Commentary - Page 3

huncoatred · 30-10-2010, 21:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pendle Red

[/b]

You may be onto something there, is the way round it actual live broadcasing by the local radio station or would that have to operate in the same way?

I used to listen to away games on 2BR but they took that away. I can`t see them back-tracking. The same way works for me, but is not necessarily available to everybody. Not every body goes on the internet.

SPUGGIE J · 30-10-2010, 21:28

There has to be ways to do it that satisfies all with minimal costs. I cant believe in this day and age we struggle to get a match broadcast that has the potential to be world wide.

cashman · 30-10-2010, 21:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by SPUGGIE J

There has to be ways to do it that satisfies all with minimal costs. I cant believe in this day and age we struggle to get a match broadcast that has the potential to be world wide.

100% agree, see me comment in The Person Beneath Me.

nige b · 30-10-2010, 21:45

Stanley could always sell our soul to the "player" option but i have no idea how this works or the financial consequences to the club and also to us fans?

lancsdave · 30-10-2010, 21:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by nige b

Stanley could always sell our soul to the "player" option but i have no idea how this works or the financial consequences to the club and also to us fans?

I don't think you want to go down that route. I'm sure I've heard that if you don't hit a certain target the club will have to make up the shortfall for the costs. The 'player' thing is something that has evolved through the 'licensed' website situation that you see most clubs have ( I think 82 clubs are under that system ). They are so tied in they can't get themselves out without massive financial penalties.

For anyone interested the rule covering audio broadcasting is rule 70.1 of the football league regualtions.
The Football League | About Us | Regulations | Regulations Detail | SECTION 7: BROADCASTING & SPONSORSHIP

Whilst it tells you the rule it doesn't mention how each club can sell ( or the cost involved ) a licence for local radio to broadcast. There must be something because 2BR have done it in the past with Stanley and Burnley.

cashman · 30-10-2010, 22:08

cheers dave if ya read the club info on stanley on the F.L. it demonstrates how incompetent the F.L. is.....as i said before *******.

lancsdave · 30-10-2010, 22:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

cheers dave if ya read the club info on stanley on the F.L. it demonstrates how incompetent the F.L. is.....as i said before *******.

I think everybody has missed the obvious. Whilst I can understand everyone's dismay at the way the league tie up the clubs, the club have yet again either been ignorant of a league rule or chosen to ignore it. Hopefully the league are satisfied the service has stopped and and take no further action........... or will they ?

cashman · 30-10-2010, 22:16

had crossed me mind, but i settled fer ignorant of the rule, if past historys owt to go off.

lancsdave · 30-10-2010, 22:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

had crossed me mind, but i settled fer ignorant of the rule, if past historys owt to go off.

And very recent history shows the authorities don't take ignorance as an excuse

cashman · 30-10-2010, 22:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by lancsdave

And very recent history shows the authorities don't take ignorance as an excuse

it aint n excuse, but god loves a trier.

DaveinGermany · 31-10-2010, 11:31

Read the blurb about broadcasts, but it only states permission is required, no mention of costs or limitations.

lancsdave · 31-10-2010, 12:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveinGermany

Read the blurb about broadcasts, but it only states permission is required, no mention of costs or limitations.

In which case it would just be a case of the club asking permission. Hard to imagine the FL not wanting some sort of blood money though

DaveinGermany · 31-10-2010, 13:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by lancsdave

In which case it would just be a case of the club asking permission. Hard to imagine the FL not wanting some sort of blood money though

Aye they'd probably want something, but if you read further on 71.1 the FL pays the PFA an agreed amount for television appearances(I would assume this also covers other media), this is set & fixed so has no real bearing.

There's also some guff about contracts & suchlike, still from what I can see the club hadn't entered into a contract with 2BR so weren't in any violation of broadcasting rights controlled by the FL board.

But we are talking the murky waters of Boardrooms & Associations who do tend to want their pound of flesh.

sherry · 01-11-2010, 19:40

See Chesterfield FC Official Site home page where there is an advert for its 'Player' service.
14 days free trial thereafter £3.99 a month or £34.99 per year.

lancsdave · 01-11-2010, 21:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by sherry

See Chesterfield FC Official Site home page where there is an advert for its 'Player' service.
14 days free trial thereafter £3.99 a month or £34.99 per year.

It's the same price at Burnley. The common factor is both they and Chesterfield use the standard league website setup. I don't know if the 'player' system is a bolt on arranged through the league, if so could or even would Stanley want to move to this system ?

I have heard Mr T make reference to this system before so we might need him to enlighten us on the ins and outs of the common website situation. Pretty sure he has said it's very costly and you're tied in for years.