Far from being towards the back of the JH stand as implied in the email from the club, the new extra TV gantry is attached to one of the pillars in the middle of the centre of the front block of seats. This now renders dozens of seats as badly restricted view and my own view from my season ticket seat had nearly all the goal at the Hammy end blocked from view together with a big chunk towards the corner flag. This is simply unacceptable and the club will be sure to find themselves in considerable trouble if they allow this to stay permanently. Several people (including myself) complained and were re-seated in the JH lower (not a very good view from there either) and I think the club is acting illegally in charging people full price for an unobstructed view which has now been altered effectively breaking the contract between Fulham FC and the seat holder. Several people sitting near me are threatening legal action and the club has surely admitted culpability by moving us. The fact is that I have been sitting in my current seat since we moved back to the Cottage, saw my first game as a child in 1962 and have been a season ticket since 1979. I do not want to move as I sit with a group of five or six others with whom I have become very friendly over the years and unless the club can either remove the obstacle or reseat us all together somewhere with a similar view it will be unsatisfactory. The poor beleaguered stadium manager, who told me this monstrosity was only wished on them a few days ago by BT Sport has given several of us his business card and asked us to get in touch this week. Trying to watch a football match through a metal gantry occupied by a cameraman and his camera is certainly not an option and I think the club will be fielding a considerable number of complaints about this. To allow this to go ahead, especially without properly informing those likely to be affected is crass in the extreme and almost certainly illegal. It certainly made for a very unpleasant atmosphere in the JH this afternoon as so many people were complaining to the stewards or demanding to be re-seated. I would be interested to hear the thoughts of any others affected by this.
I hope you get a good result Tony, the club never consider the ordinary fans
i wasn't quite as badly affected but now have an obstructedview where before I had a near perfect view.
For the first time ever i am absolutely devasted at the way the management of the club has acted, waiting to e-mail us on thursday was a nasty surprise, the gantry was far worse tan they said.
We all need to complain immediately!
Agree absolutely. I've tried for years to change my restricted view seat in F Block and having just managed it this season it's worse than ever now
Quote from: Otley on August 24, 2013, 04:08:35 PM
Agree absolutely. I've tried for years to change my restricted view seat in F Block and having just managed it this season it's worse than ever now
I suspect you were the person I was talking to who was sitting in Row G just behind me.
I have to make a hospital visit tonight, but if someone is able, I think it would be a good opening gambit to make a call on the subject to one of the national football phone-ins tonight
Seen a picture of it and it's ridiculous. My seat is restricted view in the Hammy End with that thin pole in the way, and I get £50 off the full price. For that enormous thing to be in the way, you should be getting at least £100 off IMO, if of course you stay there. Unfortunately this sounds like just another example of the TV companies thinking they can do whatever they want. BT sport have done this at other grounds too with similar problems to STH.
It's not just the money aspect, but we have a good little social scene in our section as we have all sat together since we re-located back to the Cottage and the interaction between us is one of the great pleasures of the afternoon. I'm sure some sort of refund is entirely justified, but it would be pretty poor compensation for having lost not only my formerly excellent view, but also the company of my friends. I wish I hadn't taken out that BT Sports Channel subscription now ;-)
all the club have to do is remove the gantry and tell the PL it is not acceptable!
End of. They will actually accept that.
That depends on how much influence the money put into the game by BT Sports has on the decision.
actually whilst you are correct it is only up to a point because they are not allowed to ask for things that are unreasonable and the goegraphy and age of the stadium make it unreasonable. i do not think threatening legal action is correct but i do think we must all write and express our total disapointment and displeasure.
Quote from: Tonywa on August 24, 2013, 04:45:00 PM
That depends on how much influence the money put into the game by BT Sports has on the decision.
sky, itv and channel 5 manage to survive without it. why not skip the club and go straight to bt. im sure they wouldnt want negative press about there new venture. and im sure 100s of fulham fans being unable to watch the games form where they always do will make them think about it
Quote from: fulhamben on August 24, 2013, 04:54:57 PM
Quote from: Tonywa on August 24, 2013, 04:45:00 PM
That depends on how much influence the money put into the game by BT Sports has on the decision.
sky, itv and channel 5 manage to survive without it. why not skip the club and go straight to bt. im sure they wouldnt want negative press about there new venture. and im sure 100s of fulham fans being unable to watch the games form where they always do will make them think about it
Is this just a BT thing or will it be there for all games to record highlights for MOTD and Game Of The Day on Sky?
the e-mail from the club says
'As you may be aware, the Premier League recently announced enhanced media guidelines that offer greater access to broadcasters, plus a wider range of TV camera positions.'
Nothing to do with BT.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2401403/Fulham-fans-express-anger-BT-cameras-block-view-750-seats.html?ito=feeds-newsxml (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2401403/Fulham-fans-express-anger-BT-cameras-block-view-750-seats.html?ito=feeds-newsxml)
Quote from: fulhamben on August 24, 2013, 05:28:26 PM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2401403/Fulham-fans-express-anger-BT-cameras-block-view-750-seats.html?ito=feeds-newsxml (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2401403/Fulham-fans-express-anger-BT-cameras-block-view-750-seats.html?ito=feeds-newsxml)
That last line says it all really
'We're sorry if any fans at Craven Cottage are upset by the camera position, but hope that thousands of Fulham and Arsenal supporters, who couldn't make it to the match, enjoyed the game on BT Sport.'
Looking at the offending gantry from the Riverside, it is obviously going to restrict people's view of the game and just why the club allowed it to be installed defies belief. Have you e-mailed the club yet? Because I am sure that they have broken their contract with. I bet the seats they moved you too made you very wet.
My question to Bt and others is who asked for that camera view in the contract?
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 4
If the photo on the link that Fulhamben posted looks bad you should see it from about three seats further left.
I took a photo and it shows that the gantry blocks out quite a lot more of the pitch.
Is it possible to upload a photo? If so how? The help menu doesn't explain and the Image Icon just comes up with (//)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BSbrUQvCcAAi3Gz.jpg:large)
John Cross of the mirrors view
My seat is towards the end of the JH stand and well clear of this obstruction but it looked to me as if the new camera is on the halfway line and therefore interfering with the views from the most expensive seats. This sounds terrible, the club should apologise, rectify and compensate without delay.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BSctLq7CEAExWZ_.jpg:large)
another nice view
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BScwTgwCAAAsrPC.png:large)Nice goal...I think
Was in my Dads season ticket today as he is away and still got a good view. Anyone a few rows behind won't be able to the goal though. TV companies have survived without this camera in the past, I don't see why its necessary. The camera barely changes angle as well, I'd say it covers about 1/4 of the pitch. Can't believe the club have let this happen, especially in an area where season tickets are £750++
Has anyone got the best email to contact?
Why don't they move it to the away end ...........................they will only have to look though it once a year
Quote from: Jack Fulham on August 24, 2013, 06:43:11 PM
Was in my Dads season ticket today as he is away and still got a good view. Anyone a few rows behind won't be able to the goal though. TV companies have survived without this camera in the past, I don't see why its necessary. The camera barely changes angle as well, I'd say it covers about 1/4 of the pitch. Can't believe the club have let this happen, especially in an area where season tickets are £750++
Its reaction cam, you know the one that just looks at the dugouts, its does not look at anything else.
Quote from: Jack Fulham on August 24, 2013, 06:44:36 PM
Has anyone got the best email to contact?
For who? BT sport says its not their fault, fulham say they had to have it, premier lge say its part of the contract.
Someone somewhere said, we need to have a camera opposite the dugouts. Now we have not had one for years and then BT sport come along...conclusion for me, is they asked for it and use it the most.
I'm an F block season ticket holder and when I received the FFC email informing me new camera gantry 2 days before the first home game I complained about the short notice and that it would have been proper for the club to let us know the seat numbers effected. No reply.
Having attended the game today it does not totally spoil my view but feel very sorry for the people it does.
Two observations today. I watched the cameraman on and off during the match and the camera was just pointed at the dugout, If the camera is for shots of just the dugout surely a small remote camera strapped further up the roof support would be sufficient.
Second observasion, even the camera man was complaining about the small space for him on the gantry when he stood up at half time to stretch his leg and complain about his back.
Quote from: MJG on August 24, 2013, 06:48:24 PM
Quote from: Jack Fulham on August 24, 2013, 06:44:36 PM
Has anyone got the best email to contact?
For who? BT sport says its not their fault, fulham say they had to have it, premier lge say its part of the contract.
Someone somewhere said, we need to have a camera opposite the dugouts. Now we have not had one for years and then BT sport come along...conclusion for me, is they asked for it and use it the most.
Still, Fulham own the ground, if enough fans complain, they will do there best to remove. Can't believe its a reaction camera!!!!!!
Quote from: Jack Fulham on August 24, 2013, 06:51:19 PM
Quote from: MJG on August 24, 2013, 06:48:24 PM
Quote from: Jack Fulham on August 24, 2013, 06:44:36 PM
Has anyone got the best email to contact?
For who? BT sport says its not their fault, fulham say they had to have it, premier lge say its part of the contract.
Someone somewhere said, we need to have a camera opposite the dugouts. Now we have not had one for years and then BT sport come along...conclusion for me, is they asked for it and use it the most.
Still, Fulham own the ground, if enough fans complain, they will do there best to remove. Can't believe its a reaction camera!!!!!!
It is just for that, it aimed purly at the dugouts. when game play went either end it did not move.
Quote from: MJG on August 24, 2013, 06:53:22 PM
Quote from: Jack Fulham on August 24, 2013, 06:51:19 PM
Quote from: MJG on August 24, 2013, 06:48:24 PM
Quote from: Jack Fulham on August 24, 2013, 06:44:36 PM
Has anyone got the best email to contact?
For who? BT sport says its not their fault, fulham say they had to have it, premier lge say its part of the contract.
Someone somewhere said, we need to have a camera opposite the dugouts. Now we have not had one for years and then BT sport come along...conclusion for me, is they asked for it and use it the most.
Still, Fulham own the ground, if enough fans complain, they will do there best to remove. Can't believe its a reaction camera!!!!!!
It is just for that, it aimed purly at the dugouts. when game play went either end it did not move.
I noticed, thought it was covering just the middle of the game which pissed me off. For dugouts makes it even worse. They need a camera man to point a camera at dugouts! Surely they can just get two fixed cameras put somewhere out of way directed at the dugouts. Ridiculous.
Quote from: Jack Fulham on August 24, 2013, 06:55:36 PM
Quote from: MJG on August 24, 2013, 06:53:22 PM
Quote from: Jack Fulham on August 24, 2013, 06:51:19 PM
Quote from: MJG on August 24, 2013, 06:48:24 PM
Quote from: Jack Fulham on August 24, 2013, 06:44:36 PM
Has anyone got the best email to contact?
For who? BT sport says its not their fault, fulham say they had to have it, premier lge say its part of the contract.
Someone somewhere said, we need to have a camera opposite the dugouts. Now we have not had one for years and then BT sport come along...conclusion for me, is they asked for it and use it the most.
Still, Fulham own the ground, if enough fans complain, they will do there best to remove. Can't believe its a reaction camera!!!!!!
It is just for that, it aimed purly at the dugouts. when game play went either end it did not move.
I noticed, thought it was covering just the middle of the game which pissed me off. For dugouts makes it even worse. They need a camera man to point a camera at dugouts! Surely they can just get two fixed cameras put somewhere out of way directed at the dugouts. Ridiculous.
Sarah Brookes is just tweeting that its mandatory and will investigate solutions
Surely you should use your common sense before something is made mandatory!
Alienating loyal fans......
this is classic stuff the people that are the middle managers, that get good salaries that will be off if it all goes pear shapped do not give a monkies and do not understand what they have done.
for the first time ever the actions of the club are less than honourable
I expect to be barred from turnstiles by snaking queues of fans waiting for inefficient ticket distributors to leisurely thumb their way through filing systems dating back to the Haynes Stand facade, while crowd noise indicates that kick off is imminent.
I expect over-zealous and under-trained security staff with no hint of common sense to divide families and friends at turnstiles only for them to freely reunited on the other side.
I expect the season ticket of the guy in front not to work and for him to linger, whilst the queue behind becomes ever more frustrated, the poor punter not wanting to join the snaking queue, only for the sleepy ticket assistant to mouth instructions through a glass screen designed to stifle communication in the quietest of surroundings let alone an ever-increasingly frustrated football crowd.
I expect the under-trained, half-witted, incomprehenible staff, with no sense of preparation despite season after season of the same half-time debacle, at the same under-staffed refreshment counters, to run out of goods, spill the drink or even refuse to serve a coffee in a paper cup having run out of lids, despite punters having queued for the whole of the half-time interval. As for the half-warmed pies - these have long since been abandoned.
I expect ill-trained stewards with only the mearest grasp of the English language to leave fans standing in the aisles whilst they work out the seating arrangements and then find the language to communicate the seat's whereabouts.
I expect guys to arrive late to their seats before kick off and the same guys to arrive late to their seats after the half-time interval. I also expect these same guys to leave their seats before half time and full time.
I expect selfish fans, in the absence of stewards at aisle ends at the end of a game, wanting to avoid queues, blocking up the aisles and blocking out the views of loyal supporters wishing to see the whole game,
What I don't expect is for FFC to plant a camera between hundreds, if not thousands of stalwart and long-suffering season ticket holders in the Johnny Haynes Stand and the pitch for the sake of the TV punter.
'Without fans the game is nothing' I hear - clearly that's not FFC's view.
Mr Khan - so much for the 'remarkable relationship between club and supporters' you mention in your message accompanying the season ticket. A message of welcome that rings rather hollow in light of this intrusion. Why no mention of the camera in this communication or before the tickets were purchased? When did the club become aware of the requirement for a camera in such an intrusive position?
In the first instance I implore the fans in the Johnny Haynes stand up and shout out to get the gantry, camera and all removed or at least moved where no fans view is impeded. If it isn't moved I for one will not be renewing my season ticket. I can take a lot, but this could well be the last straw.
Brilliant post which i have just tweeted.
...surely in this day and age they could fix remote cameras operated by remote control to do the same job and place them under the roof in such away as not to obstruct any views..?
Quote from: LBNo11 on August 24, 2013, 07:46:20 PM
...surely in this day and age they could fix remote cameras operated by remote control to do the same job and place them under the roof in such away as not to obstruct any views..?
Dont be silly thats far too simple a solution. What you really need to do is put a gantry right in front of the national press and some of the most expensive ST's we sell. Then say there is nothing we can do we had to have it. But we can move you to the putney end for the rest of the season.
...great first post - I will have to merge it (a little later) with the post entitled 'That New TV Gantry' which was started earlier so as to tidy up the board and add to the list of disgruntled voices...
Superb post from Darryl. I couldn't have put it better myself - and didn't ;-)
Quote from: Peabody on August 24, 2013, 05:51:13 PM
Looking at the offending gantry from the Riverside, it is obviously going to restrict people's view of the game and just why the club allowed it to be installed defies belief. Have you e-mailed the club yet? Because I am sure that they have broken their contract with. I bet the seats they moved you too made you very wet.
In fact the seat to which I was moved didn't make me wet, as I soon decided that not being able to see a fifth of the pitch was the lesser of two evils and moved back.
He who rides a tiger............ the game has long since sold its should to the greater God of money and mere supporters like ourselves matter less and less to clubs. In so many ways SUPPORTING (as opposed to just watching) Fulham was far more fun and involving when we were in the lower divisions.
The three thousand
people who attended the game were actually important to the club in those days.
It occurs to me that even "the view from South Texas" would have been better than the view from the middle of the JH stand.
:Get Coat gif:
As one of the three thousand I totally agree, although obviously I would rather not go back to those days.
Although not as bad as the people directly around the new gantry, my view from block J was also affected when the ball was in that area of the pitch so the actual problem is far more widespread than just the few that had the email.
Quote from: Tonywa on August 24, 2013, 08:25:54 PM
He who rides a tiger............ the game has long since sold its should to the greater God of money and mere supporters like ourselves matter less and less to clubs. In so many ways SUPPORTING (as opposed to just watching) Fulham was far more fun and involving when we were in the lower divisions.
The three thousand
people who attended the game were actually important to the club in those days.
Here's another picture (http://[img]http://i44.tinypic.com/281yof6.jpg)[/img]
Quote from: Darryl Henson on August 24, 2013, 07:40:52 PM
I expect to be barred from turnstiles by snaking queues of fans waiting for inefficient ticket distributors to leisurely thumb their way through filing systems dating back to the Haynes Stand facade, while crowd noise indicates that kick off is imminent.
I expect over-zealous and under-trained security staff with no hint of common sense to divide families and friends at turnstiles only for them to freely reunited on the other side.
I expect the season ticket of the guy in front not to work and for him to linger, whilst the queue behind becomes ever more frustrated, the poor punter not wanting to join the snaking queue, only for the sleepy ticket assistant to mouth instructions through a glass screen designed to stifle communication in the quietest of surroundings let alone an ever-increasingly frustrated football crowd.
I expect the under-trained, half-witted, incomprehenible staff, with no sense of preparation despite season after season of the same half-time debacle, at the same under-staffed refreshment counters, to run out of goods, spill the drink or even refuse to serve a coffee in a paper cup having run out of lids, despite punters having queued for the whole of the half-time interval. As for the half-warmed pies - these have long since been abandoned.
I expect ill-trained stewards with only the mearest grasp of the English language to leave fans standing in the aisles whilst they work out the seating arrangements and then find the language to communicate the seat's whereabouts.
I expect guys to arrive late to their seats before kick off and the same guys to arrive late to their seats after the half-time interval. I also expect these same guys to leave their seats before half time and full time.
I expect selfish fans, in the absence of stewards at aisle ends at the end of a game, wanting to avoid queues, blocking up the aisles and blocking out the views of loyal supporters wishing to see the whole game,
What I don't expect is for FFC to plant a camera between hundreds, if not thousands of stalwart and long-suffering season ticket holders in the Johnny Haynes Stand and the pitch for the sake of the TV punter.
'Without fans the game is nothing' I hear - clearly that's not FFC's view.
Mr Khan - so much for the 'remarkable relationship between club and supporters' you mention in your message accompanying the season ticket. A message of welcome that rings rather hollow in light of this intrusion. Why no mention of the camera in this communication or before the tickets were purchased? When did the club become aware of the requirement for a camera in such an intrusive position?
In the first instance I implore the fans in the Johnny Haynes stand up and shout out to get the gantry, camera and all removed or at least moved where no fans view is impeded. If it isn't moved I for one will not be renewing my season ticket. I can take a lot, but this could well be the last straw.
...the club do look in on Friends Of Fulham and so the reactions to posts such as these will be seen and must be listened too otherwise they are selling their inheritance for a mess of pottage...
if it was the clubs decision its a disgrace,and we should get a petition to mr khan at the next home game Fulham supporters must all stick together on this football supporters have been took for granted for too long.tv companies wouldnt care if all the games had no crowds as long as they got there way
Quote from: stokesy on August 24, 2013, 09:26:54 PM
if it was the clubs decision its a disgrace,and we should get a petition to mr khan at the next home game Fulham supporters must all stick together on this football supporters have been took for granted for too long.tv companies wouldnt care if all the games had no crowds as long as they got there way
well according to a certain miss brookes, the club are looking for alternatives which suggests it was not impossed upon us to be exactly where it was put, or we wouldnt be able to try and place it else where
I rarely sit in he JH, and even when I do it usually isn't in the posh seats. But this thing is a total outrage. More than that, it is an insanity. It must be some kind of mistake.
Forget all this PR guff about 'mandatory'. That's just meaningless jargon - it cannot have the force of law - it's a lousy decision made by a nameless and unthinking suit. The way to deal with such decisions is simply to say "No thanks. That's stupid". If the powers-that-be decide, in their supposed wisdom, to decree that Clubs must accomodate some kind of low-to-medium level gantry thingy on the centre line then fair enough. If the Club decides to accept that, they must then decide how to accomodate it without inconveniencing existing paying customers. Or they can take a hit and accept that they will loose the seats obstructed by it (a lot of them, it would seem). They can't just bung it down in front of the paying public and say "sorry about that". Someone must have made a mistake here. What next? 20ft. high advertising hordings immediately behind both goals? (p.s don't blame me if this actually happens).
If the Club disagrees with this thing, they should just say "No". Failing that a sign should be immediately attatched to it reading "This obstruction has been brought to you by the fine people at BT. Their message to you, their customers, is 'F*** Off home and watch it on TV".
Direct and sustained action must be remorseless. This kind of interferrence in our game should not be tolerated. The people who have made this 'mandatory' are bullies. They will crumble in the face of sustained hostile publicity, which is what they hate. The first thing is to establish exactly who, Club, League or BT, are responsible for this. And then subject them to the public ridicule they deserve.
Quote from: cmg on August 24, 2013, 09:54:27 PM
I rarely sit in he JH, and even when I do it usually isn't in the posh seats. But this thing is a total outrage. More than that, it is an insanity. It must be some kind of mistake.
Forget all this PR guff about 'mandatory'. That's just meaningless jargon - it cannot have the force of law - it's a lousy decision made by a nameless and unthinking suit. The way to deal with such decisions is simply to say "No thanks. That's stupid". If the powers-that-be decide, in their supposed wisdom, to decree that Clubs must accomodate some kind of low-to-medium level gantry thingy on the centre line then fair enough. If the Club decides to accept that, they must then decide how to accomodate it without inconveniencing existing paying customers. Or they can take a hit and accept that they will loose the seats obstructed by it (a lot of them, it would seem). They can't just bung it down in front of the paying public and say "sorry about that". Someone must have made a mistake here. What next? 20ft. high advertising hordings immediately behind both goals? (p.s don't blame me if this actually happens).
If the Club disagrees with this thing, they should just say "No". Failing that a sign should be immediately attatched to it reading "This obstruction has been brought to you by the fine people at BT. Their message to you, their customers, is 'F*** Off home and watch it on TV".
Direct and sustained action must be remorseless. This kind of interferrence in our game should not be tolerated. The people who have made this 'mandatory' are bullies. They will crumble in the face of sustained hostile publicity, which is what they hate. The first thing is to establish exactly who, Club, League or BT, are responsible for this. And then subject them to the public ridicule they deserve.
i think some very large helium filled baloons should be bought into the gound by everyone sitting directly infront of that camera. make the string just long enough for the baloon to hover just infront of it at all times
Key action points required:
-A letter to the club from as many affected supporters as possible.
-An online petition.
-Letters/emails containing pictures to the Football Supporters Foundation.
-As above but to the press.
This is utterly shambolic and cannot be allowed.
Quote from: stokesy on August 24, 2013, 09:26:54 PM
if it was the clubs decision its a disgrace,and we should get a petition to mr khan at the next home game Fulham supporters must all stick together on this football supporters have been took for granted for too long.tv companies wouldnt care if all the games had no crowds as long as they got there way
Of course it was the club's decision . No one could enter the ground and build a structure like that without clearance from the club. Let's not listen to weak excuses but ask for those responsible to stand up and be counted.
That's why I don't let the club off on this one. Even if contractually they have to have a camera in that position, if I had been an official watching the put that up I would have said hold on a minute, that can't go there.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 4
A Premier League spokesman told Press Association Sport: "We introduced new rules regarding the number and position of cameras.
"There are clearly always going to be issues at a ground like Craven Cottage; a fantastic old ground.
"It has limitations that the new owner (Shahid Khan) is trying to address."
A Fulham spokesperson told Press Association Sport: "To adhere to the broadcast regulations imposed by the Premier League we had to find a credible solution for a camera position that was a requirement.
"We understand it may have caused some issues for supporters and we will look to deal with those individuals to find a solution."
So the club will deal with individuals to find a solution eh, what refund £50 or a move to the element seats
Quote from: KCat on August 25, 2013, 12:02:39 AM
A Premier League spokesman told Press Association Sport: "We introduced new rules regarding the number and position of cameras.
"There are clearly always going to be issues at a ground like Craven Cottage; a fantastic old ground.
"It has limitations that the new owner (Shahid Khan) is trying to address."
A Fulham spokesperson told Press Association Sport: "To adhere to the broadcast regulations imposed by the Premier League we had to find a credible solution for a camera position that was a requirement.
"We understand it may have caused some issues for supporters and we will look to deal with those individuals to find a solution."
So the club will deal with individuals to find a solution eh, what refund £50 or a move to the element seats
NO! The supporters mustn't have to bend to the whims of the broadcasters and Premier League - they MUST bend to the rights of the supporters!
Quote from: KCat on August 25, 2013, 12:02:39 AM
A Fulham spokesperson told Press Association Sport: "To adhere to the broadcast regulations imposed by the Premier League we had to find a credible solution for a camera position that was a requirement.
Credible solution? Do me a favour, Fulham.
Just watched the BT coverage. The position in question seemed to provide a total of approximately 5 secs coverage. A close-up of a momentary brightening of Wenger's lugubrious features when the first goal went in, followed by further close-ups of the subs' quivering nostril hairs as they prepared to enter the fray. Hardly Acadamy Award winning stuff, and certainly not worth obscuring the view of half-a-stand (I exaggerate).
It seems clear now that the PL/BT have instructed Fulham to provide a position for a camera to perform a certain function. Someone at the Club has, ill-advisedly (I understate), decided that the present location provides a 'credible solution'. Once that person has been disabused of this idea I imagine the whole shooting-match will be taken down. If the club don't, fairly quickly, allow common-sense to prevail, it might still be worthwhile putting BT in the frame as they are more susceptible to adverse publicity.
Quote from: cmg on August 25, 2013, 01:56:13 AM
Just watched the BT coverage. The position in question seemed to provide a total of approximately 5 secs coverage. A close-up of a momentary brightening of Wenger's lugubrious features when the first goal went in, followed by further close-ups of the subs' quivering nostril hairs as they prepared to enter the fray. Hardly Acadamy Award winning stuff, and certainly not worth obscuring the view of half-a-stand (I exaggerate).
It seems clear now that the PL/BT have instructed Fulham to provide a position for a camera to perform a certain function. Someone at the Club has, ill-advisedly (I understate), decided that the present location provides a 'credible solution'. Once that person has been disabused of this idea I imagine the whole shooting-match will be taken down. If the club don't, fairly quickly, allow common-sense to prevail, it might still be worthwhile putting BT in the frame as they are more susceptible to adverse publicity.
I imagine if it hasn't been rectified by the next home game (and they have nearly 3 weeks) then there will be seriously angry fans by the bucketload.
If the seats aren't all season ticket only, then it may be worth fans just not buying them. Couple of hundred unsold seats will look ugly, and reflect badly on all parties.
Surely the club has entered a contract with the people affected, to provide a seat with the best possible view, reflected by the price they charge. Therefore, the club are now in breach of contract. I am no lawyer but have I got this wrong?
Exactly agree Peabody, i feel it is a breach of the sale of goods act.
The only credible solution is to remove it.
What has happened at grounds with cantilever stands? have they erected a gantry smack in the middle opposite the dugout?
At Fulham they have taken advantage of the old stand design to come up with an easy technical solution. If Google can get pictures of Craven Cottage from space surely TV engineers can work out how to pictures from 50 yards away!
Haven't Fulham miss sold 100's of high price season tickets as unrestricted view now?
Someone on TIFF said they rang the club after the game to complain. Probably worth emailing
[email protected] as it will allow the club to make a case to whoever has enforced it to get rid or remove it.
I have emailed both Sarah Brookes and Tommy Guthrie about this.
Quote from: Burt on August 25, 2013, 11:00:36 AM
I have emailed both Sarah Brookes and Tommy Guthrie about this.
...if you get a response about obligation to TV, Premier League etc., Please point out that the clubs' obligation should first and foremost be to the attending fans - always...
Two latest tweets from Sarah Brookes
Andrew Waddell @apw19 15h
@sarahbrookes1 very surprised at FFC re new camera. Right infront of press box. What do you think they will say! Small auto camera would do.
Expand
Sarah Brookes @sarahbrookes1 14h
@apw19 we researched ever option with broadcasters. If anything else was feasible it would have been done.
Expand
Andrew Waddell @apw19 14h
@sarahbrookes1 Auto camera. Higher up same post would surely do.Don't envy you press box and supporter backlash which has only just started.
Sarah Brookes @sarahbrookes1 14h
@apw19 Every option was looked into.
Concerning that every option has been looked into. If all options have been exhausted then the only reasonable solution is to remove it.
...if all the options have been looked at then someone is incompetent. They (all the theys') should listen to the shots we call, not the other way around.
If they refuse to do anything about it I like the idea mentioned earlier of the rows in front of the gantry holding helium balloons and banners up in front of the camera...
Quote from: Jack Fulham on August 25, 2013, 11:19:42 AM
Two latest tweets from Sarah Brookes
Andrew Waddell @apw19 15h
@sarahbrookes1 very surprised at FFC re new camera. Right infront of press box. What do you think they will say! Small auto camera would do.
Expand
Sarah Brookes @sarahbrookes1 14h
@apw19 we researched ever option with broadcasters. If anything else was feasible it would have been done.
Expand
Andrew Waddell @apw19 14h
@sarahbrookes1 Auto camera. Higher up same post would surely do.Don't envy you press box and supporter backlash which has only just started.
Sarah Brookes @sarahbrookes1 14h
@apw19 Every option was looked into.
Concerning that every option has been looked into. If all options have been exhausted then the only reasonable solution is to remove it.
Seems pretty blunt from her. Hopefully the club release a full statement soon as this has been getting national press.
There's one obvious question :
"How crucial is it to have a camera trained solely on the dugout ?"
We have always seen the dugout/ subs bench before, with existing camera positions, so why the need for a dedicated camera ?
And, as has been said, this is 2013, not 1953. A small, remote-controlled camera would do the job - or doesn't that come within the term "every option" ?
I'm actually steaming about this, and I don't even sit in the affected seats. I'll be emailing the club about it as I think the PL deserve flak for the ridiculous requirement to have a camera trained at all times on the bench and FFC deserve flak for siting the camera tower as they have done. I encourage as many people as possible to email the club.
For my part, I'm not simply planning a ranty email. Thinking about it, I came up with the auto camera idea mentioned in those tweets to Sarah Brooks. Other ideas I've come up with include having cameras mounted in the corners (front of Cottage balcony) to cover the benches or if slavish obedience to the regulations is going to be the order of the day, mounting the camera on the JH roof (didn't there used to be a commentary position up there in years gone by?). I'll be putting these ideas to FFC...more to stimulate some consideration within the club. To some degree, I feel sorry for Sarah Brooks...she probably wasn't involved in the decision-making process and now has to hide behind the "every option was explored" line in the absence of any real knowledge. Which just serves to make FFC look even poorer all-round, the only way out of which is to properly address the issue
Interestingly, the 2013/14 PL Hanbook has a formal section on camera positions (http://www.premierleague.com/content/dam/premierleague/site-content/News/publications/handbooks/premier-league-handbook-2013-14.pdf (http://www.premierleague.com/content/dam/premierleague/site-content/News/publications/handbooks/premier-league-handbook-2013-14.pdf,), see page 405), whereas the previous season's Handbook didn't
Quote from: The Doctor on August 25, 2013, 12:11:24 PM
I'm actually steaming about this, and I don't even sit in the affected seats. I'll be emailing the club about it as I think the PL deserve flak for the ridiculous requirement to have a camera trained at all times on the bench and FFC deserve flak for siting the camera tower as they have done. I encourage as many people as possible to email the club.
For my part, I'm not simply planning a ranty email. Thinking about it, I came up with the auto camera idea mentioned in those tweets to Sarah Brooks. Other ideas I've come up with include having cameras mounted in the corners (front of Cottage balcony) to cover the benches or if slavish obedience to the regulations is going to be the order of the day, mounting the camera on the JH roof (didn't there used to be a commentary position up there in years gone by?). I'll be putting these ideas to FFC...more to stimulate some consideration within the club. To some degree, I feel sorry for Sarah Brooks...she probably wasn't involved in the decision-making process and now has to hide behind the "every option was explored" line in the absence of any real knowledge. Which just serves to make FFC look even poorer all-round, the only way out of which is to properly address the issue
Interestingly, the 2013/14 PL Hanbook has a formal section on camera positions (http://www.premierleague.com/content/dam/premierleague/site-content/News/publications/handbooks/premier-league-handbook-2013-14.pdf, (http://www.premierleague.com/content/dam/premierleague/site-content/News/publications/handbooks/premier-league-handbook-2013-14.pdf,) see page 405), whereas the previous season's Handbook didn't
that link comes up with page can not be found
Strange, I'm viewing fine here. Will try to post image of interest in a mo
EDIT: Here we go, PL formal expectations of camera positions to be provided, from 2013/14 Handbook
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/1239505_10151654181193924_1136257124_n.jpg)
Quote from: The Doctor on August 25, 2013, 12:16:01 PM
Strange, I'm viewing fine here. Will try to post image of interest in a mo
cheers dr
Hopefully there's now an image visible in my previous reply on this thread. Presumably, FFC will state that they are complying with the requirement to have cameras 14 and 15 viewing the benches and providing reverse angles of the pitch. I'm imagining that any calls for the camera to be scrapped will be ignored on the basis of this. So some creative thinking needed to provide a solution that complies with the regs but doesn't impact on the fans like yesterday.
I don't for a second buy that every option was explored. I think FFC said that they were only informed there'd ned to be a camera there fairly recently (and to be fair, the Handbook was only published in the last couple of weeks). If so, then they've probably just gone for the quickest and cheapest option without much consideration. Seeing as that's backfired, time to give it some thought I'd say
Quote from: The Doctor on August 25, 2013, 12:29:08 PM
Hopefully there's now an image visible in my previous reply on this thread. Presumably, FFC will state that they are complying with the requirement to have cameras 14 and 15 viewing the benches and providing reverse angles of the pitch. I'm imagining that any calls for the camera to be scrapped will be ignored on the basis of this. So some creative thinking needed to provide a solution that complies with the regs but doesn't impact on the fans like yesterday.
I don't for a second buy that every option was explored. I think FFC said that they were only informed there'd ned to be a camera there fairly recently (and to be fair, the Handbook was only published in the last couple of weeks). If so, then they've probably just gone for the quickest and cheapest option without much consideration. Seeing as that's backfired, time to give it some thought I'd say
yep, im sure the every option was looked at would be revised if 400 fans demanded a refund on there season tickets
Its the angle the camera has to be at which is an issue. If they are not going to use a remote camera then the next best thing is to put it in the back row of jh stand behind the press. Now I know that would upset the 20 or 30 fans that may have to he moved but if it has to be there, then that's one solution.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 4
I've got a meeting with the club on Tuesday( although not about this issue) I will definitely bring it up though and try and find out more.
I'm sure in this day and age of technology, a small remote camera would be better, and as Ed says, the fans should always come first
Tommy Guthrie gave several of us his business card yesterday and asked us to get in touch with him during the coming week.
Quote from: The Doctor on August 25, 2013, 12:16:01 PM
Strange, I'm viewing fine here. Will try to post image of interest in a mo
EDIT: Here we go, PL formal expectations of camera positions to be provided, from 2013/14 Handbook
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/1239505_10151654181193924_1136257124_n.jpg)
Blimey! Only 35 cameras? I'm suprised the poor old viewer gets to see anything at all.
If that was the requirement back in 96 there'd have been more cameras and crew in the ground than spectators. Perhaps that's what they're after.
Frustrated Fulham supporters expressed their anger at the first home game of the season after a new television camera position restricted views in the main Johnny Haynes Stand
..
The camera, required as part of the bumper new television deal, was installed in front of the press box and season ticket holders who pay in the region of £750 for their seats.
Fans received an email on the eve of the first home Premier League game of the season, against Arsenal, informing that some seats would have a restricted view, but the reality was described as unacceptable by supporters.
Andrew Stanley, a season ticket holder for 35 years and a Fulham fan for 50 years, said: "It's totally intrusive, not just for people behind the gantry, but for people around it. Some people won't be able to see the goals.
London 24
We have a referee who wears a watch that can tell him if Hawkeye 'sees' a goal.
We have people paying lots of money sitting at home, seeing the replays
Yet we have supporters sitting in a stand that can't see part of the pitch or part of the goal because of cameras.
Madness
Quote from: LBNo11 on August 24, 2013, 07:46:20 PM
...surely in this day and age they could fix remote cameras operated by remote control to do the same job and place them under the roof in such away as not to obstruct any views..?
They use remote cameras attached to the umpires chair at tennis matches. They are no bigger than hand held video cameras & show excellent quality pictures.
Quote from: MJG on August 25, 2013, 12:42:31 PM
Its the angle the camera has to be at which is an issue. If they are not going to use a remote camera then the next best thing is to put it in the back row of jh stand behind the press. Now I know that would upset the 20 or 30 fans that may have to he moved but if it has to be there, then that's one solution.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 4
I't obviously doesn't effect you,MGJ, but I would be one of those 20 or 30 supporters that may have to be moved, I would not be happy, having been there for the last 18 years. Try something else!
Having mentioned on the first page of this topic, I watched the camera man and he just points the camera at the dugout , a remote would do exactly the same job.
I did not read all comments but am outraged by this sort of treatment.
1. Is there a LAWYER on here who might be able to help if the club don't remove it.
2. Can we start a PETITION on here, every FoF member should sign to try to help. (and other supporters sites).
It doesn't affect me, I dont even live in UK but would be as mad as hell if it did,
3. start a chant.....get your f....cameras out of here. (probably not the best method)
It does affect me and l gave it as an option to reduce the amount of fans affected. I have been on the case since yesterday about this and think the only option is take it down and stick a remote one in.BUT failing that the rear of stand could be one other option. If I had a choice there would be no camera.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 4
Another thought.....everybody stand up for the game....they can't throw everyone out and the club will be in big trouble from the league.
If its not removed for next home game I'll be up for helping arrange some kind of protest at the game.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 4
I no longer have a season ticket, and I only attended 6 games last season, yet I will be using whatever influence I have to get rid of that thing. I honestly think that supporters of other clubs can get involved in this too - if it can affect us, it can affect all.
it's not what is legal,
it's not being given money back
it's not even being offerd an alternative seat, although with that camera it would surely mean changing to the other side of the ground
what it is is the club not behaving decently towards their supporters.
the idea that 'every option was explored' is as laughable as it is ludicrous and I hope there was a misprint or misunderstanding somewhere along the way.
every option clearly was not explored and everyone in the central areas and many others have had their site lines badly comprimised... and to only tell us a couple of days in advance was a terrible thing to do.
For what the camera is needed for a much smaller remote device would be perfectly adequate, the PL and the broadcasters will not have at problem with that solution at Fulham! that solution clear was not explored!
Quote from: jarv on August 25, 2013, 03:03:03 PM
I did not read all comments but am outraged by this sort of treatment.
1. Is there a LAWYER on here who might be able to help if the club don't remove it.
2. Can we start a PETITION on here, every FoF member should sign to try to help. (and other supporters sites).
It doesn't affect me, I dont even live in UK but would be as mad as hell if it did,
3. start a chant.....get your f....cameras out of here. (probably not the best method)
...we have started a poll/petition, hopefully all fans will 'sign' it whether directly or indirectly affected, after all, it could happen to you next:- http://www.friendsoffulham.com/forum/index.php?topic=32083.0 (http://www.friendsoffulham.com/forum/index.php?topic=32083.0)
Quote from: LBNo11 on August 25, 2013, 09:34:58 PM
Quote from: jarv on August 25, 2013, 03:03:03 PM
I did not read all comments but am outraged by this sort of treatment.
1. Is there a LAWYER on here who might be able to help if the club don't remove it.
2. Can we start a PETITION on here, every FoF member should sign to try to help. (and other supporters sites).
It doesn't affect me, I dont even live in UK but would be as mad as hell if it did,
3. start a chant.....get your f....cameras out of here. (probably not the best method)
...we have started a poll/petition, hopefully all fans will 'sign' it whether directly or indirectly affected, after all, it could happen to you next:- http://www.friendsoffulham.com/forum/index.php?topic=32083.0 (http://www.friendsoffulham.com/forum/index.php?topic=32083.0)
POLL AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE...
Took this from my seat in H4 yesterday. Just for another angle of it. It's a f-ing monstrosity, and I guess another way of looking at it is how much it ruins the image of the JH stand!
If I can't see the fans behind it, they sure as hell can't see me and I sit right behind the goal..
(http://i42.tinypic.com/dgrzu1.jpg)
For whatever reason, someone saw fit to have the whole stand listed - we are now stuck with it - this is a classic case of "he who pays the pipe calls the tune" - the TV companies pay the money and the camera goes where they want it.
No amount of £700 seats are going to make up for what they pay.
Maybe someone needs to start a campaign to have parts of it de-listed, so the club can build a new stand behind the Stevenage Road façade.
Oh - and while we are at it maybe the "Cottage" can be moved to Bishops Park or even relocated to Motspur Park.
We have 'always' had TV views of the dugout area, so why an extra camera now ?
35 cameras (I think I have also heard the number 38 quoted) seems to be ever-so-slightly an overkill. I guess half-a-dozen of them must be to do with the goal line technology. But surely an angled view of the dugout from one end of a stand would be sufficient with the usual high quality zoom lens.
Are these people aware that the game is played on the pitch or are they frightened of missing some indiscretion which would make a few controversial headlines ?
Quote from: Roberty on August 26, 2013, 10:04:12 AM
For whatever reason, someone saw fit to have the whole stand listed - we are now stuck with it - this is a classic case of "he who pays the pipe calls the tune" - the TV companies pay the money and the camera goes where they want it.
No amount of £700 seats are going to make up for what they pay.
Maybe someone needs to start a campaign to have parts of it de-listed, so the club can build a new stand behind the Stevenage Road façade.
Oh - and while we are at it maybe the "Cottage" can be moved to Bishops Park or even relocated to Motspur Park.
Ok put it in perspective, yes the TV companies pay a lot of money but so do the fans and to them, £700 represents a big investment in the club. For that investment, they surely should expect a decent view of the game.
I did not say that they did not need to have a good view of the game.
The point I made was that if the club have to keep the seats empty so be it - the money the TV companies pay will be more than the value of the empty seats.
The whole problem with the JH Stand is that it is really not fit for purpose in the first place.
If a new stand was constructed behind the Stevenage Road wall it would be possible to have a cantilevered roof, with all seats covered and no restricted views at all. It could also be built to provide positions for TV cameras in the roof space.
