Would More People Go To Craven Cottage

[White Noise]

If the online streams and free pub screenings were stamped out? Or do they actually do more to publicise the game and attract supporters and revenue than is lost on the gate?


Why Niall Quinn's argument with fans over watching football in pubs is one he just can't win


By Brian McNally

Published 14:35 20/02/11


Niall Quinn has deservedly acquired an enviable reputation as one of the most fan-friendly chairmen in British football.

The amiable Irishman has usually had his finger on the pulse when it comes to the big issues that consume followers of our national game.

Paying £8,000 for taxis to get 80 stranded Sunderland fans the 300 miles home from Bristol in 2007 cemented the legendary status that was secured by his huge act of generosity in handing over £1million from his 2002 testimonial to hospitals in Dublin and Cork.

But Quinn's 2011 crusade against supporters who get their football fix watching illegal Premier League broadcasts in pubs has sharply divided fandom- and not just on Wearside where many regard him as a candidate for canonization.


The Sunderland footballer-come manager-come chairman has put his revered status as St. Niall of Kildare on the line with an uncharacteristically intemperate remark about the Stadium of Light's stay-away fans.

Quinn's use of the word "despise" to describe his feelings towards those who watch football for free in pubs and clubs has caused considerable anger and resentment towards the 92-times capped Republic of Ireland international.

Last year he was equally unspoken branding the burgeoning bar brigade as "cheats"- but that remark slipped largely unnoticed under the media radar.

Quinn now claims to have used "despise" as a calculated tactic to provoke a reaction - and there is no doubt that the strength of his language has sparked a ferocious debate that now extends far beyond the banks of the Wear.

But there are many admirers of Quinn, who believe that the Irishman's public relations salvo is tantamount to an own goal - even if he declared it helped achieve his objective.

How they argue, do you convince the pub fans to give up their free match viewing and pay to watch games at the Stadium of Light by publicly airing your disdain for them?

The criticism may have been music to the ears of the 39,000 or so fans who regularly pay to watch their side at the Stadium of Light. But I simply don't see what effect it will have on the 10,000 Wearsiders Quinn claims are part of the pub-watching culture.

At best his description was ill-judged and unnecessary and at worst inflammatory and insulting. But undaunted Quinn has shown his both his courage and strength of feeling by planning meetings with Sunderland fans in a series of roadshows at local clubs.

He may not sport a flak jacket or a tin helmet but it is a fair bet that the telly will be switched off as he spells out the damage he believes pub football is doing to his club.

The problem for the one-time centre forward is that a sizeable proportion of casual football supporters think that he is way off target with this attack. Particularly when he claims it is not the loss of revenue he is worried about, but the loss of atmosphere in the stadium. A lot of his critics simply don't buy that line believing that businessmen are always motivated by the bottom line.

When I asked on Twitter this week whether Quinn was right or wrong in his opposition to fans - those who can afford to go to games - watching football for free in pubs I was taken aback by the hostile reaction to the Sunderland chairman's views.

And, equally surprising, was the fact that much of the criticism came not just from fans in the North-East but from a wide range of locations in England, Wales and Scotland.

Many felt that Quinn was ignoring the bigger picture of economic depression, extortionate Premier League prices and a growing alienation between fans and players caused by clubs paying obscene salaries and living beyond their means.

Among the avalanche of critical tweets that landed in my inbox were claims such as:

* "You can't force people to spend money they don't have."

* "Why pay to watch players who flaunt their wealth in fans faces?"   

* "Why can the Bundisliga charge a fraction of what Premier League clubs do?"

* "Niall Quinn is wrong. Football fans are getting shafted and priced out of the game."

* "What is Quinn's plan if the EU declare the pubs can legally show games?"

* "What about cheaper tickets,Quinny and cheaper and better beer and food in the ground?"

My feeling is that, unusually, Quinn has embarked on an argument he simply can't win. Too many people simply think attending football matches has become too expensive and have opted for a cheaper option.

The legality or otherwise of that option is still to be decided by the EU but the indications are that Quinn and the Premier League chairmen as well as Sky could be in for a nasty surprise.

Those who tweeted in support of Quinn's arguments were best summed up by the Vital Sunderland website who said: "He's bang on. Illegal viewing of games is a shambles. It should never be allowed.Football will be dead in less than 10 years."

Quinn claims that the pub-watchers are "damaging the progress of the club" but many disillusioned Sunderland fans argue that the biggest collateral damage being done at the Stadium of Light is inflicted by a massive wage bill that is now more than £46million - more than 80 per cent of turnover.

When Quinn tempted American owner Ellis Short into the club he sold him a "vision" of the Stadium of Light rocking to average gates of more than 40,000.

A glance at Sunderland's attendance figures since the last War shows that the target of 40,000-plus gates is an extremely optimistic figure. Between the 1965-66 season and the start of the 21st Century Sunderland failed to hit a 40,000 average in 34 consecutive campaigns.

Only in Peter Reid's campaigns of 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 when the average soared above 46,000 has the Stadium of Light regularly been close to capacity.

But two embarrassing relegations from the Premier League followed the highs of Quinn's playing days under Reid and savaged attendances. Quinn's competitive pricing policy repaired much of that damage, but the recession has since hit Wearside harder than most other parts of the country.

Concern among fans isn't just about paying for season tickets or match day costs. The price of watching Sky Sports or ESPN at home is also prohibitive for many.

I know scores of former match-attending fans of many different club persuasions who have become so disillusioned with the greed in the modern game that they now confine their viewing to the pub or the internet.

And the massive spending cuts imposed by the coalition government are creating a big rise in unemployment and financial uncertainty that is having a devastating effect on working-class life.

Throw in the fact that Sunderland have just sold star striker Darren Bent for £24million, then announced a small season ticket price rise and it is not difficult to see why for once Quinn seems to have split opinion on Wearside right down the middle.

And you don't need an "O" level in maths to work out that two successive annual losses of more than £25million show that even a full stadium every week would make only a tiny indent on the club's inability to balance the books.

The Black Cats supremo has threatened he could walk away if football can't stem the loss of fans to pubs and clubs. That would be a massive blow not just for Sunderland but for football in general.

Quinn has brought a breath of fresh air to the Premier League with his eloquence, generosity fairness and sportsmanship.

It would be a sad loss if such a caring football ambassador called time on his chairmanship over an issue that is simply beyond his individual control. Not even Quinn's legendary powers of persuasion will bring back the missing thousands in the present economic climate.

Let's hope that over a few pints of beer, the good people of Wearside and County Durham can convince their favourite son that slashing his club's escalating wage bill and using those savings to create cheaper ticket prices is the only way to attract capacity crowds to the Stadium of Light.



Read more: http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/opinion/columnists/brian-mcnally/Brian-McNally-column-Why-Sunderland-chairman-Niall-Quinn-can-t-win-his-argument-with-fans-over-watching-football-in-pubs-article702655.html#ixzz1Eh3h3Tje

[MJG]

Simple reason people don't go to games is cost.
Travelling anywhere in the UK is expensive and the way fixtures get moved around fecks up home and away fans.
The sooner clubs sell online games live the better. They missed a trick years ago when a company (can't remember the name) put a package together for a set of games to be shown on the internet. Instead they went with sky and satanta I think.
The future is a online ST for fans to watch at least away games or something similar.

[AlFayedsChequebook]

In this case Niall Quinn is being pretty thick.

Firstly, being told by a well off former player that you are not a proper fan is never going to end well

Secondly, TV brings in far, far, far more revenue for the club than tickets, not to mention the ability to 'spread the brand'.

[White Noise]

Interesting idea MJG.

Would anyone on here be willing to pay say £95 per season (£2.50 per game) for all 38 home and aways games in high quality from the club with accompanying Fulham led commentary rather than the patchy, free foreign streams?

[TonyGilroy]

I've had the same thought.

I'd buy an away ST for good on line coverage for up to about £100. Less if the pirate sites were still available.

[AlFayedsChequebook]

Interesting idea MJG.

Would anyone on here be willing to pay say £95 per season (£2.50 per game) for all 38 home and aways games in high quality from the club with accompanying Fulham led commentary rather than the patchy, free foreign streams?

If I couldn't get a season ticket then definitely, they could even do a pay per game thing as well....

Ideally for the club, they should offer a package for non-uk residents only, I bet most on here who are not in the UK would sign up in a flash.

[King_Crud]

in Australia about 4 years ago they offered an premier league deal for not much cash. My mate and I signed up, all games were available live. Stream was ok but with todays modern technology it would be an excellent deal.

If the game is 3pm Saturday though i would still prefer Soccer Saturday

[Jimpav]

I think that it simply boils down to the expense and effort of going to matches. The cheapest non promotonal ticket price we have for a league game is about £30, plus food/drink before after the match, a programme, travel etc doesn't make for a cheap day out.

Banning illegally televised games would increase attendances it would simply push people into subscribing for Sky Sports or more likely watching it online. Even this seems unlikely though because neither are a substitute for going to the pub with your mates -a big part of weekend culture for many young men up and down the country.

[JBH]

Interesting idea MJG.

Would anyone on here be willing to pay say £95 per season (£2.50 per game) for all 38 home and aways games in high quality from the club with accompanying Fulham led commentary rather than the patchy, free foreign streams?

I think a better idea is if the club could offer Fulham fans access to live away games at say £2 a game when they purchase their season ticket this would ensure that the Cottage still gets the fans for home games thereby still getting the revenue that this generates.

[White Noise]

Interesting to see Quinn now saying that they are going to have to sell players if the gates don't improve. That is really laying it on the line.



http://www.clubcall.com/sunderland/quinn-warns-over-sales-1170912.html

Quinn warns over sales

Sunderland, 10:49, February 23, 2011


Chief Niall Quinn has warned fans that they may have to sell the likes of Asamoah Gyan and Craig Gordon if gates do not improve.

Quinn has been banging the drum for supporters to return to the Stadium of Light for most of the season, as attendances have dropped to around 35,000 for the visit of the lower lights in the Premier League.

Quinn had already warned that the stellar signings of the likes of Gyan and Gordon would be a thing of the past if crowds did not improve. And now he has gone one step further and admitted players may have to be sold if fans do not start to return to the club.

He said: "If I don't win them back, the club may have to downsize and cut its cloth differently.

"It'll be difficult to follow up on the current investment and players may have to be sold.

"Manchester United have just announced turnover of £289m; ours is £64m. We can't compete financially with that, and we're missing 10,000 fans."

[lamby]

Interesting idea MJG.

Would anyone on here be willing to pay say £95 per season (£2.50 per game) for all 38 home and aways games in high quality from the club with accompanying Fulham led commentary rather than the patchy, free foreign streams?

I think a better idea is if the club could offer Fulham fans access to live away games at say £2 a game when they purchase their season ticket this would ensure that the Cottage still gets the fans for home games thereby still getting the revenue that this generates.

Yep, I would have done this in a shot - the amount of effort and disappointment that went into watching bad quality streams would be easily worth £2 a game.

Here in Aus, we get pretty much every game live through Foxtel (sky equiv) - push the red button to get the other games. Only once has Fulham not been shown on any weekend. The only trouble is that 3am is a bit tough with a 5 month old baby - so the only games I get to see in real time are the mid week games.

[The Equalizer]

Out of interest, is it actually 'illegal' to show Premier League games in pubs? I'm not sure that I've seen the law that states 'thou shalt not usurp Grand UberLord Murdoch's monopoly on showing football'.

And if it's illegal to show the games, does it also make it illegal to show the foreign TV channels?

Sorry for going off topic...

Quinn is being blinkered in his opinion. I can see exactly where he comes from, but he really doesn't seem to have taken the time to weigh up his argument against the facts - most of which are stated above.

[MJG]

Out of interest, is it actually 'illegal' to show Premier League games in pubs? I'm not sure that I've seen the law that states 'thou shalt not usurp Grand UberLord Murdoch's monopoly on showing football'.

And if it's illegal to show the games, does it also make it illegal to show the foreign TV channels?

Sorry for going off topic...

Quinn is being blinkered in his opinion. I can see exactly where he comes from, but he really doesn't seem to have taken the time to weigh up his argument against the facts - most of which are stated above.

A case in Europe(thanks to a landlady from Pompy) at the moment will pretty much answer that question soon.

[Blingo]

I've had the same thought.

I'd buy an away ST for good on line coverage for up to about £100. Less if the pirate sites were still available.

Make it £50 Tony and you can buy mine aswell  :54:. ;p One for the price of two and you get the other one for nothing  :005: :005:

[MisfitKid]

Interesting idea MJG.

Would anyone on here be willing to pay say £95 per season (£2.50 per game) for all 38 home and aways games in high quality from the club with accompanying Fulham led commentary rather than the patchy, free foreign streams?

Ideally for the club, they should offer a package for non-uk residents only, I bet most on here who are not in the UK would sign up in a flash.

Yes, please...  :008:

[DukeTyrion]

I can see both sides of the coin here. Whilst I rarely agree with people using 'free-downloads', the fact is that people in this country are being charged more for the same viewing as overseas viewers.

Football teams have a captive customer base, and really need to do more to protect their customers. Spending more and more on player wages might in their view be what their customers want, but that's not always the case. Sure, some would love to see Messi and Ronaldo at the cottage and would be happy to pay £5,000 for a season ticket to do so, but the higher football in general climbs financially, the more grass roots fans drop off the other end.

It's a difficult situation, especially when Chairmen are often pumping millions of their own money into the game, for little return, but they really do need to start thinking about the average guy in the street, before the whole system starts to collapse around their ears.

Personally I would love to pay for some kind of remote (either TV or Stream) Fulham season ticket, as my wife's illness currently leaves me unable to get to many games, but in the meanwhile I will make do with listening to Gentleman Jim or soccer saturday as I currently do.

[SoCalJoe]

Interesting idea MJG.

Would anyone on here be willing to pay say £95 per season (£2.50 per game) for all 38 home and aways games in high quality from the club with accompanying Fulham led commentary rather than the patchy, free foreign streams?

Ideally for the club, they should offer a package for non-uk residents only, I bet most on here who are not in the UK would sign up in a flash.

Yes, please...  :008:

+1

In the States for NFL games there is a local "blackout" rule in which if by Thursday of the Sunday game if there is not a sell out, it will not be televised within the local geographical area. It's a very short-sighted rule and does not help attendance. Mr. Quinn needs to realize that some people prefer watching from the pubs (it's still an expense), without the hassle of traffic, with the availability of TV replays, a bathroom within a few feet, etc..

Threatening to sell players isn't exactly the best way to get people to buy tickets, in fact it's a good way to keep people to stay away from the Stadium of Light box office and gift shop.

[grimmynz]

TV and online streaming are OK but there is nothing like the atmosphere of a live game.  I really miss that.
However if clubs want revenue from fans who can't attend, I have no problem with paying for online viewing.
Let's face it some of us just can't get to a game for financial, work or geographical reasons. But that doesn't make us any less keen supporters.