The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
From http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,27-536035,00.html
-----
Farnborough try hard to make romantic gesture
By Peter Lansley
HAMPSHIRE police and the FA will today determine whether Farnborough Town are obliged to make a loss in order to uphold the integrity of the FA Cup. Romantics everywhere will be trusting that the police, the FA and the Nationwide Conference club emerge from their meeting at the charming but restricted Aimita Stadium to announce that Arsenal must travel there for the fourth-round tie that was yesterday selected to be televised live two weeks on Saturday.
Yet if health and safety considerations necessitate that Farnborough cannot stage the game, and Sky Sports decide to take their cameras elsewhere, then the non-league club can expect to double their revenue from the glamorous draw, as well as enjoying a run-out at the home of the Cup holders. Some consolation, the cynics will mutter.
BSkyB, in which The News Corporation, parent company of The Times, has a 35.4 per cent stake, has chosen this beguiling tie, for a 12.30pm kick-off on Saturday, January 25, on the proviso that Farnborough are able to stage the game. Yet even if the club loses the £265,000 TV fee from the FA, a full house at Highbury would earn them £600,000 in gate receipts alone. The capacity at the Cherrywood Road ground is 4,900 before segregation.
A spokesman for Sky Sports hinted that they would look elsewhere for their glory fix should the only non-league side definitely through to the next round be advised to play at Highbury. "It is not currently decided whether the tie will be played at Farnborough," he said, "and we can’t comment on what will happen if the game is switched."
Shrewsbury Town have been rewarded for staging a momentous home victory over Everton. Their fourth-round tie with Chelsea will be televised live from Gay Meadow on BBC One at teatime on Sunday, January 26. The BBC had first choice of the four live games to be shown in the next round, Sky having second and third pick. The satellite station will show Crystal Palace's game with Liverpool at 4pm on the Sunday, after the BBC have screened Manchester United against West Ham United at 1pm.
"We have heard that Sky have selected us for their live match if we can stage the tie but discussions are ongoing with Farnborough police," Vince Williams, the secretary, said. "There are a whole multitude of issues to consider, from parking and segregation to whether we could control the number of people liable to turn up wanting to watch the game. Health and safety aspects are paramount."
Graham Westley, the Farnborough owner and manager, is adamant that the club should not be held to ransom. "I'm very disappointed at the attitude of the TV companies," he said. "This match deserves to be screened live to the country, no matter where it is staged. There is so much romance surrounding the game. It's the tie of the year and should be top TV billing."
The FA underlined that clubs cannot switch a tie simply on financial grounds. A spokesperson for Hampshire police said: "Talks are ongoing and no conclusions have been reached."
In 1992, when Farnborough were drawn at home to West Ham in the third round, the tie was switched on police advice and after a 1-1 draw, only a last-minute goal from Trevor Morley allowed the top-flight club to prevail in the replay, also at Upton Park.
Five years ago, however, Stevenage Borough fought to host their fourth-round tie with Newcastle United at Broadhall Way, despite protestations from Kenny Dalglish's side. They drew 1-1 before Newcastle won the replay.
-----
What is Sky's problem with a switch of the venue? I don't just mean a switch to Highbury - they seem to be saying that, even if it's switched to a neutral ground, they aren't interested.
Surely the attraction of this game is the same, wherever it is played? Non-league team versus current Premiership champions and FA Cup holders - an FA Cup game sure doesn't get more 'romantic' than that? Many sources are saying that there is massive global interest in this game, and surely Sky would be missing out on potentially one of their biggest audiences EVER - if not THE biggest - for a live game if they refuse to cover it.
Sky Sports are always full of talk about the big clubs making lots of money while the small clubs struggle - yet this makes all that seem like hypocritical claptrap. Farnborough stand to get around £260,000 from Sky if they host the game - yet they can almost QUADRUPLE that from gate receipts at Highbury alone. A switch - to ANY larger venue, not just Highbury - would only benefit Farnborough, yet Sky would seemingly be happy to deny them that.
Their club want it, their players want it, and I'm sure their fans would also want it, as more of them could see the game at a larger venue. There is - surely - no down-side? Sure, the FA say that a switch can't be made purely due to financial reasons, but surely they can see that it wouldn't be purely financial?
I feel that Sky are being unnecessarily pedantic over the whole thing, and I can't see any valid reason for it, to be honest. This isn't a dig at either Premiership club, but I can't help wondering if there would have been any suggestion of not covering the game if it had been Farnborough versus Man Utd or Liverpool.
Your opinions on the whole thing?
-----
Farnborough try hard to make romantic gesture
By Peter Lansley
HAMPSHIRE police and the FA will today determine whether Farnborough Town are obliged to make a loss in order to uphold the integrity of the FA Cup. Romantics everywhere will be trusting that the police, the FA and the Nationwide Conference club emerge from their meeting at the charming but restricted Aimita Stadium to announce that Arsenal must travel there for the fourth-round tie that was yesterday selected to be televised live two weeks on Saturday.
Yet if health and safety considerations necessitate that Farnborough cannot stage the game, and Sky Sports decide to take their cameras elsewhere, then the non-league club can expect to double their revenue from the glamorous draw, as well as enjoying a run-out at the home of the Cup holders. Some consolation, the cynics will mutter.
BSkyB, in which The News Corporation, parent company of The Times, has a 35.4 per cent stake, has chosen this beguiling tie, for a 12.30pm kick-off on Saturday, January 25, on the proviso that Farnborough are able to stage the game. Yet even if the club loses the £265,000 TV fee from the FA, a full house at Highbury would earn them £600,000 in gate receipts alone. The capacity at the Cherrywood Road ground is 4,900 before segregation.
A spokesman for Sky Sports hinted that they would look elsewhere for their glory fix should the only non-league side definitely through to the next round be advised to play at Highbury. "It is not currently decided whether the tie will be played at Farnborough," he said, "and we can’t comment on what will happen if the game is switched."
Shrewsbury Town have been rewarded for staging a momentous home victory over Everton. Their fourth-round tie with Chelsea will be televised live from Gay Meadow on BBC One at teatime on Sunday, January 26. The BBC had first choice of the four live games to be shown in the next round, Sky having second and third pick. The satellite station will show Crystal Palace's game with Liverpool at 4pm on the Sunday, after the BBC have screened Manchester United against West Ham United at 1pm.
"We have heard that Sky have selected us for their live match if we can stage the tie but discussions are ongoing with Farnborough police," Vince Williams, the secretary, said. "There are a whole multitude of issues to consider, from parking and segregation to whether we could control the number of people liable to turn up wanting to watch the game. Health and safety aspects are paramount."
Graham Westley, the Farnborough owner and manager, is adamant that the club should not be held to ransom. "I'm very disappointed at the attitude of the TV companies," he said. "This match deserves to be screened live to the country, no matter where it is staged. There is so much romance surrounding the game. It's the tie of the year and should be top TV billing."
The FA underlined that clubs cannot switch a tie simply on financial grounds. A spokesperson for Hampshire police said: "Talks are ongoing and no conclusions have been reached."
In 1992, when Farnborough were drawn at home to West Ham in the third round, the tie was switched on police advice and after a 1-1 draw, only a last-minute goal from Trevor Morley allowed the top-flight club to prevail in the replay, also at Upton Park.
Five years ago, however, Stevenage Borough fought to host their fourth-round tie with Newcastle United at Broadhall Way, despite protestations from Kenny Dalglish's side. They drew 1-1 before Newcastle won the replay.
-----
What is Sky's problem with a switch of the venue? I don't just mean a switch to Highbury - they seem to be saying that, even if it's switched to a neutral ground, they aren't interested.
Surely the attraction of this game is the same, wherever it is played? Non-league team versus current Premiership champions and FA Cup holders - an FA Cup game sure doesn't get more 'romantic' than that? Many sources are saying that there is massive global interest in this game, and surely Sky would be missing out on potentially one of their biggest audiences EVER - if not THE biggest - for a live game if they refuse to cover it.
Sky Sports are always full of talk about the big clubs making lots of money while the small clubs struggle - yet this makes all that seem like hypocritical claptrap. Farnborough stand to get around £260,000 from Sky if they host the game - yet they can almost QUADRUPLE that from gate receipts at Highbury alone. A switch - to ANY larger venue, not just Highbury - would only benefit Farnborough, yet Sky would seemingly be happy to deny them that.
Their club want it, their players want it, and I'm sure their fans would also want it, as more of them could see the game at a larger venue. There is - surely - no down-side? Sure, the FA say that a switch can't be made purely due to financial reasons, but surely they can see that it wouldn't be purely financial?
I feel that Sky are being unnecessarily pedantic over the whole thing, and I can't see any valid reason for it, to be honest. This isn't a dig at either Premiership club, but I can't help wondering if there would have been any suggestion of not covering the game if it had been Farnborough versus Man Utd or Liverpool.
Your opinions on the whole thing?
Page:
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> Yes, but - the question is - should Sky still show it, regardless of
> where it's played?
Yes, because if they chose that game to begin with, they should keep with it. Even if it's played at a differnt ground.
> Yes, but - the question is - should Sky still show it, regardless of
> where it's played?
Yes, because if they chose that game to begin with, they should keep with it. Even if it's played at a differnt ground.
Narcileptic Insomniac wrote:
> 2) At 10,000-1 you will find that many people will chance a £1
> or even £5 bet on a Farnborough victory.
10,000-1 on them beating Arsenal? Who is giving those odds? Cos William Hill are only giving 10,000-1 on them winning the FA cup.
> 2) At 10,000-1 you will find that many people will chance a £1
> or even £5 bet on a Farnborough victory.
10,000-1 on them beating Arsenal? Who is giving those odds? Cos William Hill are only giving 10,000-1 on them winning the FA cup.
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> Yes, but England were playing a superior team! :-)
---
A superior team who they claimed they would beat with ease.
I watched the World Cup documentary.
"Worst Brazil team ever"
"We'll easily beat them 2 or 3 to 0"
"They won't put anything past us"
"Brazil's journey ends here"
Pffffft.
> Yes, but England were playing a superior team! :-)
---
A superior team who they claimed they would beat with ease.
I watched the World Cup documentary.
"Worst Brazil team ever"
"We'll easily beat them 2 or 3 to 0"
"They won't put anything past us"
"Brazil's journey ends here"
Pffffft.
Superior? Perhaps. On england's form, they were never more than equals in my opinion. The luck of Ronaldinho won the match for them.
Wind has undone Seaman once, it could do it again :p
Wind has undone Seaman once, it could do it again :p
Yes, but England were playing a superior team! :-)
Oh, and lest we forget, "a cross which was carried on a humid summer breeze" knocked England out of the world cup ;)
not only can i not spell, i can't count either. must be getting old...
1) I was being descriptive. Something football seems to have lost. Once upon a time, a paper would dedicate 4 pages to a single football game, with commentary of the entire 90 minutes. Starting with "Barnes applied his left pedal extremity to the ball to start the first half" right through to "and the referee silences the hopes of 35,000 fans by blowing the final whistle on an evening that will go down in history" etc. Now we get "Man Utd beat so and so with a great Nistelrooy goal, who banged it in the top corner on 36 minutes. In other news - terrorists blah blah"
Personally I think football is good enough a game to warrant a few more words. Sorry.
1) Wrexham are better than Farnborough...
2) At 10,000-1 you will find that many people will chance a £1 or even £5 bet on a Farnborough victory.
3) I thought my nick up on the fly, so sue me.
Personally I think football is good enough a game to warrant a few more words. Sorry.
1) Wrexham are better than Farnborough...
2) At 10,000-1 you will find that many people will chance a £1 or even £5 bet on a Farnborough victory.
3) I thought my nick up on the fly, so sue me.
On another note - from TeamTalk.com...
-----
Gunners hand Farnborough cash boost
Arsenal will give non-league Farnborough all the profits from programme sales at this month's FA Cup tie after the game was moved to Highbury.
The FA granted Farnborough's request to switch the tie from their tiny Cherrywood Road ground due to safety reasons, but the Conference club will miss out on £265,000 as a result, which they would have banked for live coverage on Sky.
The televised fourth-round game will now be Gillingham's home tie against Leeds instead. But Farnborough can look forward to a £40,000 highlights fee, as well as 50% of gate receipts, which could net them an estimated £500,000.
The latest boost to the Conference team's coffers will come as a result of the decision by the Gunners to promise them profits from sales of the programme.
Arsenal managing director Keith Edelman said: "All our discussions with Farnborough were amicable and constructive. As far as money is concerned, we will not earn any more from the game being played at Highbury than at Farnborough.
"In fact, we have told Farnborough that they can have all the profits from programme sales," he told the Evening Standard.
-----
Gunners hand Farnborough cash boost
Arsenal will give non-league Farnborough all the profits from programme sales at this month's FA Cup tie after the game was moved to Highbury.
The FA granted Farnborough's request to switch the tie from their tiny Cherrywood Road ground due to safety reasons, but the Conference club will miss out on £265,000 as a result, which they would have banked for live coverage on Sky.
The televised fourth-round game will now be Gillingham's home tie against Leeds instead. But Farnborough can look forward to a £40,000 highlights fee, as well as 50% of gate receipts, which could net them an estimated £500,000.
The latest boost to the Conference team's coffers will come as a result of the decision by the Gunners to promise them profits from sales of the programme.
Arsenal managing director Keith Edelman said: "All our discussions with Farnborough were amicable and constructive. As far as money is concerned, we will not earn any more from the game being played at Highbury than at Farnborough.
"In fact, we have told Farnborough that they can have all the profits from programme sales," he told the Evening Standard.
Jesus firkin Christ, are you Insane Bartender in disguise? "a cross which gets carried on the chill winter winds"? This is about 22 men chasing a sack of air around a field, not a lesson in English Literature!
I'm not saying that Arsenal are guaranteed a win. We all know that there's a chance of an upset - that's the whole thing about the magic of the FA Cup.
I'm not under-estimating anyone. I still remember the Wrexham game! And I'm sure that Arsenal won't be under-estimating anyone either. I do sincerely hope that Wenger doesn't decide to field a weakened team, because not only does that reek of arrogance, but they could also very easily be made to stupid. I also feel that, as the holders, we have more obligation than usual to field a full-strength squad regardless of the supposed quality of the opposition.
The mention of form would be a fair point, but it doesn't account for the quality of opposition each team has been playing against. Nor does it show that form counts for nothing in the FA Cup.
All I'm saying is that realistically speaking, very few people (I won't say no-one, simply because of the odds on offer) would put very much money on anything other than an Arsenal win, regardless of where this tie is played. That's why a Farnborough win would be called a "cup upset" - because people *expect* an Arsenal win.
Oh, and it's 'narcoleptic', by the way.
I'm not saying that Arsenal are guaranteed a win. We all know that there's a chance of an upset - that's the whole thing about the magic of the FA Cup.
I'm not under-estimating anyone. I still remember the Wrexham game! And I'm sure that Arsenal won't be under-estimating anyone either. I do sincerely hope that Wenger doesn't decide to field a weakened team, because not only does that reek of arrogance, but they could also very easily be made to stupid. I also feel that, as the holders, we have more obligation than usual to field a full-strength squad regardless of the supposed quality of the opposition.
The mention of form would be a fair point, but it doesn't account for the quality of opposition each team has been playing against. Nor does it show that form counts for nothing in the FA Cup.
All I'm saying is that realistically speaking, very few people (I won't say no-one, simply because of the odds on offer) would put very much money on anything other than an Arsenal win, regardless of where this tie is played. That's why a Farnborough win would be called a "cup upset" - because people *expect* an Arsenal win.
Oh, and it's 'narcoleptic', by the way.
Page: