This doesn't have to be all or nothing, just a bit of consideration for those who are our most regular and committed customers. Ainsworth and the players are good enough to acknowledge the Support they give so maybe it would be nice if we used some of the extra 10k (not all or even most) to subsidize the coach, give them a free burger or cap the ticket price a bit.
@glasshalffull said:
Quite the most delusional posts that I’ve read in a long time. A rant unsurpassed in its assumptions, opinions and inaccuracies. By the way, we get £10k for the disruption in moving the fixture, circa £600k of TV money per season even if we never have a game broadcast live. I await your ideas of how a supporter owned club could raise £600k per season from alternative sources.
I have no idea. But you are completely missing the point. We shouldn't have to
@aloysius said:
Alan is absolutely right - it's both a necessary evil and a price worth paying.
However, given there's a wealthy benefactor in town who's trying to generate enough goodwill among fans to be given the right to take over the club, it seems an easy win if he were to compensate out of his own pocket anyone who's already purchased travel / accommodation that can't be refunded. It's not as if there won't be a clear paper trail in place for anyone needing to claim nor will it break the bank - we're probably talking 50 or so people max.
Good point. But I don't think we need to bother Mr. Couhig. If the £10K income figure is correct that will be more than sufficient and still leave the club with a nice piece of 'football fortune'.
And I’m not alone in being delighted to be able to watch a game which I had no chance of getting to.
I’m grateful to Micra for adding some balance. There will be many Wycombe fans delighted that they can now watch a game they would otherwise not have been able to see. I have huge admiration for those fans who travel the length and breadth of the country, particularly in midweek, and the players are indeed appreciative. However, this disruption is something that very rarely happens, it’s good for the club’s profile and bank balance and in all honesty I think some of the negative reaction has been over the top. Incidentally, I won’t now be able to attend a game that I was looking forward to as I’m working on that Sunday.
@glasshalffull said:
Quite the most delusional posts that I’ve read in a long time. A rant unsurpassed in its assumptions, opinions and inaccuracies. By the way, we get £10k for the disruption in moving the fixture, circa £600k of TV money per season even if we never have a game broadcast live. I await your ideas of how a supporter owned club could raise £600k per season from alternative sources.
Opions are opinions. I respect yours Alan.
So please point out my assumptions and inaccuracies
@glasshalffull said:
Quite the most delusional posts that I’ve read in a long time. A rant unsurpassed in its assumptions, opinions and inaccuracies. By the way, we get £10k for the disruption in moving the fixture, circa £600k of TV money per season even if we never have a game broadcast live. I await your ideas of how a supporter owned club could raise £600k per season from alternative sources.
I note you have completely avoided addressing any of the points made in my 'delusional posts'
I also don’t really mind playing on the Sunday provided they give sufficient notice. I’m one of those who quite liked the novelty of a Friday night game, something away fans at Tranmere no longer seem to have to endure as a matter of course. This thread has bordered on Twitter at times with the outrage and squabbling. We are going to need to get used to this when we go up. It surely isn’t that hard to visit the National Rail website, book an advance ticket on the 08:10 Football Special from Watford Junction, arriving back at 17:49. It’s just over £50 with a young persons rail card. See you there.
@LX1 said:
If the sky coup hadn't happened in 92 WWFC would be better off.
The top few clubs in the 1st division (now ridiculously called Premier league... fault sky/sugar) wouldn't have been flooded with money
Wages wouldn't have been inflated to a ridiculous degree. No problem for the greedy big six.. But detrimental to the thousands of other clubs across the country
Wycombe Town centre wouldn't have now been full of idiots watching once proud clubs {fault.. sky) from cities they had no idea about and clapping goals they scored in a pub (an unfathomable phenomenon).
More importantly player wages would not have been inflated resulting in the constant struggle our Club has.
So forgive us Mr Parry for blaming Sky for the Tranmere move but I'm afraid 10k is a drop in the ocean compared to the cost that Australian has imposed on our football club and will continue to do so long after you are passed.
Perhaps hysterical would have been a better word than delusional, but I’ll address your points:
1) Purely speculation, no one could possibly know if we’d have been better off, worse off or about the same.
2) True, I’ll grant you that, but why is the Premier League a ‘ridiculous name’?
3) It’s widely accepted that the most significant reason why player salaries spiralled was the Bosman ruling, which I’m sure every true socialist would have applauded. How on earth has the ‘Sky coup’ affected ‘thousands of clubs’? Flackwell Heath, Marlow etc? Have they really been affected by Sky?
4) Why describe fans of other clubs as idiots? Why assume that people watching televised games have no idea about the cities those clubs come from? Aren’t there any Geordies, Scousers, Mancunians etc living in Wycombe? Why is clapping goals whilst watching TV an ‘unfathomable phenomenon’? Would that apply to Wycombe fans applauding if we scored against Tranmere?
5) Player wages have been inflated at PL level, but that’s had minimal affect on the lower divisions where salaries are far more realistic.
6) Why blame Sky for activating the terms of a contract that was agreed by the majority of EFL clubs including, I believe, Wycombe? £10k is a facility fee, £600k per season is what Wycombe receive from the TV deal.
I agree that you are entitled to your opinion, but opinions should never be confused with facts.
It's obviously better to go to the games, but you can't beat the option of just clicking it onto the laptop instead of an 8hour round trip to a couple of those!
I'll watch those leasing games online too, when I probs wouldn't have gone to them if not.
@Uncle_T said:
I think matches selected for TV coverage are not available on iFollow, so the Tranmere Rovers match won't be viewable using that service.
Correct. That's why I added the line "live on PC/TV"
@glasshalffull I appreciate that a lot of it is hearsay but I’m struggling to agree with your point 5 about player salaries being more realistic.
They certainly didn’t appear to be at Bury.
Logic would suggest that if most clubs are running at a loss the people in charge have a somewhat warped view of reality.
Logic would also imply that to compete with relegated teams with significant parachute payments owners are likely to be tempted/forced to pay higher wages than they would do otherwise under supply and demand, (as every capitalist will no doubt applaud). Great for players and their agents I agree.
This isn’t to say that the money that has flooded into the game from Sky (primarily) is itself ‘bad’ (things like the inclusiveness of the sport, better stadiums, for example have been positive (to me) changes), but to state that it has had minimal effect on lower league (or National League) clubs expenditure seems questionable.
Bookertease, I agree that PL salaries have had some affect on players’ wages in the lower divisions, but other factors like inflation etc have also played a part and clearly they are still light years away from the salaries being paid in the PL. You mentioned Bury and my information was that their playing budget was 3 times greater than Wycombe’s despite being a division below us. I can’t see how the PL can be blamed for that sort of extravagance.
I see that tomorrow's televised match, K.O. 12pm, is Coventry v Tranmere. What have Tranmere done to deserve having two fixtures moved to Sunday in the space of 5 weeks?
Comments
And I’m not alone in being delighted to be able to watch a game which I had no chance of getting to.
This doesn't have to be all or nothing, just a bit of consideration for those who are our most regular and committed customers. Ainsworth and the players are good enough to acknowledge the Support they give so maybe it would be nice if we used some of the extra 10k (not all or even most) to subsidize the coach, give them a free burger or cap the ticket price a bit.
Good idea @StrongestTeam .
I have no idea. But you are completely missing the point. We shouldn't have to
Good point. But I don't think we need to bother Mr. Couhig. If the £10K income figure is correct that will be more than sufficient and still leave the club with a nice piece of 'football fortune'.
@micra said:
I’m grateful to Micra for adding some balance. There will be many Wycombe fans delighted that they can now watch a game they would otherwise not have been able to see. I have huge admiration for those fans who travel the length and breadth of the country, particularly in midweek, and the players are indeed appreciative. However, this disruption is something that very rarely happens, it’s good for the club’s profile and bank balance and in all honesty I think some of the negative reaction has been over the top. Incidentally, I won’t now be able to attend a game that I was looking forward to as I’m working on that Sunday.
for Rupert?
Same.
And surely for the only time in our history, you can watch 4 of the next 5 games on tv/laptops legally in this country!
close down the stadiums!
Do catch up, as I’ve already mentioned in an earlier post, Rupert Murdoch sold Sky to Comcast months ago.
@Malone , I must be missing something.
Aren't the only games that can be watched live on PC/TV, in the next 5, the two Tuesday night matches against Stevenage & Blackpool?
I'll give you 4 in the next 7 - add Fulham & Tranmere - or even 6 in 7 if you attend the Sunderland & Shrewsbury Saturday 3pm k.o. at Adams Park.
close down the stadiums!> @glasshalffull said:
For comcast?
Opions are opinions. I respect yours Alan.
So please point out my assumptions and inaccuracies
I note you have completely avoided addressing any of the points made in my 'delusional posts'
I also don’t really mind playing on the Sunday provided they give sufficient notice. I’m one of those who quite liked the novelty of a Friday night game, something away fans at Tranmere no longer seem to have to endure as a matter of course. This thread has bordered on Twitter at times with the outrage and squabbling. We are going to need to get used to this when we go up. It surely isn’t that hard to visit the National Rail website, book an advance ticket on the 08:10 Football Special from Watford Junction, arriving back at 17:49. It’s just over £50 with a young persons rail card. See you there.
I realise now i missed an essential word out..."aways".
Black pool.
Ipswich
Tranmere
Mk
Not necessarily in that order but those 4 watch able with Rotherham making up the five games run
Perhaps hysterical would have been a better word than delusional, but I’ll address your points:
1) Purely speculation, no one could possibly know if we’d have been better off, worse off or about the same.
2) True, I’ll grant you that, but why is the Premier League a ‘ridiculous name’?
3) It’s widely accepted that the most significant reason why player salaries spiralled was the Bosman ruling, which I’m sure every true socialist would have applauded. How on earth has the ‘Sky coup’ affected ‘thousands of clubs’? Flackwell Heath, Marlow etc? Have they really been affected by Sky?
4) Why describe fans of other clubs as idiots? Why assume that people watching televised games have no idea about the cities those clubs come from? Aren’t there any Geordies, Scousers, Mancunians etc living in Wycombe? Why is clapping goals whilst watching TV an ‘unfathomable phenomenon’? Would that apply to Wycombe fans applauding if we scored against Tranmere?
5) Player wages have been inflated at PL level, but that’s had minimal affect on the lower divisions where salaries are far more realistic.
6) Why blame Sky for activating the terms of a contract that was agreed by the majority of EFL clubs including, I believe, Wycombe? £10k is a facility fee, £600k per season is what Wycombe receive from the TV deal.
I agree that you are entitled to your opinion, but opinions should never be confused with facts.
@Malone, got it! I'd forgotten about the MK fixture anyway - can't think why.
Turns out I can watch six games on TV before Christmas :-
Stevenage (H Leasing.com)
Blackpool (A Lg1)
Fulham (H Leasing.com)
MK (A Leasing.com)
Tranmere (A Lg1)
Ipswich (A Lg1)
Watching a game against MK Dons in the leasing.com trophy streamed live on ifollow would surely be anyone's nadir as a Wycombe fan?
It's obviously better to go to the games, but you can't beat the option of just clicking it onto the laptop instead of an 8hour round trip to a couple of those!
I'll watch those leasing games online too, when I probs wouldn't have gone to them if not.
I think matches selected for TV coverage are not available on iFollow, so the Tranmere Rovers match won't be viewable using that service.
Correct. That's why I added the line "live on PC/TV"
@glasshalffull I appreciate that a lot of it is hearsay but I’m struggling to agree with your point 5 about player salaries being more realistic.
They certainly didn’t appear to be at Bury.
Logic would suggest that if most clubs are running at a loss the people in charge have a somewhat warped view of reality.
Logic would also imply that to compete with relegated teams with significant parachute payments owners are likely to be tempted/forced to pay higher wages than they would do otherwise under supply and demand, (as every capitalist will no doubt applaud). Great for players and their agents I agree.
This isn’t to say that the money that has flooded into the game from Sky (primarily) is itself ‘bad’ (things like the inclusiveness of the sport, better stadiums, for example have been positive (to me) changes), but to state that it has had minimal effect on lower league (or National League) clubs expenditure seems questionable.
Bookertease, I agree that PL salaries have had some affect on players’ wages in the lower divisions, but other factors like inflation etc have also played a part and clearly they are still light years away from the salaries being paid in the PL. You mentioned Bury and my information was that their playing budget was 3 times greater than Wycombe’s despite being a division below us. I can’t see how the PL can be blamed for that sort of extravagance.
@glasshalffull A little difficult to find much information but the closest I can find supports your version rather than mine. Dates a bit (2011) but is reasonably interesting (if you are so minded).
http://www.sportingintelligence.com/2011/10/30/revealed-official-english-football-wage-figures-for-the-past-25-years-301002/
Thanks for that Bookertease, good research.
I see that tomorrow's televised match, K.O. 12pm, is Coventry v Tranmere. What have Tranmere done to deserve having two fixtures moved to Sunday in the space of 5 weeks?