Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

SKY TV Game Listings (Fulham H now Sun 4th Oct)

24567…15

Comments

  • sunbury-addick
    sunbury-addick Posts: 1,931
    Really thought I had a good chance of seeing the QPR game on holiday, hey ho. End of the day, can only assume that when we are on the viewing figures are crap.
  • EdgeleyAddick
    EdgeleyAddick Posts: 939
    When were Leeds last in the Prem? 2004???? How many other clubs would still fill the Jimmy Seed like they do 11 years later?

    Unpleasant, but huge club in the end of the day.
  • MrOneLung
    MrOneLung Posts: 26,906
    2nd favourites to be relegated not being shown live shock
  • killerandflash
    killerandflash Posts: 69,978
    Bizarre considering that Leeds were mid table last season having sold their best player McCormack, and have shown no signs that they will be serious promotion contenders or even that they will play particularly good football.
    I'm just glad that the Hull game wasn't shifted to the Sunday as I'll be at the Oval!
  • Greenie
    Greenie Posts: 9,172
    killerandflash said:

    Bizarre considering that Leeds were mid table last season having sold their best player McCormack, and have shown no signs that they will be serious promotion contenders or even that they will play particularly good football.
    I'm just glad that the Hull game wasn't shifted to the Sunday as I'll be at the Oval!

    Irrelevant where they will finish.
    Leeds are probably the biggest club in the Championship, whereas we are one of the smallest, hence Sky's decision .
  • Bryan_Kynsie
    Bryan_Kynsie Posts: 2,179
    Wouldn't it be nice if, when they do want us, we held out for more money or told them to feck off! Not as if we have much to lose, is it?
  • cfgs
    cfgs Posts: 11,494
    Do people in Leeds even know electricity has been invented let alone TV?
  • shirty5
    shirty5 Posts: 19,260
    Has anyone started a petition yet?
  • Algarveaddick
    Algarveaddick Posts: 21,181
    Are we any worse of a draw than Rotherham v Burnley? Is an opening weekend London derby against a newly relegated team that are always in the news likely to be less interesting than Brighton v Forest? Sorry I just don't buy into that, we were the 13th best supported team in the league last year, and we finished 12th, we are certainly not "one of the smallest" by any means.

    As for relegation odds being any kind of indicator, as previously mentioned Rotherham are on, and not even in a derby game with the massives.

    We lose out on the money Sky pay and less exposure means less advertising income, so whilst I understand it may be inconvenient to have to get to the game three hours early and that our notoriously poor displays on TV seem to be some kind of hoodo (they are not) the club really suffers from this clear bias against us - look at the year we won League 1 when they decided to show all our quota in the first half of the season, including the shittiest kick off time of the year - tea time on new years eve.

    There are lots of ex-pats like me and people who don't get to the games regularly, and I think we (the club) deserve a fair crack of the whip.

    Of course looking at the opposition in run in, it maybe that from mid March we are on every other week, but I doubt it.

    Even my Leeds supporting mate out here agrees that they are not good to watch.
  • Greenie
    Greenie Posts: 9,172
    Algarveaddick said:

    Are we any worse of a draw than Rotherham v Burnley? Is an opening weekend London derby against a newly relegated team that are always in the news likely to be less interesting than Brighton v Forest? Sorry I just don't buy into that, we were the 13th best supported team in the league last year, and we finished 12th, we are certainly not "one of the smallest" by any means.

    As for relegation odds being any kind of indicator, as previously mentioned Rotherham are on, and not even in a derby game with the massives.

    We lose out on the money Sky pay and less exposure means less advertising income, so whilst I understand it may be inconvenient to have to get to the game three hours early and that our notoriously poor displays on TV seem to be some kind of hoodo (they are not) the club really suffers from this clear bias against us - look at the year we won League 1 when they decided to show all our quota in the first half of the season, including the shittiest kick off time of the year - tea time on new years eve.

    There are lots of ex-pats like me and people who don't get to the games regularly, and I think we (the club) deserve a fair crack of the whip.

    Of course looking at the opposition in run in, it maybe that from mid March we are on every other week, but I doubt it.

    Even my Leeds supporting mate out here agrees that they are not good to watch.

    But its irrelevant in terms of 'best supported' teams. its the TV ratings that Sky use as their yardstick.
    Its obvious that when we are on, the neutrals do not watch us and I would make the assumption that the neutrals are not interested in QPR either.
    But, when we are top of the league at Xmas, with an 18 point lead, are also in the FA cup semi final by April then we will be all over Sky, and the supporters who have abandoned or sceptred isle will be happy. ;o)

  • Sponsored links:



  • Covered End
    Covered End Posts: 52,065
    To be fair to Sky, half the people on CL, don't go regularly to Charlton.

    So if they aren't that interested .........
  • seth plum
    seth plum Posts: 53,448
    I assume sky want the ratings to attract advertising revenue, and the viewer has to pay a subscription as well as endure the advertisements. Win win for sky, and money for the Premiership so their clubs eventually create a closed shop by default.
    Glad I go elsewhere or thieve the coverage on the internet rather than pay sky any money. If I subscribed, the feeling would be a bit like a vegetarian eating in McDonald's
  • killerandflash
    killerandflash Posts: 69,978
    edited July 2015
    Greenie said:

    killerandflash said:

    Bizarre considering that Leeds were mid table last season having sold their best player McCormack, and have shown no signs that they will be serious promotion contenders or even that they will play particularly good football.
    I'm just glad that the Hull game wasn't shifted to the Sunday as I'll be at the Oval!

    Irrelevant where they will finish.
    Leeds are probably the biggest club in the Championship, whereas we are one of the smallest, hence Sky's decision .
    I wasn't thinking so much about our absence but more about the excessive coverage of Leeds

    They may be the biggest club, but they are also probably the least liked by everyone else in the division! They don't have a famous manager who might attract the neutrals, or been recently relegated from the PL either.

  • Greenie
    Greenie Posts: 9,172
    Covered End said:

    To be fair to Sky, half the people on CL, don't go regularly to Charlton.

    So if they aren't that interested .........

    Sone of Algarves post was more in reference to ex pats, however I wonder how many of our games will be available on the internet?
    Does any one know how we find out?
  • Algarveaddick
    Algarveaddick Posts: 21,181
    Greenie said:

    Algarveaddick said:

    Are we any worse of a draw than Rotherham v Burnley? Is an opening weekend London derby against a newly relegated team that are always in the news likely to be less interesting than Brighton v Forest? Sorry I just don't buy into that, we were the 13th best supported team in the league last year, and we finished 12th, we are certainly not "one of the smallest" by any means.

    As for relegation odds being any kind of indicator, as previously mentioned Rotherham are on, and not even in a derby game with the massives.

    We lose out on the money Sky pay and less exposure means less advertising income, so whilst I understand it may be inconvenient to have to get to the game three hours early and that our notoriously poor displays on TV seem to be some kind of hoodo (they are not) the club really suffers from this clear bias against us - look at the year we won League 1 when they decided to show all our quota in the first half of the season, including the shittiest kick off time of the year - tea time on new years eve.

    There are lots of ex-pats like me and people who don't get to the games regularly, and I think we (the club) deserve a fair crack of the whip.

    Of course looking at the opposition in run in, it maybe that from mid March we are on every other week, but I doubt it.

    Even my Leeds supporting mate out here agrees that they are not good to watch.

    But its irrelevant in terms of 'best supported' teams. its the TV ratings that Sky use as their yardstick.
    Its obvious that when we are on, the neutrals do not watch us and I would make the assumption that the neutrals are not interested in QPR either.
    But, when we are top of the league at Xmas, with an 18 point lead, are also in the FA cup semi final by April then we will be all over Sky, and the supporters who have abandoned or sceptred isle will be happy. ;o)
    Taking your point entirely Greenie - but why not put on Charlton v Leeds or Charlton v Derby if that opposition is so attractive, rather than Charlton v Ipswich as they did last year?
  • MuttleyCAFC
    MuttleyCAFC Posts: 47,773
    Would be great if the top 5 at the beginning of October were the teams Sky have ignored!!!
  • Greenie
    Greenie Posts: 9,172
    Algarveaddick said:

    Greenie said:

    Algarveaddick said:

    Are we any worse of a draw than Rotherham v Burnley? Is an opening weekend London derby against a newly relegated team that are always in the news likely to be less interesting than Brighton v Forest? Sorry I just don't buy into that, we were the 13th best supported team in the league last year, and we finished 12th, we are certainly not "one of the smallest" by any means.

    As for relegation odds being any kind of indicator, as previously mentioned Rotherham are on, and not even in a derby game with the massives.

    We lose out on the money Sky pay and less exposure means less advertising income, so whilst I understand it may be inconvenient to have to get to the game three hours early and that our notoriously poor displays on TV seem to be some kind of hoodo (they are not) the club really suffers from this clear bias against us - look at the year we won League 1 when they decided to show all our quota in the first half of the season, including the shittiest kick off time of the year - tea time on new years eve.

    There are lots of ex-pats like me and people who don't get to the games regularly, and I think we (the club) deserve a fair crack of the whip.

    Of course looking at the opposition in run in, it maybe that from mid March we are on every other week, but I doubt it.

    Even my Leeds supporting mate out here agrees that they are not good to watch.

    But its irrelevant in terms of 'best supported' teams. its the TV ratings that Sky use as their yardstick.
    Its obvious that when we are on, the neutrals do not watch us and I would make the assumption that the neutrals are not interested in QPR either.
    But, when we are top of the league at Xmas, with an 18 point lead, are also in the FA cup semi final by April then we will be all over Sky, and the supporters who have abandoned or sceptred isle will be happy. ;o)
    Taking your point entirely Greenie - but why not put on Charlton v Leeds or Charlton v Derby if that opposition is so attractive, rather than Charlton v Ipswich as they did last year?
    Hmmm, fair point. I wonder if their is any info available on which teams get the bets or worst viewing figures, I assume that Ipswich would get a fair few, certainly more than us.
  • Algarveaddick
    Algarveaddick Posts: 21,181
    Greenie said:

    Algarveaddick said:

    Greenie said:

    Algarveaddick said:

    Are we any worse of a draw than Rotherham v Burnley? Is an opening weekend London derby against a newly relegated team that are always in the news likely to be less interesting than Brighton v Forest? Sorry I just don't buy into that, we were the 13th best supported team in the league last year, and we finished 12th, we are certainly not "one of the smallest" by any means.

    As for relegation odds being any kind of indicator, as previously mentioned Rotherham are on, and not even in a derby game with the massives.

    We lose out on the money Sky pay and less exposure means less advertising income, so whilst I understand it may be inconvenient to have to get to the game three hours early and that our notoriously poor displays on TV seem to be some kind of hoodo (they are not) the club really suffers from this clear bias against us - look at the year we won League 1 when they decided to show all our quota in the first half of the season, including the shittiest kick off time of the year - tea time on new years eve.

    There are lots of ex-pats like me and people who don't get to the games regularly, and I think we (the club) deserve a fair crack of the whip.

    Of course looking at the opposition in run in, it maybe that from mid March we are on every other week, but I doubt it.

    Even my Leeds supporting mate out here agrees that they are not good to watch.

    But its irrelevant in terms of 'best supported' teams. its the TV ratings that Sky use as their yardstick.
    Its obvious that when we are on, the neutrals do not watch us and I would make the assumption that the neutrals are not interested in QPR either.
    But, when we are top of the league at Xmas, with an 18 point lead, are also in the FA cup semi final by April then we will be all over Sky, and the supporters who have abandoned or sceptred isle will be happy. ;o)
    Taking your point entirely Greenie - but why not put on Charlton v Leeds or Charlton v Derby if that opposition is so attractive, rather than Charlton v Ipswich as they did last year?
    Hmmm, fair point. I wonder if their is any info available on which teams get the bets or worst viewing figures, I assume that Ipswich would get a fair few, certainly more than us.
    Not many more though - they only averaged a 1000 more than us in a season where they made the play offs...
  • Airman Brown
    Airman Brown Posts: 15,755
    AFKABartram said:

    @danhughes99 said:

    19/24 teams selected at least once. Usual culprits multiple times!!
    Only teams missing
    Brentford
    Bristol City
    Cardiff
    Charlton
    Mk Dons

    18/24 - Preston also missing, Leeds x 3, Burnley x 2, Derby x 2, Nottm Forest x 2, Wolves x 2
  • Greenie
    Greenie Posts: 9,172
    Algarveaddick said:

    Greenie said:

    Algarveaddick said:

    Greenie said:

    Algarveaddick said:

    Are we any worse of a draw than Rotherham v Burnley? Is an opening weekend London derby against a newly relegated team that are always in the news likely to be less interesting than Brighton v Forest? Sorry I just don't buy into that, we were the 13th best supported team in the league last year, and we finished 12th, we are certainly not "one of the smallest" by any means.

    As for relegation odds being any kind of indicator, as previously mentioned Rotherham are on, and not even in a derby game with the massives.

    We lose out on the money Sky pay and less exposure means less advertising income, so whilst I understand it may be inconvenient to have to get to the game three hours early and that our notoriously poor displays on TV seem to be some kind of hoodo (they are not) the club really suffers from this clear bias against us - look at the year we won League 1 when they decided to show all our quota in the first half of the season, including the shittiest kick off time of the year - tea time on new years eve.

    There are lots of ex-pats like me and people who don't get to the games regularly, and I think we (the club) deserve a fair crack of the whip.

    Of course looking at the opposition in run in, it maybe that from mid March we are on every other week, but I doubt it.

    Even my Leeds supporting mate out here agrees that they are not good to watch.

    But its irrelevant in terms of 'best supported' teams. its the TV ratings that Sky use as their yardstick.
    Its obvious that when we are on, the neutrals do not watch us and I would make the assumption that the neutrals are not interested in QPR either.
    But, when we are top of the league at Xmas, with an 18 point lead, are also in the FA cup semi final by April then we will be all over Sky, and the supporters who have abandoned or sceptred isle will be happy. ;o)
    Taking your point entirely Greenie - but why not put on Charlton v Leeds or Charlton v Derby if that opposition is so attractive, rather than Charlton v Ipswich as they did last year?
    Hmmm, fair point. I wonder if their is any info available on which teams get the bets or worst viewing figures, I assume that Ipswich would get a fair few, certainly more than us.
    Not many more though - they only averaged a 1000 more than us in a season where they made the play offs...
    I was referring to armchair fans. My old man lives in that part of the world and when either Ipswich or Naarch are on telly the pubs are rammed.

  • Sponsored links:



  • Elthamaddick
    Elthamaddick Posts: 15,846
    200 people round 1 TV = 1 viewer according to the TV ratings
  • danhughes99
    danhughes99 Posts: 490
    Airman Brown said:

    AFKABartram said:

    @danhughes99 said:

    19/24 teams selected at least once. Usual culprits multiple times!!
    Only teams missing
    Brentford
    Bristol City
    Cardiff
    Charlton
    Mk Dons

    18/24 - Preston also missing, Leeds x 3, Burnley x 2, Derby x 2, Nottm Forest x 2, Wolves x 2
    PNE are the 3rd game on, at home to boro. So 19/24.
  • Airman Brown
    Airman Brown Posts: 15,755
    edited July 2015
    danhughes99 said:

    Airman Brown said:

    AFKABartram said:

    @danhughes99 said:

    19/24 teams selected at least once. Usual culprits multiple times!!
    Only teams missing
    Brentford
    Bristol City
    Cardiff
    Charlton
    Mk Dons

    18/24 - Preston also missing, Leeds x 3, Burnley x 2, Derby x 2, Nottm Forest x 2, Wolves x 2
    PNE are the 3rd game on, at home to boro. So 19/24.
    Not according to Sky's own site. Not that it matters very much anyway!

    http://www1.skysports.com/watch/football-on-sky/competitions/championship
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 0
    TV don't like us, TV don't like us, we don't care.

    On second thought lets not go there.
  • Covered End
    Covered End Posts: 52,065
    http://www.live-footballontv.com/
  • Leaburns Daddy
    Leaburns Daddy Posts: 636
    edited July 2015
    Sky have announced another 8 championship games to be shown live so was half expecting us to be featured at least once, guess I was wrong! Oh look Leeds again, cu#ts!

    Leeds x1
    Burnley x1
    Birmingham x2
    Cardiff x2
    QPR x2
    Boro x1
    Fulham x1
    Blackburn x1
    Wolves x1
    Forest x1
    Ipswich x1
    Mk Dons x1
    Derby x1

    So only us and Brentford not shown in 3 months yet some teams shown 3 or 4 times.
  • Callumcafc
    Callumcafc Posts: 63,836
  • ForeverAddickted
    ForeverAddickted Posts: 94,741
    I think there should be a new chant from the stands whenever there is a good match (whether were drawing or winning) at the Valley this season.

    Are you watching... Are you watching
    Are you watching, SkySportsOne
    Are you watching, SkySportsOne
  • PragueAddick
    PragueAddick Posts: 22,176
    Elthamaddick said:

    200 people round 1 TV = 1 viewer according to the TV ratings

    Not its not.,they have mechanisms in place for measuring the pub audience. These people are not idiots.
  • oohaahmortimer
    oohaahmortimer Posts: 34,205
    I'm glad we're not on telly
    Saturday afternoon 3pm is good for footy and for away travellers who buy train tickets in advance this is good news
    Whatever fixture gets moved there will be a moan up
    Just be happy it is what it is !

Categories

“Marketplace”