Its a northern thing with Sky, they need more subscribers in the north of the country.
It don't really worry me anymore, its really been like this since the invention of football round about 1992. Although I did one record a good live game that I went to. But that must have been way back in '98.
I know some are glad but really its hardly fair is it? Be nice to watch a few away games on the telly even if we are cursed. Makes for a good Friday night (or a bad one).
Its now no longer a joke. Leeds on about 8 time before xmas & we're not on once. Is worse than tghe old days when we were promoted in the last 80's - at least then we would get a mention somewhere.
I'd tell them to p**s off & cant use our ground as a backdrop if they have no intention of showing us. I'm serious. Someone should get KM to contact Sky and tell them to change the background........and then tell the media why Sky have had to change it.
Of course I want to see us on Sky as often as possible. But even if I were still in the UK I couldn't for the life of me see why you would not want us on TV. The club earns facility fees from the TV company, more exposure means we can charge more for ground boards, shirt sponsorship etc, and it may encourage kids seeing us on TV to ask their Dad to take them to The Valley (a lot more useful than a shagging couple or a sofa). If a lunchtime KO means you can't have a lie in - so what? You can always watch it on the tele...
Anyway, here's a couple of my e-mails to Sky and their bullshit response.
Dear Sir/Madam,
Can you explain to me why Leeds Utd are being shown live four times in August, when five other championship clubs are not scheduled to be shown at all?
One of the ostracised five being my club, Charlton Athletic, as usual; who, despite being just outside the thirty best supported clubs in the country and finishing reasonably well have been on a total of about five times in four years. Now I appreciate that little old Charlton might not be much of a draw, but you can always show our games against teams that are – e.g. Derby, Leeds, Forest. But you choose not to, showing, for example our game against Ipswich last year, and then probably using the unsurprising low audience figure as a reason to ignore us again…
Of course this apparent bias also helps swell Leeds coffers with their facility fee as well as the extra advertising revenue they can gain from shirt sponsorship and ground boards, most unfair.
I wouldn’t mind if they were good to watch or riding high, but last season you showed them 9 times (including the Capital 1 cup), even their own fans admitted their football was poor and they even finished below us!
I can understand why their game at Donny is a good one to cover, likewise the derby with that “massive” club from Sheffield, but I am not buying that their game against Burnley is any more of interest to the public at large than Charlton v QPR…
Please take this as a complaint about your scheduling, and I look forward to hearing your opinion on the subject.
Best Regards
Perry
Dear Perry
Thank for your email about Sky's coverage of Leeds United. I can assure you that programmes planners affiliation with any club does not come into question when fixtures are arranged for live coverage on Sky Sports. We try to be fair when making our television selections. Usually we achieve this at the end of almost every season, with the team at the top of their respective league having most appearances and the teams at the bottom having fewest. We always welcome customers’ comments and actively encourage viewers’ feedback which, again, has been passed to Sky Sports for their information. Thank you for taking time to contact Sky. Kind Regards Marion Viewer Relations
Dear Marion,
Thank you for taking the time to write back to me.
The problem is that the reply given simply does not ring true in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, please see below a list of the final positions of Championship clubs last season, and how many live league games Sky showed of each club:
Brighton, 5th from bottom on five times, Brentford 5th from top on 3 times? Leeds – as previously stated, 8 times (that’s the same number of times as the champions – 14 places above them) . Blackburn, 5 places above Leeds, only one game? The 3 teams that finished immediately below dear old Charlton had a total of 19 appearances between them. I understand Derby, the wheels fell off when it looked like they were a cert for promotion, no one could odds that.
So last season was a one off maybe? – I don’t think so, check out the championship stats from the previous season:
Look there’s bottom of the pile Yeovil on four times more than Charlton, meanwhile in 16th place, there’s our old chums from Yorkshire, with 12 appearances. A place lower than last year, but with even more appearances… Fifth placed Wigan on just twice, Forest in 11th on seven times again.
I am hoping you can see why I am a bit miffed Marion?
Since December 31st, 2011, my club have featured a grand total of four times on Sky TV’s Championship coverage, once each in 2012/13 and 2013/14 and twice last term. That’s as many times as Yeovil, in a season where they couldn’t win a one ticket raffle. I don’t know the figures for 12/13 for Leeds, but let’s go for the average of the past two years and say 10 times? Yes? So in the same period Charlton have been on four times, Leeds have (probably) been on thirty times.
And of course, having released the second batch of live League games since my original e-mail, the poor old Addicks remain one of only three teams not scheduled to feature – another one of the missing sides being last season’s fifth placed side, Brentford. Surely at least they deserve a better crack of the whip?
Leeds, naturally have had yet another game added making it five including the capital one cup (let me remind you one more time, that’s Leeds on one more times in the first two months of the coming season than Charlton have will have been on in three years and nine months… ) by the end of September.
Now even Inspector Clouseau would be raising an eyebrow in suspicion confronted with that evidence – n’est-ce pas?
I would very much appreciate it if you might share these thoughts with some of the programming team, and see if they can’t start to make it a bit fairer on some clubs, particularly my beloved Charlton. In light of the evidence presented, I don’t think I am being unreasonable in thinking Sky unreasonable, do you?
Of course I want to see us on Sky as often as possible. But even if I were still in the UK I couldn't for the life of me see why you would not want us on TV. The club earns facility fees from the TV company, more exposure means we can charge more for ground boards, shirt sponsorship etc, and it may encourage kids seeing us on TV to ask their Dad to take them to The Valley (a lot more useful than a shagging couple or a sofa). If a lunchtime KO means you can't have a lie in - so what? You can always watch it on the tele...
1 We tend to perform badly on TV.
2 I don't think the TV fees are that good, especially for the away team. (not sure what they are now). And the TV money is offset by a reduced attendance, especially when the KO time is anti social.
3 More TV coverage would put off kids
4 A lunchtime KO makes for a poor atmosphere & just isn't as good
5 A late afternoon KO is even worse
6 It buggers up your advanced away day train tickets, when switched for TV. So you either lose your train fare or don't book 3 months in advance & have to pay a lot more in any case.
Anyway, I admire you e mailing Sky, but personally I couldn't give a toss, even though I know "it's not fair".
It's very simple, they televise the teams that will give the biggest viewing figures and Leeds are the "biggest" club.
I agree that if I lived in Portugal. I would be happy for Charlton to be shown more often.
Of course I want to see us on Sky as often as possible. But even if I were still in the UK I couldn't for the life of me see why you would not want us on TV. The club earns facility fees from the TV company, more exposure means we can charge more for ground boards, shirt sponsorship etc, and it may encourage kids seeing us on TV to ask their Dad to take them to The Valley (a lot more useful than a shagging couple or a sofa). If a lunchtime KO means you can't have a lie in - so what? You can always watch it on the tele...
1 We tend to perform badly on TV.
2 I don't think the TV fees are that good, especially for the away team. (not sure what they are now). And the TV money is offset by a reduced attendance, especially when the KO time is anti social.
3 More TV coverage would put off kids
4 A lunchtime KO makes for a poor atmosphere & just isn't as good
5 A late afternoon KO is even worse
6 It buggers up your advanced away day train tickets, when switched for TV. So you either lose your train fare or don't book 3 months in advance & have to pay a lot more in any case.
Anyway, I admire you e mailing Sky, but personally I couldn't give a toss, even though I know "it's not fair".
It's very simple, they televise the teams that will give the biggest viewing figures and Leeds are the "biggest" club.
I agree that if I lived in Portugal. I would be happy for Charlton to be shown more often.
1) Coincidence 2) The fees are more than nothing and you have failed to address the commercial aspect 3) 4) Agree about the atmosphere, but "& just isn't as good" - what does that mean? 5) That's just not true. 6) I agree with that.
Anyway - the e-mail address for PL54 is mailto:ViewerR@BSkyB.com
Of course I want to see us on Sky as often as possible. But even if I were still in the UK I couldn't for the life of me see why you would not want us on TV. The club earns facility fees from the TV company, more exposure means we can charge more for ground boards, shirt sponsorship etc, and it may encourage kids seeing us on TV to ask their Dad to take them to The Valley (a lot more useful than a shagging couple or a sofa). If a lunchtime KO means you can't have a lie in - so what? You can always watch it on the tele...
1 We tend to perform badly on TV.
2 I don't think the TV fees are that good, especially for the away team. (not sure what they are now). And the TV money is offset by a reduced attendance, especially when the KO time is anti social.
3 More TV coverage would put off kids
4 A lunchtime KO makes for a poor atmosphere & just isn't as good
5 A late afternoon KO is even worse
6 It buggers up your advanced away day train tickets, when switched for TV. So you either lose your train fare or don't book 3 months in advance & have to pay a lot more in any case.
Anyway, I admire you e mailing Sky, but personally I couldn't give a toss, even though I know "it's not fair".
It's very simple, they televise the teams that will give the biggest viewing figures and Leeds are the "biggest" club.
I agree that if I lived in Portugal. I would be happy for Charlton to be shown more often.
I think the FL clubs agreed that all the facility fee should go to home clubs, as there isn't really any loss of revenue to the visitors.
To say that we are rubbish when we are on Sky isn't really the point. The point it why we feature 4 times in 4 years and Leeds over 30 ? It's the principle.
So I see yet again we are left off the list, sky are absolute cnuts aren't they? Agree with curb it that it would be nice to have the odd game especially with work and family commitments these days making it so much harder getting to games. Let's hope there are some live streams again this year or Roland let's us tap into his. Going to throw an email at sky aswell and will await their generic response.
Typical Norvern monkey bias....Leeds, Massive, Preston, Brighton all on!!!
You may be joking, but it certainly looks like Northern bias. Of course, it would need a lot longer time frame to prove it.
Four southern teams unrepresented. No northern teams unrepresented. No southern teams with more than one showing. Three northern and three midlands teams with more than one showing.
Still, it's the north. There's nothing else for them to do. Bless 'em.
Charlton Athletic, a proper football club that plays its weekend games when all true football fans want them to be played, Saturday afternoon, 3 o'clock kick off...unless the financial reward to the club is significant, long may it continue that our games are not selected to be shown on TV...
Taking the good old Watford Gap as a dividing line, 49 appearances from 14 clubs originating from north of the esteemed service station, 13 from the 10 below...
Comments
It don't really worry me anymore, its really been like this since the invention of football round about 1992.
Although I did one record a good live game that I went to. But that must have been way back in '98.
http://www.skysports.com/watch/football-on-sky/competitions/championship
Useless cnuts
Be nice to watch a few away games on the telly even if we are cursed. Makes for a good Friday night (or a bad one).
I'd tell them to p**s off & cant use our ground as a backdrop if they have no intention of showing us. I'm serious. Someone should get KM to contact Sky and tell them to change the background........and then tell the media why Sky have had to change it.
Dear Sir/Madam,
Can you explain to me why Leeds Utd are being shown live four times in August, when five other championship clubs are not scheduled to be shown at all?
One of the ostracised five being my club, Charlton Athletic, as usual; who, despite being just outside the thirty best supported clubs in the country and finishing reasonably well have been on a total of about five times in four years. Now I appreciate that little old Charlton might not be much of a draw, but you can always show our games against teams that are – e.g. Derby, Leeds, Forest. But you choose not to, showing, for example our game against Ipswich last year, and then probably using the unsurprising low audience figure as a reason to ignore us again…
Of course this apparent bias also helps swell Leeds coffers with their facility fee as well as the extra advertising revenue they can gain from shirt sponsorship and ground boards, most unfair.
I wouldn’t mind if they were good to watch or riding high, but last season you showed them 9 times (including the Capital 1 cup), even their own fans admitted their football was poor and they even finished below us!
I can understand why their game at Donny is a good one to cover, likewise the derby with that “massive” club from Sheffield, but I am not buying that their game against Burnley is any more of interest to the public at large than Charlton v QPR…
Please take this as a complaint about your scheduling, and I look forward to hearing your opinion on the subject.
Best Regards
Perry
Dear Perry
Thank for your email about Sky's coverage of Leeds United.
I can assure you that programmes planners affiliation with any club does not come into question when fixtures are arranged for live coverage on Sky Sports.
We try to be fair when making our television selections. Usually we achieve this at the end of almost every season, with the team at the top of their respective league having most appearances and the teams at the bottom having fewest.
We always welcome customers’ comments and actively encourage viewers’ feedback which, again, has been passed to Sky Sports for their information.
Thank you for taking time to contact Sky.
Kind Regards
Marion
Viewer Relations
Dear Marion,
Thank you for taking the time to write back to me.
The problem is that the reply given simply does not ring true in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, please see below a list of the final positions of Championship clubs last season, and how many live league games Sky showed of each club:
Team Appearances
Bournemouth 8
Watford 7
Norwich 5
Middlesbrough 8
Brentford 3
Ipswich 8
Wolves 8
Derby 11
Blackburn 1
Birmingham 3
Cardiff 4
Charlton 2
Sheff Weds 4
Forest 7
Leeds 8
Huddersfield 1
Fulham 5
Bolton 3
Reading 2
Brighton 5
Rotherham 1
Millwall 2
Wigan 2
Blackpool 1
Brighton, 5th from bottom on five times, Brentford 5th from top on 3 times? Leeds – as previously stated, 8 times (that’s the same number of times as the champions – 14 places above them) . Blackburn, 5 places above Leeds, only one game? The 3 teams that finished immediately below dear old Charlton had a total of 19 appearances between them. I understand Derby, the wheels fell off when it looked like they were a cert for promotion, no one could odds that.
So last season was a one off maybe? – I don’t think so, check out the championship stats from the previous season:
Team Appearances
Leicester 10
Burnley 8
Derby 7
QPR 11
Wigan 2
Brighton 4
Reading 4
Blackburn 3
Ipswich 2
Bournemouth 1
Forest 7
Middlesbrough 3
Watford 4
Bolton 3
Leeds 12
Sheff Weds 5
Huddersfield 2
Charlton 1
Millwall 2
Blackpool 6
Birmingham 2
Doncaster 3
Barnsley 2
Yeovil 4
Look there’s bottom of the pile Yeovil on four times more than Charlton, meanwhile in 16th place, there’s our old chums from Yorkshire, with 12 appearances. A place lower than last year, but with even more appearances… Fifth placed Wigan on just twice, Forest in 11th on seven times again.
I am hoping you can see why I am a bit miffed Marion?
Since December 31st, 2011, my club have featured a grand total of four times on Sky TV’s Championship coverage, once each in 2012/13 and 2013/14 and twice last term. That’s as many times as Yeovil, in a season where they couldn’t win a one ticket raffle. I don’t know the figures for 12/13 for Leeds, but let’s go for the average of the past two years and say 10 times? Yes? So in the same period Charlton have been on four times, Leeds have (probably) been on thirty times.
And of course, having released the second batch of live League games since my original e-mail, the poor old Addicks remain one of only three teams not scheduled to feature – another one of the missing sides being last season’s fifth placed side, Brentford. Surely at least they deserve a better crack of the whip?
Leeds, naturally have had yet another game added making it five including the capital one cup (let me remind you one more time, that’s Leeds on one more times in the first two months of the coming season than Charlton have will have been on in three years and nine months… ) by the end of September.
Now even Inspector Clouseau would be raising an eyebrow in suspicion confronted with that evidence – n’est-ce pas?
I would very much appreciate it if you might share these thoughts with some of the programming team, and see if they can’t start to make it a bit fairer on some clubs, particularly my beloved Charlton. In light of the evidence presented, I don’t think I am being unreasonable in thinking Sky unreasonable, do you?
Best Regards
That's when Roland will take the moral high ground
#InRolandWeTrust
2 I don't think the TV fees are that good, especially for the away team. (not sure what they are now). And the TV money is offset by a reduced attendance, especially when the KO time is anti social.
3 More TV coverage would put off kids
4 A lunchtime KO makes for a poor atmosphere & just isn't as good
5 A late afternoon KO is even worse
6 It buggers up your advanced away day train tickets, when switched for TV. So you either lose your train fare or don't book 3 months in advance & have to pay a lot more in any case.
Anyway, I admire you e mailing Sky, but personally I couldn't give a toss, even though I know "it's not fair".
It's very simple, they televise the teams that will give the biggest viewing figures and Leeds are the "biggest" club.
I agree that if I lived in Portugal. I would be happy for Charlton to be shown more often.
2) The fees are more than nothing and you have failed to address the commercial aspect
3)
4) Agree about the atmosphere, but "& just isn't as good" - what does that mean?
5) That's just not true.
6) I agree with that.
Anyway - the e-mail address for PL54 is mailto:ViewerR@BSkyB.com
The point it why we feature 4 times in 4 years and Leeds over 30 ?
It's the principle.
Four southern teams unrepresented. No northern teams unrepresented.
No southern teams with more than one showing. Three northern and three midlands teams with more than one showing.
Still, it's the north. There's nothing else for them to do. Bless 'em.
Middlesbrough 3
Burnley 4
Leeds 6
Preston 2
Hull 2
Blackburn 3
Huddersfield 2
Bolton 2
Rotherham 2
Sheff Weds 3
Forest 5
Derby 6
Wolves 5
Birmingham 4
Ipswich 2
Milton Keynes 1
QPR 3
Brentford 0
Charlton 0
Fulham 2
Cardiff 2
Bristol C 1
Reading 1
Brighton 1
Includes Capital 1 Cup games for Leeds & Derby