Villa Match moved

[Rawlie19]

Have I missed something here ????

Some folks on this thread are stating "I won't renew my season ticket because THEY moved this fixture".

Other than the sheer disbelief at a statement like this, it has actually shaken me into responding.

So SKY move a fixture and, as a result, a current Reading season ticket holder decides not to renew a season ticket for next season.
So if you are so angry with SKY, why do you not renew your SKY package, and therefore vent your frustration on those that caused you
this problem.

There have been numerous posters on here in recent weeks who are not going to renew their season ticket. And for some reason, they
seem to think that everyone wants to know. News for you....WE DON'T.

Over the years and decades since RFC started, fans come and go. This will always be the case. It is just that now, some of the so-called fans use HobNob as a vehicle to proudly state "I had to queue for 7 minutes to buy a beer at half-time, therefore I will NOT be renewing my season ticket" etc etc etc

No one really cares. New fans will take your place. And if you want to go and watch a non-league game in front of 256 people every fortnight, so that you can get back to your car before 10 to 5, then cheerio.

And one final thing. Sky could not care less if the games were played in empty stadiums. It is those at home, that pay the monthly Sky payment, that keep SKY going.

Well said.

For such a well put post, have an avatar. Take your pick.

[Royal Lady]

Actually Barney, wonderful though your sentiments are, I think you'll find the only person who mentioned he might not renew his ST, on this thread, was RoyalBlue and he said it was because he felt let down by the club that although they get the PL and Sky money they haven't spent enough on players in his opinion. Everyone else who has voiced an express opinion has moaned about SKY and Murdoch.

[RoyalBlue]

Actually Barney, wonderful though your sentiments are, I think you'll find the only person who mentioned he might not renew his ST, on this thread, was RoyalBlue and he said it was because he felt let down by the club that although they get the PL and Sky money they haven't spent enough on players in his opinion. Everyone else who has voiced an express opinion has moaned about SKY and Murdoch.

And just just for the benefit of the 'hard of reading' such as Barney, I did not state that I considering not renewing my season ticket solely because this fixture has been moved (it is just one of many reasons). What's more I have also made it very clear what I think of that barsteward Murdoch and his Sky operation.

Having said that I do think the club are rather willingly prostituting themselves to the likes of Sky because in their words 'It is ultimately good for the club'.

They might find themselves rethinking the wisdom and ultimate good of letting Sky p*ss off their fans if Sky lose interest in the club e.g. if we are to go down. Should that happen they will quickly have to reassess the value of looking after the fans who, as with every other club, are the real life blood of the club and in fact the only reason for it existing in the first place!

As for newbie Barney - I think you'll actually find that it is hardcore fans not casual comers and goers (see the other thread on renewers) who are now really seriously considering whether they want to continue to be be treated as nothing more than stupid customers aka mugs and milked of every penny possible in the Sky PL. They will not be so easy for the club to replace like for like because the very people you claim will replace them tend to be those that will leave again without thinking twice about it. Drive the lifeblood of the club away and you too could be watching football at a far lower level and alongside far fewer fans than you ever imagined.

Finally your argument about Sky not being worried about empty stadiums is naive and laughable. How do you think players will perform in front of empty stadiums with no atmosphere? How do you think the armchair fans will feel about watching them go through the motions in soul-less, passionless games in whisper quiet stadia? Maybe Sky could play some piped crowd sounds over the PA to make up for it and the armchair punters would be happy! I think not. Drive the fans away and you kill the game, Sky's football customer base and ultimately Sky's own unhealthy interest in the game itself.

[Vision]

Having said that I do think the club are rather willingly prostituting themselves to the likes of Sky because in their words 'It is ultimately good for the club'.

They might find themselves rethinking the wisdom and ultimate good of letting Sky p*ss off their fans if Sky lose interest in the club e.g. if we are to go down. Should that happen they will quickly have to reassess the value of looking after the fans who, as with every other club, are the real life blood of the club and in fact the only reason for it existing in the first place!

As for newbie Barney - I think you'll actually find that it is hardcore fans not casual comers and goers (see the other thread on renewers) who are now really seriously considering whether they want to continue to be be treated as nothing more than stupid customers aka mugs and milked of every penny possible in the Sky PL. They will not be so easy for the club to replace like for like because the very people you claim will replace them tend to be those that will leave again without thinking twice about it. Drive the lifeblood of the club away and you too could be watching football at a far lower level and alongside far fewer fans than you ever imagined.

Finally your argument about Sky not being worried about empty stadiums is naive and laughable. How do you think players will perform in front of empty stadiums with no atmosphere? How do you think the armchair fans will feel about watching them go through the motions in soul-less, passionless games in whisper quiet stadia? Maybe Sky could play some piped crowd sounds over the PA to make up for it and the armchair punters would be happy! I think not. Drive the fans away and you kill the game, Sky's football customer base and ultimately Sky's own unhealthy interest in the game itself.

Good Post. I don't tend to agree with your "worst case scenario" all doom and gloom posts regards the team but i agree entirely that the club itself needs to be very careful in how they treat a lot of their current fanbase.

They may well think that the Thames Valley is awash with people wanting to experience the "delights" of Premiership football but i'm not convinced its sustainable unless thay start to recognise their diehard fanbase are getting very restless with a lot of the trappings of Reading FC 2008.

[willz_royal]

pathetic. absolutely pathetic.why do they even need to move it? just so we can fit in with their viewing schedules. i thinks its pretty clear where the authorities allegiances lie. they are letting television get monopoly over whether the proper fans can enjoy the game or not. i have never been angry at a decision like this before, but i am now. i am never going to ask for sky again.

oxf*rd murdoch.

He who pays the piper......

calls the tune.

so what does the money i pump into reading fc/ the premier league count for. i pay for entertainment, and having a game moved to 12:30 on a sunday takes alot of the entertainment value out of it. its all a bit of a facade, caring about the fans and all that. sort it out FA.

[RoyalBlue]

I guess I now have to be thankful to Sky for sparing me having to witness another display like yesterday, followed by more Steve Coppell 'can only work harder to fix' and folks on here still saying that games like Villa don't count as we will pick up the points we need from the teams below us.

Income v expenditure, I reckon my kids football teams invest more than RFC!

[Platypuss]

pathetic. absolutely pathetic.why do they even need to move it? just so we can fit in with their viewing schedules. i thinks its pretty clear where the authorities allegiances lie. they are letting television get monopoly over whether the proper fans can enjoy the game or not. i have never been angry at a decision like this before, but i am now. i am never going to ask for sky again.

oxf*rd murdoch.

He who pays the piper......

calls the tune.

so what does the money i pump into reading fc/ the premier league count for.

Feck all - you're paying for a 6 year old with a recorder while Murdoch has the woodwind section of the LSO.

[STAR Liaison]

Having said that I do think the club are rather willingly prostituting themselves to the likes of Sky because in their words 'It is ultimately good for the club'.

They might find themselves rethinking the wisdom and ultimate good of letting Sky p*ss off their fans if Sky lose interest in the club e.g. if we are to go down. Should that happen they will quickly have to reassess the value of looking after the fans who, as with every other club, are the real life blood of the club and in fact the only reason for it existing in the first place!

Yet again you make me look as if I am defending the club because you are so antagonistic towards them but you really cannot misrepresent things this much.

The club has no say in the Sky deal other than as one of the 20 PL clubs involved in the deal. It is not a deal that each individual club makes and long may it stay that way. The EU wanted to remove the collective bargaining of the PL but if they had had their way the differential between the BIG clubs like ManU, Liverpool Chelsea Arsenal etc and everyone else would grow and grow. It is bad enough now when ManU has a profit that exceeds Reading's turnover so just think how much worse it would be if the gig clubs could (as the Glaziers hoped?) negotiate their own deal with the TV companies. I am not as informed as others in STAR who see the bigger picture through the FSF but I know enough to realise that raving at RFC about this is a Canute act

It is the armchair fan, and the money they put into the satellite TV companies, that p*sses off the fans who actually attend games to support their team. It is the whole money grabbing feel to the top level of football and it is the holy grail of the vast majority of football fans to see their team there in the top flight but the price is very high and the least of it now is moving fixtures.

When it comes to moving fixtures think about our favourite local rivals Aldershot in the Blue Square Conference. They have had fixtures moved to a Tuesday night by Setanta, only to be told a week before that although it was moved for TV to a week night it is now not going to be broadcast as Setanta belatedly realised that it clashed with a Champions League game. By this time the Police refused to allow it to be moved back to the weekend as it was insufficient notice, so they end up with the worst of all worlds, a low crowd, a moved fixture and no consolation of seeing it on the box. I know most on here would not sympathise with Aldershot but just think how low we would have to drop to escape the hassles of moving fixtures.

[Dirk Gently]

Indeed. If you were to ask any club chairman, Scudamore - or just about anyone involved in Sky, Setanta or the Premier League - their response would be "it's the price you have to pay for getting £50 million a season to buy and pay players. If you want to go back to watching nondescript English players in crumbling stadiums then you're welcome to do that at 3 pm every Saturday."

I'm not for a minute defending that attitude, and there must clearly be some middle ground that makes the changes less unpalatable, but once football sold its soul to television this was the inevitable result.

As always, of course, it's the match-going fans who suffer the pain of it. And things have clearly got worse this season - because instead of Sky deciding what fixtures they want to move (as last year and before) we're now in a situation where Sky and Setanta decide and argue between themselves who's going to cover what, which takes a lot longer. Believe me, the contract and the rules governing the two companies and who gets what of the 5 contracts is a massive book - literally 6 inches thick, and the two companies hate each so I'm amazed they ever agree. But yes, the level of notice given is unacceptable and needs to be changed - but we do get off lightly compared to some teams who are televised almost every week.

Still, what does it matter? No-one who posts on "The Team" was planning to come anyway, were they? - we'll already be relegated by then so what's the point of watching?

[RoyalBlue]

Having said that I do think the club are rather willingly prostituting themselves to the likes of Sky because in their words 'It is ultimately good for the club'.

They might find themselves rethinking the wisdom and ultimate good of letting Sky p*ss off their fans if Sky lose interest in the club e.g. if we are to go down. Should that happen they will quickly have to reassess the value of looking after the fans who, as with every other club, are the real life blood of the club and in fact the only reason for it existing in the first place!

Yet again you make me look as if I am defending the club because you are so antagonistic towards them but you really cannot misrepresent things this much.

Just where did I misrepresent things, let alone 'this much'? Did or did not Jackie Evans (someone I normally have a lot of time for) state on the Official Site that 'It is ultimately good for the club'?

Was it necessary for her to say that if the club don't feel that way? How about speaking out for the fans, even if they alone can't change the situation?

The club think it is ultimately good for them and I'm arguing that they might have to rethink that and will regret the treatment of their fans if the Sky money goes away. No misrepresentation of either parties' views there I would have said.

I'm sorry but the 'only following orders' excuse really isn't acceptable. If both the club and STAR are really on the side of the supporters, what do they propose to do in terms of getting together with like minded bodies to try to get something done about the way supporters are being treated?

Rather than 'excuse' what has happened in terms of it being 'ultimately good for the club', perhaps the club could have at least made a strong statement in support of its supporters e.g.

'The club believe it is completely unacceptable that supporters are inconvenienced and even prevented from attending the game because of a change in kickoff date and time ordered at very short notice by Sky. Unfortunately, the way the TV deal is currently structured means that we are powerless to resist on this occasion. However, we have written to the Premier League, the Government and Sky stating our extreme concern at the way our supporters have been treated and pressing for a change in regulation to prevent TV companies changing fixture times at such short notice in the future. We will also be lobbying other clubs for their support in achieving this.'

Alternatively: 'We recognise that this late change means that some supporters will now be unable to attend the game as originally planned. Therefore, those supporters now unable to attend will be given a credit of £15 (less for concessions) against the cost of renewing their season ticket for next season.'

Now I'm sure many will argue that the latter option is impossible to operate for a variety of reasons. No doubt it would present some difficulties but I very much doubt that they would be insurmountable if the will was there. As for cost, even given the present poor form of the team, I doubt this offer would lead to thousands staying away from a game that they are still able to attend. Worst case scenario 4,000 getting a credit of some sort if they renew their season ticket next season? And no, it wouldn't be done for every TV change but only where that change was implemented at unreasonably short notice.

I guess where people stand on this matter is likely to come down to whether or not they believe Sky's involvement and the massive amount of money they bring with them really benefits the game in this country, both now and in the longer term.

[STAR Liaison]

Having said that I do think the club are rather willingly prostituting themselves to the likes of Sky because in their words 'It is ultimately good for the club'.



Just where did I misrepresent things, let alone 'this much'? Did or did not Jackie Evans (someone I normally have a lot of time for) state on the Official Site that 'It is ultimately good for the club'? .

I think the mispresentation is the phrase I have made bold. The club made the statement that it is ultimately for the good of the club in relation to the rest of the PL rather than in isolation. I think if you gave them a 'not starting from here' scenario the result would be very different but they have to operate in the existing world not the one that we all may prefer. Having been approached by Jackie before the move was announced I know how frustrated and disappointed the club is, but if you step back far enough you may understand that in comparison with the clubs we are competing with in the PL it can be seen as ultimately good for the club

I'm sorry but the 'only following orders' excuse really isn't acceptable. If both the club and STAR are really on the side of the supporters, what do they propose to do in terms of getting together with like minded bodies to try to get something done about the way supporters are being treated?

Only following orders is again misrepresenting things - how about not breaking the terms of your contract - that is more accurate. In terms of cost I have no doubt that would be (knowing the power of those TV companies) more likely to break the club than the moving of a fixture. STAR is a member of the FSF who do take these sort of things on and one of the STAR board is currently vice-chairman of the FSF so if you personally did something to get together with like minded supporters you may have know this rather than implying that we don't care.

I guess where people stand on this matter is likely to come down to whether or not they believe Sky's involvement and the massive amount of money they bring with them really benefits the game in this country, both now and in the longer term.

FYI I do not approve of what SKY has done to football but I do appreciate that just moaning and blaming the club is not really at all constructive and will not wave that magic wand to make things better. I have been a personal member of Fottball Supporters Federation (and of Football Supporters Association before that) and actively supported their work as well as actually talking to some of the people who have to cope with the repercussions of these changes. If you think your suggestions are a practical way forward have you sent them to the club or are you expecting them to read this?

[Victor Meldrew]

I remember the away game at Man City being moved to the Saturday a few years ago and it was a loud sod you to the fans even though at the start of the season it was designated that all games in our division would be played on the Sunday.
I had made arrangements months before to accommodate the Sunday fixture but a couple of weeks before City changed the date and informed me that most City fans preferred the game to kick off on a Saturday-so there.
As Vision said earlier all clubs including Reading need to listen to their fans because one day they might need them again.

BTW if the club had said (as they did with season ticket hikes that they were necessary because of the more expensive players that would be bought) that we have to accept that Sky and Setanta dictate kick-off times and in return the club receives £30million plus which the club can add to the increased ticket money to buy better players I am sure the fans would have gone along with being treated as a second-rate consideration.
As it is we are getting the worst of both worlds-increased admission costs and kick-off changes at the whim of TV producers without getting the better (and more expensive) signings.
No wonder a number of people are talking about giving support of our club a miss next season even if we don't get relegated.

[weybridgewanderer]

Maybe Sky could play some piped crowd sounds over the PA to make up for it and the armchair punters would be happy! I think not. Drive the fans away and you kill the game, Sky's football customer base and ultimately Sky's own unhealthy interest in the game itself.

It would not be beyond SKY to feed crowd noise to the TV audience despite there being no noise in the stadium.

[weybridgewanderer]

it wouldn't be done for every TV change but only where that change was implemented at unreasonably short notice.

and therein lies some problem, what is classed as unreasonable short notice.

We have been given 4 weeks notice. Is that unreasonable? Personally I don't think so. I accept that others may prefer 6.

Say last weeks game against Bolton was called off for a waterlogged pitch at 10am and rescheduled for next wednesday night, would that be entitled to a credit too?

UEFA Cup games on a thursday night cause weekend fixtures to move.

Round of 32, 2nd leg 21.02.2008
Round of 16, 1st leg 06.03.2008
Round of 16 2nd leg 12/13.03.2008
Quarter-finals, 1st leg 03.04.2008
Quarter-finals, 2nd leg 10.04.2008
Semi-finals, 1st leg 24.04.2008
Semi-finals, 2nd leg 01.05.2008

The one that may affect us would be Tottenham on May 3rd if they get to the semi finals and have to play May 1st. We would find out April 10th but they teams that have the UEFA cup teams on march 8th onty find out on the 21st of feb if that game will be moved.

[T.R.O.L.I.]

But at least there is a decent reason for moving the games on the days you mentioned (and if you are the supporter of the team in Europe you can't really complain). Moving a Saturday 3pm game to Sunday 12:30pm (for no other reason than showing a game on TV) once the tickets have already gone on sale is a complete piss take IMO.

[weybridgewanderer]

But at least there is a decent reason for moving the games on the days you mentioned (and if you are the supporter of the team in Europe you can't really complain). Moving a Saturday 3pm game to Sunday 12:30pm (for no other reason than showing a game on TV) once the tickets have already gone on sale is a complete piss take IMO.

So if you can't make the Sunday game thats moved at 4 to 6 weeks notice for TV you get a credit but if I can't make a game thats moved at 2 weeks notice because Tottenham are in the UEFA Cup I don'tget a credit because that is an acceptable reason to move a game?

Sorry but I think it is just as unacceptable. After all why is the UEFA Cup on a Thursday rather than a Wednesday? is it so that it doesn't clash with champions league games and also can be on TV. So ultimately our weekend game will be moved so that tottenhams midweek game can be on TV?

[AF1]

Indeed. If you were to ask any club chairman, Scudamore - or just about anyone involved in Sky, Setanta or the Premier League - their response would be "it's the price you have to pay for getting £50 million a season to buy and pay players. If you want to go back to watching nondescript English players in crumbling stadiums then you're welcome to do that at 3 pm every Saturday."

Where do I sign up?

[T.R.O.L.I.]

But at least there is a decent reason for moving the games on the days you mentioned (and if you are the supporter of the team in Europe you can't really complain). Moving a Saturday 3pm game to Sunday 12:30pm (for no other reason than showing a game on TV) once the tickets have already gone on sale is a complete piss take IMO.

So if you can't make the Sunday game thats moved at 4 to 6 weeks notice for TV you get a credit but if I can't make a game thats moved at 2 weeks notice because Tottenham are in the UEFA Cup I don'tget a credit because that is an acceptable reason to move a game?

Sorry but I think it is just as unacceptable. After all why is the UEFA Cup on a Thursday rather than a Wednesday? is it so that it doesn't clash with champions league games and also can be on TV. So ultimately our weekend game will be moved so that tottenhams midweek game can be on TV?

My point was that for the last however many years, the UEFA cup has been played on a Thursday and PL games have been moved to the Sunday to accomadate this. When the fixtures are released at the start of the season, at least you know when the UEFA cup games are so you could make some contingency plans (Blackburn at home last season immediately springs to mind). The same applies to this season if either Man City (8th March) or Newcastle (5th April) had got to the FA Cup 6th Round / Semi finals respectively.

Just moving a game for TV with only a few weeks notice (and when the tickets have already gone on sale) to satisfy the armchair supporters' needs for televised football is a complete pisstake IMO.

[T.R.O.L.I.]

Indeed. If you were to ask any club chairman, Scudamore - or just about anyone involved in Sky, Setanta or the Premier League - their response would be "it's the price you have to pay for getting £50 million a season to buy and pay players. If you want to go back to watching nondescript English players in crumbling stadiums then you're welcome to do that at 3 pm every Saturday."

Where do I sign up?

'greed.

[STAR Voice]

Indeed. If you were to ask any club chairman, Scudamore - or just about anyone involved in Sky, Setanta or the Premier League - their response would be "it's the price you have to pay for getting £50 million a season to buy and pay players. If you want to go back to watching nondescript English players in crumbling stadiums then you're welcome to do that at 3 pm every Saturday."

Where do I sign up?

'greed.

Here, for starters. http://www.fsf.org.uk/site-pages/poll.html

And then do what this says : http://www.fsf.org.uk/news/news0095no-to-game-39.html

The fightback starts today!