Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
EFL deal with Sky Sports to stream all EFL matches
robinofottershaw
Posts: 1,925
Deal to allow all clubs to stream live games on their websites due COVID related attendance restrictions.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8652447/EFL-make-huge-deal-Sky-Sports-allow-clubs-three-divisions-stream-match.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8652447/EFL-make-huge-deal-Sky-Sports-allow-clubs-three-divisions-stream-match.html
0
Comments
-
Sensible decision to allow some form of income.0
-
Good to know... Wonder if it'll remain £5 for fans abroad0
-
I think £5 is a reasonable fee for everywhere, £10 is too much for what you get.ForeverAddickted said:Good to know... Wonder if it'll remain £5 for fans abroad10 -
I imagine you'll be able to get £5 game still if you're abroadcfgs said:
I think £5 is a reasonable fee for everywhere, £10 is too much for what you get.ForeverAddickted said:Good to know... Wonder if it'll remain £5 for fans abroad
iFollow also gave them the offer of £110 for a season ticket for all 46-games0 -
Read the article. In the Championship the clubs can keep their own income. In Leagues 1 & 2 it will be shared out. So we get fucked again because only 1 man & his dog will watch Accrington v Wimbledon & poor Accrington need the money so let's rip off rich old Charlton when they play Pompey.cfgs said:Sensible decision to allow some form of income.
I really hate the lower leagues.6 -
Changes the argument for deferring buying a season ticket.0
-
How on earth can the EFL let that happen? It beggars belief.golfaddick said:
Read the article. In the Championship the clubs can keep their own income. In Leagues 1 & 2 it will be shared out. So we get fucked again because only 1 man & his dog will watch Accrington v Wimbledon & poor Accrington need the money so let's rip off rich old Charlton when they play Pompey.cfgs said:Sensible decision to allow some form of income.
I really hate the lower leagues.
A third of their organisation running on a completely different set of rules to the other two thirds. Along with the salary cap they really appear to be looking to screw over leagues one and two. Obviously they are absolutely petrified of Premier League 2 happening, and just as they did when the Prem was first formed, they "fight" it by fucking up the rest of their organisation.
Even if we were not (typically) one of the biggest victims in all this, I would feel the same. But it could only happen to Charlton. We get unfairly relegated because they want to look after a "bigger" club in the Championship, then as one of the biggest clubs in League one, they move the goalposts to fuck us up there too. Utter wankers.
8 -
Trouble is its the same with FIFA in the sense that everyone gets the same vote regardless of the size
Its not a bad thing but with FIFA you get smaller nations who'll be more open to corruption (due to limited budgets) so will vote for World Cup's in Qatar etc.
Similar sort of thing in the EFL; Championship is primarily made up of bigger clubs so will vote for their own interests
League One and League Two the smaller clubs outnumber the bigger ones so there'll be more backing for a share of the pie
e.g. Dont forget you've got the likes of the Accrington owner (Andy Holt) who has sensible views on the game yet was extremely against the introduction of iFollow when it came out because it meant that Accrington v Cambridge etc. on a Tuesday night would see fewer away fans attending because they could stay at home and watch it cheaper than buying a ticket / travel
He was so against iFollow that he (like Charlton initially) rejected it for Accrington and so far as I understand thats still the case in normal circumstances3 -
Will Snoop Dog still be part of the coverage?7
-
Let’s hope notse9addick said:Will Snoop Dog still be part of the coverage?2 -
Sponsored links:
-
This year's coverage is being sponsored by South Yorkshire-based Just Cheat with the adverts fronted by well-known (c)rap artist, Snoop Owl.se9addick said:Will Snoop Dog still be part of the coverage?19 -
As long as he's not part of the commentary team I can ignore the daft twat.se9addick said:Will Snoop Dog still be part of the coverage?
If he's alongside Tel and Greg as summariser then he can Foxtrot Oscar.0 -
Did somebody call... Juuuust EatBedsaddick said:
Let’s hope notse9addick said:Will Snoop Dog still be part of the coverage?
@se9addick put that annoying sound in my head when he mentioned Snoop Dog so thought I'd be kind enough to share!!0 -
When they turn up with his food, does he drop it like it's hot?ForeverAddickted said:
Did somebody call... Juuuust EatBedsaddick said:
Let’s hope notse9addick said:Will Snoop Dog still be part of the coverage?
3 -
iForeverAddickted said:
My understanding is that under normal rules each team keeps its own income From I follow so if we were playing Sunderland and 3,000 of their supporters turned up we would get all of the gate money but under I follow Sunderland would receive the income from their fans that watched via I follow and we would get sod all.Trouble is its the same with FIFA in the sense that everyone gets the same vote regardless of the size
Its not a bad thing but with FIFA you get smaller nations who'll be more open to corruption (due to limited budgets) so will vote for World Cup's in Qatar etc.
Similar sort of thing in the EFL; Championship is primarily made up of bigger clubs so will vote for their own interests
League One and League Two the smaller clubs outnumber the bigger ones so there'll be more backing for a share of the pie
e.g. Dont forget you've got the likes of the Accrington owner (Andy Holt) who has sensible views on the game yet was extremely against the introduction of iFollow when it came out because it meant that Accrington v Cambridge etc. on a Tuesday night would see fewer away fans attending because they could stay at home and watch it cheaper than buying a ticket / travel
He was so against iFollow that he (like Charlton initially) rejected it for Accrington and so far as I understand thats still the case in normal circumstances
So the smaller clubs were against it. I guess we will share the income so hopefully we will finish up around the same.Obviously I would rather be able to go, but at least I will be able to watch every game in some shape or form.
My wife was not happy though I think she’s hoping I will be able to get back in the ground and she will get her Saturdays back without me screaming at a screen, yes I know they can’t hear me but it makes me feel better.....0 -
No, that's his brother Deputy Dog.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
When they turn up with his food, does he drop it like it's hot?ForeverAddickted said:
Did somebody call... Juuuust EatBedsaddick said:
Let’s hope notse9addick said:Will Snoop Dog still be part of the coverage?0 -
Not sure it says how the money will actually be shared out.golfaddick said:
Read the article. In the Championship the clubs can keep their own income. In Leagues 1 & 2 it will be shared out. So we get fucked again because only 1 man & his dog will watch Accrington v Wimbledon & poor Accrington need the money so let's rip off rich old Charlton when they play Pompey.cfgs said:Sensible decision to allow some form of income.
I really hate the lower leagues.
In normal times a club gets to keep all the income from home matches even if there is a high proportion of away supporters in the ground.
But with IFollow the away supporters pay directly to their own club.
It's quite possible that when Accrington play Charlton at home, there are 1000 Accrington supporters and 10,000 Charlton supporters watching on IFollow because you no longer have to travel to see an away game.
It seems unfair that Accrington receive only a tenth of the gate for a match played at their own ground.
Would it be better to split the gate money in this situation?
1 -
But say all those 10,000 CAFC fans pay every week to see the matches then CAFC get to keep 46 lots of that revenue. Accrington can keep 46 lots of whatever revenue they get from their fans paying to watch online. If they only have 1,000 fans watching online then that's just life. In your case, and the EFL's, we are subsidising other teams. You also have to remember that although they might have got more revenue through the gate hosting us (if fans were allowed) they also have the expense of paying for stewards, police etc.stevexreeve said:
Not sure it says how the money will actually be shared out.golfaddick said:
Read the article. In the Championship the clubs can keep their own income. In Leagues 1 & 2 it will be shared out. So we get fucked again because only 1 man & his dog will watch Accrington v Wimbledon & poor Accrington need the money so let's rip off rich old Charlton when they play Pompey.cfgs said:Sensible decision to allow some form of income.
I really hate the lower leagues.
In normal times a club gets to keep all the income from home matches even if there is a high proportion of away supporters in the ground.
But with IFollow the away supporters pay directly to their own club.
It's quite possible that when Accrington play Charlton at home, there are 1000 Accrington supporters and 10,000 Charlton supporters watching on IFollow because you no longer have to travel to see an away game.
It seems unfair that Accrington receive only a tenth of the gate for a match played at their own ground.
Would it be better to split the gate money in this situation?
As a pp said, since lockdown Leagues 1&2 are voting in a different way than The Championship & as there are more "smaller" clubs voting then they hold the sway. Clubs came away from sharing Gate receipts years ago.0 -
Good idea in principle just think £10 per game is ott to watch on tv.
They could offer a deal, like with sky sports say £30pm, over the course of a 9 month season it eould be £270 for the year instead of £460 at £10 per game.
Obviously ST holders would say its cheaper than a ST but they from October they should hopefully be able to get back in anyway so they get the live experience.
As I say just think over the course of a 46 game season £10 a game is to expensive to watch on a tv screen lol2 -
46-games for £460 and multiple views or 23-games for £455 and just the one view though...paulie8290 said:Good idea in principle just think £10 per game is ott to watch on tv.
They could offer a deal, like with sky sports say £30pm, over the course of a 9 month season it eould be £270 for the year instead of £460 at £10 per game.
Obviously ST holders would say its cheaper than a ST but they from October they should hopefully be able to get back in anyway so they get the live experience.
As I say just think over the course of a 46 game season £10 a game is to expensive to watch on a tv screen lol
Even if you were to get the cheapest season ticket: £10 per home game is still better value for money than having to fork out to go to the games
Sounds a pretty good deal if you ask me
Especially when you take into account the amount your saving from travelling to away games
Talking about the wrong ticket coming down in price for me, should be more incentive to go to games
(Even when we return to normal and you can pay £10 for a midweek game over attending the actual game)0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Not the same though is it, otherwise no-one would buy festival tickets for hundreds of pounds when you can watch it on tv for free.ForeverAddickted said:
46-games for £460 and multiple views or 23-games for £455 and just the one view though...paulie8290 said:Good idea in principle just think £10 per game is ott to watch on tv.
They could offer a deal, like with sky sports say £30pm, over the course of a 9 month season it eould be £270 for the year instead of £460 at £10 per game.
Obviously ST holders would say its cheaper than a ST but they from October they should hopefully be able to get back in anyway so they get the live experience.
As I say just think over the course of a 46 game season £10 a game is to expensive to watch on a tv screen lol
Sounds a pretty good deal if you ask me
Especially when you take into account the amount your saving from travelling to away games3 -
There's obviously no right and wrong way here!
But you can understand why Accrington would prefer to go online via a system where people just pay to watch games (like you do on SKY) and don't have to direct their cash at one particular club.
Remember that a lot more people will watch Charlton than Accrington over the course of the season so we would still get significantly more revenue overall. It's just each match that is divided between the two clubs.
Another reason the the IFollow model will not survive is because neutral supporters find it unnerving to make that choice before watching a game. Suppose Manchester City were playing Liverpool in the Champions League final and you fancied paying a tenner to watch. But you have to choose which club gets your money? It just doesn't make sense!
0 -
Of course not as the supply and demand will often tend to be thereCovered_End_Lad said:
Not the same though is it, otherwise no-one would buy festival tickets for hundreds of pounds when you can watch it on tv for free.ForeverAddickted said:
46-games for £460 and multiple views or 23-games for £455 and just the one view though...paulie8290 said:Good idea in principle just think £10 per game is ott to watch on tv.
They could offer a deal, like with sky sports say £30pm, over the course of a 9 month season it eould be £270 for the year instead of £460 at £10 per game.
Obviously ST holders would say its cheaper than a ST but they from October they should hopefully be able to get back in anyway so they get the live experience.
As I say just think over the course of a 46 game season £10 a game is to expensive to watch on a tv screen lol
Sounds a pretty good deal if you ask me
Especially when you take into account the amount your saving from travelling to away games
As we're seeing with matchday attendances though, supply and demand is dwindling as more and more people opt to watch on their TV's
As attending games becomes more expensive its going to price out families who'll choose the cheaper option
Even I've considered it this summer for the first time in 22-years, watching Charlton games on iFollow
As I'll get more for my money combined with the uncertainty at ownership level0 -
Or go to the theatreCovered_End_Lad said:
Not the same though is it, otherwise no-one would buy festival tickets for hundreds of pounds when you can watch it on tv for free.ForeverAddickted said:
46-games for £460 and multiple views or 23-games for £455 and just the one view though...paulie8290 said:Good idea in principle just think £10 per game is ott to watch on tv.
They could offer a deal, like with sky sports say £30pm, over the course of a 9 month season it eould be £270 for the year instead of £460 at £10 per game.
Obviously ST holders would say its cheaper than a ST but they from October they should hopefully be able to get back in anyway so they get the live experience.
As I say just think over the course of a 46 game season £10 a game is to expensive to watch on a tv screen lol
Sounds a pretty good deal if you ask me
Especially when you take into account the amount your saving from travelling to away games
0 -
iFollow isnt designed for the neutral supporters though is it?stevexreeve said:There's obviously no right and wrong way here!
But you can understand why Accrington would prefer to go online via a system where people just pay to watch games (like you do on SKY) and don't have to direct their cash at one particular club.
Remember that a lot more people will watch Charlton than Accrington over the course of the season so we would still get significantly more revenue overall. It's just each match that is divided between the two clubs.
Another reason the the IFollow model will not survive is because neutral supporters find it unnerving to make that choice before watching a game. Suppose Manchester City were playing Liverpool in the Champions League final and you fancied paying a tenner to watch. But you have to choose which club gets your money? It just doesn't make sense!
First and foremost its a platform thats designed so people like OzAddick and SDAddick can see Charlton games from abroad with the club they support getting a little bit more revenue
Its not even designed for me and you (apart from midweek fixtures), it just so happens the VPN technology is there for us to bypass it - Its evolved a little bit what with COVID but imagine when we eventually return to normal, iFollow will return to being what it was when it was originally introduced0 -
A tad expensive if you are watching on your own, but if you have kids or mates who live locally you can share the cost and still socially distance.
Free VPNs are going to be very popular!2 -
At £10 I didn't and won't bother, £5 I'd buy a game all day long0
-
I think Redmidland said he would be doing live commentaries this season (I hope so), but if not with all the games on stream I probably will not be wanted.0
-
I got this a couple of weeks back by email
Dear oohaahmortimer,
Our records show that you have accounts with the following clubs:
AFC Wimbledon,Bradford City,Bristol Rovers,Burton Albion,Coventry City,Doncaster Rovers,Fleetwood Town,Luton Town,Northampton Town,Oxford United,Peterborough United,Plymouth Argyle,Portsmouth,Rotherham United,Shrewsbury Town,Walsall,Wycombe Wanderers
From the 25th August 2020, a change in policy will be implemented that means an email address can no longer be associated with more than one club’s iFollow (or club own-branded) service.
As a result, you will only have access from this period onwards to the following club with your current log-in details:
AFC Wimbledon
Should you wish to access content on a different club's iFollow service, you will need to do so with an alternative email address.
If you have any queries regarding your account then please contact ifollow@efl.com.
FAQs
Q: I have a Season Pass with more than one of the clubs listed above, what will happen to those accounts?
A: You will only be charged for the club that is listed as being the club you will still be able to access.
Q: I have a Monthly Pass with more than one of the clubs listed above, what will happen to those accounts?
A: Your Monthly Pass for the club(s) you no longer have access to will cease working on August 25th and you will not be charged for those clubs again. The club which you still have access to will continue to be charged monthly.
EFL Digital
2 -
^^^^^
Ditto, morts.
Did you ignore it like me ?
0
