many clubs as possible. As long as they have the broadcasting rights to the games, they shouldn't give most of the money to say the top four-five clubs and leave the rest to sort themselves. Their "product", the PL, will benefit the most if they go for a more even distribution of money.

[jillc]

I'm sure those other clubs were really worried about us potentially going into administration last season.

What's that got to do with anything? We got ourselves into that mess as you well know.

[CraigDS]

Oh sky deal is generous now. There was me thinking sky had ruined football with that deal, brokered by big, greedy clubs looking to cash in.

Sky deal gets split so the rich get richer and the poor get less...

[graffspider]

Oh sky deal is generous now. There was me thinking sky had ruined football with that deal, brokered by big, greedy clubs looking to cash in.

You seem confused - if their share of the broadcast deal isn't generous then why would they be bothered about a new, different agreement coming into effect?

Either way, it is irrelevant. The real question is why you think LFC selling overseas broadcast rights to its own matches and to its own fans is in any way unfair or unethical?

[Five Times]

Are you being serious or have I read that wrong?

Entirely serious. Just as I believe in redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor in society, so I believe in redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor in football. Anyone who doesn't believe in redistribution of wealth is *not* a lefty, but *is* a bastard. And morally bankrupt to boot.

"The socialism I believe in is everyone working for each other, everyone having a share of the rewards. It's the way I see football, the way I see life."

[Hazell]

What's that got to do with anything? We got ourselves into that mess as you well know.

Of course we did and those clubs had no responsibility to help us.

[Hazell]

Of course. It's natural that the club try to get as much income as possible. I don't think the club's main view should be to help others. Clearly, other clubs were not lining up to help LFC last season and we shouldn't expect them to. 

Overall though, I believe the FA should try to benefit as many clubs as possible. As long as they have the broadcasting rights to the games, they shouldn't give most of the money to say the top four-five clubs and leave the rest to sort themselves. Their "product", the PL, will benefit the most if they go for a more even distribution of money.

That's fair enough. I've said earlier on this thread that I can see both sides and am in two minds about this. I don't think it's as black as white as people are making out.

[CraigDS]

Entirely serious. Just as I believe in redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor in society

This is a whole discussion I am not even going to get into or will be here all night and this also isnt the right place - but I totally disagree with this!

[Red Genius]

Entirely serious. Just as I believe in redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor in society, so I believe in redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor in football. Anyone who doesn't believe in redistribution of wealth is *not* a lefty, but *is* a bastard. And morally bankrupt to boot.

"The socialism I believe in is everyone working for each other, everyone having a share of the rewards. It's the way I see football, the way I see life."

Theres one massive problem with using that as an arguement, football exists in a capitalist environment - socialist values are obsolete. Accepting this, does not equal agreeing to it.

Much like you can't adopt moves from poker in solitaire, because the rules are entirely different.

As i've said before, don't hate the players hate the game. If people feel so strongly about it, it is the governing bodies and owners of our leagues that need to be lobbied, not the individual clubs as we like every other club are only looking to use those rules to protect number one.

[jillc]

Of course we did and those clubs had no responsibility to help us.

So why were you using it as part of your argument. I'm not picking on you here Hazell I think you're a good poster,  but you are the second person who has used this argument, and I just find it bizarre.  After all Liverpool didn't lift a hand to help Portsmouth or any other team that hit the buffers, so it seems a strange point to raise.

[Red Genius]

So why were you using it as part of your argument. I'm not picking on you here Hazell I think you're a good poster,  but you are the second person who has used this argument, and I just find it bizarre.  After all Liverpool didn't lift a hand to help Portsmouth or any other team that hit the buffers, so it seems a strange point to raise.

Point = everybody is only looking after number one, this proposal is no different in that respect.

[Liverbird 2010]

What's that got to do with anything? We got ourselves into that mess as you well know.

Indeed !!! how people have short memories hey?

[CraigDS]

So why were you using it as part of your argument. I'm not picking on you here Hazell I think you're a good poster,  but you are the second person who has used this argument, and I just find it bizarre.  After all Liverpool didn't lift a hand to help Portsmouth or any other team that hit the buffers, so it seems a strange point to raise.

It was in reply to a post further up and wasnt really being used as an argument for this IIRC.

[TheTeflonJohn]

Entirely serious. Just as I believe in redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor in society, so I believe in redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor in football. Anyone who doesn't believe in redistribution of wealth is *not* a lefty, but *is* a bastard. And morally bankrupt to boot.

"The socialism I believe in is everyone working for each other, everyone having a share of the rewards. It's the way I see football, the way I see life."

So if I go out to work, pay my taxes, then have to give more of my hard earned money to other people and question it I`m a "bastard" right?

Also the Shankly quote. Unfortunately football has moved on since the days of the great man himself. Football has evolved into a business more than a sport and sadly those quotes don`t work in todays football. As other people have pointed out, since the start of the prem we have stood still on the business side of things while other teams have moved with the times, most notably Utd.

So what do we do. Hold onto Shankly`s ethos or move forward with a more business minded way of thinking. Whilst I wish and would prefer myself to stay with Bill`s way it will also leave us standing still. When Bill made that quote was he talking about football in general or LFC on its own? I`m personally not sure. Maybe someone could put me straight

[ashleyrose-66]

Entirely serious. Just as I believe in redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor in society, so I believe in redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor in football.

With the greatest of respect, there aren't many "poor" teams playing in the Premiership! 

Promotion from the Championship to the Premiership means a massive financial windfall for even a small club (like Blackpool for instance) and if that club is managed properly by their owners, they won't be "poor".    Mis-manage the club (like Portsmouth were) and they will have trouble, but should the "rich" clubs be responsible for helping them as well?

So where does this "rich" giving to the "poor" philosophy end?  Why should it only extend to "poor" Premiership clubs?
Chester City were went out of existence last season - how many "rich" clubs offered to help save them?

[iheartthetoons]

As long as Newcastle go bust I think everyone is happy.

 

You are also what's wrong with football today!

[CraigDS]

 

You are also what's wrong with football today!

He is joking, its called banter.

[Five Times]

we like every other club are only looking to use those rules to protect number one.

This is exactly my point. Looking after number one. Morally bankrupt. You might not be able to change the tax system but it doesn't stop you giving plenty away. You can quite easily hold socialist values, and behave accordingly, in a capitalist society. I'd prefer LFC to lobby for equitable distribution, not seek to maximise its share.

[graffspider]

 

You are also what's wrong with football today!

The head against the brick wall graphic explains a lot. You said bye an hour and a half ago and still haven't managed to find your way out.

[iheartthetoons]

You were the one who called the other teams lowly. I simply repeated it back to you.

And for the record, what would you like the lower clubs in the PL to be called? I don't think calling some team in the lower parts of the league 'lowly' is particularly disparaging, in fact its more like the correct adjective to use.

And for the record, i said 'lowly' not lowly, which was used to describe Newcastle and other 'lowly' teams i.e. anything bar the top 6. A friend's episode explains the concept perfectly if you need an explanation.

[iheartthetoons]

The head against the brick wall graphic explains a lot. You said bye an hour and a half ago and still haven't managed to find your way out.

Told ya I couldn't resist, love a debate me.

[Nessy76]

Of course. It's natural that the club try to get as much income as possible. I don't think the club's main view should be to help others. Clearly, other clubs were not lining up to help LFC last season and we shouldn't expect them to. 

Overall though, I believe the FA should try to benefit as many clubs as possible. As long as they have the broadcasting rights to the games, they shouldn't give most of the money to say the top four-five clubs and leave the rest to sort themselves. Their "product", the PL, will benefit the most if they go for a more even distribution of money.

The FA don't hold broadcast rights to Premier League matches.

[itsgunnabebarnes!]

I know ill get slated for it, and its simplistic on my part, but no club would have helped save us if we had gone under a year ago, so i fail to see why us as a club have to lose out more than most financially . For that reason alone i say look after ourselves.

Football has moved on since shanks days, and in my view (again slate away) athough the sentiment behind them is correct its impossible to be a club by those ideals.

[iheartthetoons]

This is exactly my point. Looking after number one. Morally bankrupt. You might not be able to change the tax system but it doesn't stop you giving plenty away. You can quite easily hold socialist values, and behave accordingly, in a capitalist society. I'd prefer LFC to lobby for equitable distribution, not seek to maximise its share.

Bingo. Proper football fan and an LFC supporter you should all be proud of. That's the Liverpool of old I like.

[CraigDS]

And for the record, i said 'lowly' not lowly, which was used to describe Newcastle and other 'lowly' teams i.e. anything bar the top 6. A friend's episode explains the concept perfectly if you need an explanation.

If your definition of things is coming from episodes of Friends then sort of explains a lot.

[Hazell]

So why were you using it as part of your argument. I'm not picking on you here Hazell I think you're a good poster,  but you are the second person who has used this argument, and I just find it bizarre.  After all Liverpool didn't lift a hand to help Portsmouth or any other team that hit the buffers, so it seems a strange point to raise.

Your point about Liverpool not helping Portsmouth is exactly it. We didn't have a responsibility to help them when they were in financial trouble and no one had a responsibility to help us. Yes, we both put ourselves in that position but morally speaking, it wasn't right. The other clubs didn't care, the fans were laughing.

Similarly, if we're concerned about ourselves, we don't have a responsibility to the Bolton's of this world to ensure their revenues remain high. If we can increase our revenue, then I'd expect the club to explore various avenues of doing this. This is potentially one way. Do the clubs involved in the Premier League care about the disproportionate high payments they get than lower divisions? Did they do so when it was formed? Most of the issues seem to revolve around 'fairness' when it's not fair anyway. It's a bit hypocritical from the likes of Whealan to say what he has.

Bear in mind, this is one point of view which I find understandable. I totally get where you're coming from too.

[iheartthetoons]

If your definition of things is coming from episodes of Friends then sort of explains a lot.

Oh the irony of you not getting the irony.

Ironic.

[TheTeflonJohn]

Bingo. Proper football fan and an LFC supporter you should all be proud of. That's the Liverpool of old I like.

Exactly. The Liverpool of old. Standing still

[Red Genius]

This is exactly my point. Looking after number one. Morally bankrupt. You might not be able to change the tax system but it doesn't stop you giving plenty away. You can quite easily hold socialist values, and behave accordingly, in a capitalist society. I'd prefer LFC to lobby for equitable distribution, not seek to maximise its share.

Lobby for equitable distribution is fine, but that doesn't help the club and hasn't helped the club for the past 20 years. As we keep reminded ourselves its been that long since we last won a league the bread and butter trophy.

What would you have the club do in the meantime whilst they are lobbying and achieving very little equality - because that is a utopian pipe dream. Give up the opportunity to bring in further fianances to help us win on the pitch?

I just cannot wrap my head around a judgement which directly and also indirectly gives the club we are all supposed to love a harder chance in doing what it is renoun for, winning trophys?

What is the alternative? stagnate... fall further behind, end up battling it out for UEFA cup places - fighting to cling onto Premiership football? what is it that you want...

[CraigDS]

Football has moved on since shanks days, and in my view (again slate away) athough the sentiment behind them is correct its impossible to be a club by those ideals.

Not a successful one unfortunately.

If we want the club to be like that then the PL and European competitions are not for us. Lower divisions will be where its at, but the same things go on there just with lower values.

[CraigDS]

Oh the irony of you not getting the irony.

Ironic.

Saying things multiple times doesn't make it the truth you know?!

[graffspider]

Told ya I couldn't resist, love a debate me.

Nothing wrong with a good mass debate

[iheartthetoons]

Exactly. The Liverpool of old. Standing still

How are you standing still? Just because you haven't one a PL title in 20 years, doesn't make you unsuccessful! You're on your way, but it takes time with a rebuilding process.

[iheartthetoons]

Saying things multiple times doesn't make it the truth you know?!

When did I say I knew that?

[Five Times]

So if I go out to work, pay my taxes, then have to give more of my hard earned money to other people and question it I`m a "bastard" right?

In simple terms, yes. Of course the mechanism is incredibly complex than that and there are many shades of grey, but anyone who doesn't conceptually believe that a redistributive system is a fair and just thing is a bastard. I accept that this means that I think most people are bastards, but I'm happy holding that position

Also the Shankly quote. Unfortunately football has moved on since the days of the great man himself. Football has evolved into a business more than a sport and sadly those quotes don`t work in todays football. As other people have pointed out, since the start of the prem we have stood still on the business side of things while other teams have moved with the times, most notably Utd.

So what do we do. Hold onto Shankly`s ethos or move forward with a more business minded way of thinking. Whilst I wish and would prefer myself to stay with Bill`s way it will also leave us standing still. When Bill made that quote was he talking about football in general or LFC on its own? I`m personally not sure. Maybe someone could put me straight

So Shankly's ethos is no longer applicable and "those quotes don't work" because the world has moved on? Bollocks. Either you believe in sharing of rewards, or you don't and therefore are, at the risk of repeating myself, a bastard.