The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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 at least more of them get to see the game. And I wouldn't
> expect crowd differences to have much of an impact in this particular
> case!
It's not unheard of for a conference side to manage a premiership scalping. Neither is it unheard of for one of the scalped premiership sides to defeat Arsenal/Man Utd etc in the premiership. So, if a conference team can beat a premiership team which is in turn able to defeat arsenal, why can't a conference team defeat Arsenal themselves?
Sure, it's only Farnborough, but underestimating your opponents is the first step to being defeated by them. At the end of the day, it's all about who performs well on the night. A freak goal scored by a cross which gets carried on the chill winter winds coulds decide the game. A penalty given by a referee who didn't see the incident - or lack thereof.
Being a good side is one thing, but you also need to have luck, the referee's judgement and even nature on your side before you can be guaranteed anything.
Arsenal have lost 7 games so far this season, Farnborough 9. Their form is not so far removed as you might like to think.
> Yes, but at least more of them get to see the game. And I wouldn't
> expect crowd differences to have much of an impact in this particular
> case!
It's not unheard of for a conference side to manage a premiership scalping. Neither is it unheard of for one of the scalped premiership sides to defeat Arsenal/Man Utd etc in the premiership. So, if a conference team can beat a premiership team which is in turn able to defeat arsenal, why can't a conference team defeat Arsenal themselves?
Sure, it's only Farnborough, but underestimating your opponents is the first step to being defeated by them. At the end of the day, it's all about who performs well on the night. A freak goal scored by a cross which gets carried on the chill winter winds coulds decide the game. A penalty given by a referee who didn't see the incident - or lack thereof.
Being a good side is one thing, but you also need to have luck, the referee's judgement and even nature on your side before you can be guaranteed anything.
Arsenal have lost 7 games so far this season, Farnborough 9. Their form is not so far removed as you might like to think.
Or†ega wrote:
> 4000 Farnborough fans Vs a few thousand Arsenal fans is a little
> different to 34,000 Arsenal fans vs 5000 farnbough fans.
Yes, but at least more of them get to see the game. And I wouldn't expect crowd differences to have much of an impact in this particular case!
> 4000 Farnborough fans Vs a few thousand Arsenal fans is a little
> different to 34,000 Arsenal fans vs 5000 farnbough fans.
Yes, but at least more of them get to see the game. And I wouldn't expect crowd differences to have much of an impact in this particular case!
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> Badgerman wrote:
> But now, with it being moved to Highbury, Farnborough now dont have
> the advantage of having a home crowd behind them. I sense a
> thrashing,
> and so do Sky, so they are guaranteed to be a bit miffed.
>
> Considering that there'll probably be more Farnborough fans at
> Highbury than there would at Farnborough...
4000 Farnborough fans Vs a few thousand Arsenal fans is a little different to 34,000 Arsenal fans vs 5000 farnbough fans.
> Badgerman wrote:
> But now, with it being moved to Highbury, Farnborough now dont have
> the advantage of having a home crowd behind them. I sense a
> thrashing,
> and so do Sky, so they are guaranteed to be a bit miffed.
>
> Considering that there'll probably be more Farnborough fans at
> Highbury than there would at Farnborough...
4000 Farnborough fans Vs a few thousand Arsenal fans is a little different to 34,000 Arsenal fans vs 5000 farnbough fans.
§n][pe® wrote:
> I think our so called replacement wont be too bad.
I mean replacements for first teamers.
> I think our so called replacement wont be too bad.
I mean replacements for first teamers.
Well wookie, you said maybe if it was another team i.e. Utd or Liverpool maybe we'd get it shown on Sky?
Well youve got even better - the FA have switched it to Highbury meaning all but any hope which farnborough had is lost.
Well youve got even better - the FA have switched it to Highbury meaning all but any hope which farnborough had is lost.
Couldn't they've moved it to a neutral ground, to make it a tad fairer?
What happens if its a draw and has to be replayed?
:D
At Highbury again?
:D
At Highbury again?
I think our so called replacement wont be too bad.
Badgerman wrote:
> But now, with it being moved to Highbury, Farnborough now dont have
> the advantage of having a home crowd behind them. I sense a thrashing,
> and so do Sky, so they are guaranteed to be a bit miffed.
Considering that there'll probably be more Farnborough fans at Highbury than there would at Farnborough...
And - barring a complete Arsenal disaster - it's likely to be a thrashing anyway!
> But now, with it being moved to Highbury, Farnborough now dont have
> the advantage of having a home crowd behind them. I sense a thrashing,
> and so do Sky, so they are guaranteed to be a bit miffed.
Considering that there'll probably be more Farnborough fans at Highbury than there would at Farnborough...
And - barring a complete Arsenal disaster - it's likely to be a thrashing anyway!
True, and for that reason alone, I hope it is switched, regardless of Sky's desires. I don't care how much money they put into it, no TV company should ever be allowed to dictate what happens in football.
It's bad enough that they move games to fit Sky's TV schedule. If Sky want to show - for example - an Arsenal v ManYoo game, they should show it at 3pm on a Saturday, when it's due to play - not move it to Sunday or Monday, or change the kick-off time.
It's bad enough that they move games to fit Sky's TV schedule. If Sky want to show - for example - an Arsenal v ManYoo game, they should show it at 3pm on a Saturday, when it's due to play - not move it to Sunday or Monday, or change the kick-off time.
Page: