disgrace...had no idea we were shown less than Liverpool. Sp*rs and Arse this season...how the hell does that happen? Perhaps it's a good thing BT are coming along, perhaps they will wake up to the fact Chelsea are now better than all three of those clubs

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2328266/Manchester-United-earn-record-60m-TV.html

Edited May 21, 201313 yr by The Brit

disgrace...had no idea we were shown less than Liverpool. Sp*rs and Arse this season...how the hell does that happen? Perhaps it's a good thing BT are coming along, perhaps they will wake up to the fact Chelsea are now better than all three of those clubs

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2328266/Manchester-United-earn-record-60m-TV.html

 

To be honest, we've been better than Utd and Man City this season too. Considering the changes that our club has been through this season, I think we've done extremely well. Not to mention the amount of games we've played as well. 

disgrace...had no idea we were shown less than Liverpool. Sp*rs and Arse this season...how the hell does that happen? Perhaps it's a good thing BT are coming along, perhaps they will wake up to the fact Chelsea are now better than all three of those clubs

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2328266/Manchester-United-earn-record-60m-TV.html

 

Our football under Rafa can't have been as appealing as the media would like to have made us to believe. 

official prem lge stats also coming out...apparently Mata and Hazard are the top two in the League for number of assists, with 18 and 16 respectively...who'd want to watch those dullards in action when you can see Stewart Downing, Gervinho or Clint Dempsey instead?

Edited May 21, 201313 yr by The Brit

They need to make the domestic money evenly distributed like the foreign money is as despite finishing above Liverpool, Everton received £3 million less. Not really right.

tv money is more evenly distributed in england than most countries mac. in other countries, each club negotiates their own deals separately so the huge clubs get far, far more money than others in the league. i know this is the case in italy (hence the milan, inter, juve dominance) and i think its the same in spain (hence the duopoly)

Yeah Coxy, I know it is. I just think it's ridiculous that it's the foreign TV money which is actually contributing to a more equitable league.

Though our system is relatively excellent and I'm glad we have a league where teams can dream (Chelsea, Blackburn, City, Wigan and more), I think more can be done to improve it.

I suppose Arsenal and Liverpool still have larger global fan bases and thus will continue to get more TV time.

Here in Australia though we get every single game live..?

It's about the fan base and who wants to see who, rather than who is the best.

We are not a well loved club in the UK at all and our haters hate to see us winning.

Haters gonna hate!

It's about the fan base and who wants to see who, rather than who is the best.

We are not a well loved club in the UK at all and our haters hate to see us winning.

Haters gonna hate!

 

out of all upsets this season, most have ocurred against chelsea, youd think more people would have followed chelsea games

 

http://www.eplindex.com/32276/premier-league-shockers-how-common-are-shocking-upsets.html

 

a quite damning piece of statistics i must say

Edited May 21, 201313 yr by Lane

I have no problem being shown less, but I think we should all get paid the same like teams do for the Overseas TV money. And yes, I do know this will mean Chelsea will receive less money.

Yeah Jonty in most countries abroad every game is shown live. In the UK 3pm Saturday games can't be shown in fear that it will negatively affect attendances at other games. When I lived abroad, I absolutely loved though. Got to see every Chelsea game on TV opposed to finding some crappy stream.

out of all upsets this season, most have ocurred against chelsea, youd think more people would have followed chelsea games

 

http://www.eplindex.com/32276/premier-league-shockers-how-common-are-shocking-upsets.html

 

a quite damning piece of statistics i must say

I think our run in 10/11 contributed massively to that. Also some stinker of results under AVB and Rafa. Even in 09/10 we lost to Wigan and Villa. 

I suppose Arsenal and Liverpool still have larger global fan bases and thus will continue to get more TV time.

Here in Australia though we get every single game live..?

 

always the way...you're better off living abroad in terms of seeing live English football on tv...

 

but point is, this is amount of times Chelsea were shown to English audience and it's bizarre as european champions were shown less than teams that have won bugger all for years...even argument that our fanbase in UK isn't the biggest (worldwide we're huge) doesn't run true as Newcastle were shown as much as us and they're supporters are all obviously in one city...

Edited May 21, 201313 yr by The Brit

It's about the fan base and who wants to see who, rather than who is the best.

 

 

If that were true then why were we up/near the top when winning/challenging for the title?

 

in saying that, maybe sky were sick of the sight of fsw's smug face as much as we were!

To be fair i cant blame the TV company not wanting us on TV. Who the hell wants to look at that fat bar steward Rafa. Its bad enough that we had to at the Bridge.

The only TV show he should be on is Worlds biggest loser.

I suppose Arsenal and Liverpool still have larger global fan bases and thus will continue to get more TV time.

Here in Australia though we get every single game live..?

 

Ditto across the ditch, live nine times out of ten and delayed if not.

 

Awfully pricey, though, but worth it!

Ditto across the ditch, live nine times out of ten and delayed if not.

 

Awfully pricey, though, but worth it!

Yep, I get every EPL game live, as well as all FA Cup/League Cup ties involving Chelsea and other popular teams, plus every CL knockout round game live and the majority of group stage matches, plus major Liga ties.

Plus I pay a bit extra for Setanta that also gives me live Bundesliga/Europa League/Copa Libertadores/Serie A/Erevidise.

Not that I ever have the time to watch many non-Chelsea games, plus most games are on in the middle of the night.

You're lucky to have Setanta, over here we can only get Premier League football via Sky and Champions League football via ESPN, that's literally it. (Aside from A-League/MLS)

 

ESPN used to broadcast Serie A and La Liga matches here, but the rights expired a couple of years ago and they seemingly haven't bothered to renew.

Well there is about five football specific channels in the states plus ESPN, so Im not complaining about how much I get to see Chelsea play. I think all 69 games were shown live on one channel or another.  And if they ever use any dumb in-studio Yank announcers I can just find a sky or itv stream

I think your better off with the Yank announcers vs ITV. 

For sure! I actually quite like the Yank announcers, they make me laugh.

I think your better off with the Yank announcers vs ITV.

At least they are fair!

I was shocked at first, then I remembered the dreary, sh*te football Benitez had us playing then I realised it's not actually that surprising.

Well there is about five football specific channels in the states plus ESPN, so Im not complaining about how much I get to see Chelsea play. I think all 69 games were shown live on one channel or another.  And if they ever use any dumb in-studio Yank announcers I can just find a sky or itv stream

 

I've got no complaints on the Chelsea front, but the lack of football from other leagues bugs me a great deal.

 

Sadly we just don't have the market for a dedicated football channel down here, it's still a rather niche sport in terms of viewing despite it's popularity in participation terms.

For sure! I actually quite like the Yank announcers, they make me laugh.

If Matrix was here, he'd laugh too.