Friday, February 08, 2008

Show your support: SAY NO TO GAM£ 39

Following on from this morning's blunt words on the idiocy of the men running football I feel it is vital that fans strike back. Please join me in signing a petition that the Football Supporters' Federation has set up:
http://www.fsf.org.uk/petitions/no-to-game-39/

Please spread the word to all fans, whether they follows Spurs or not!


And in the words of the FSF:

The Premier League has gone too far with their proposals to invent an extra fixture to be played abroad – and the time for football fans to stand up and be counted has arrived. We want as many people as possible to sign up and add their name. And don't just leave it there – you must know dozens of people who feel the same way about this. So spread the word, email them and tell them about the campaign, and make sure they get signed up too. Fans are the most important people in football. We have to make sure our voice is heard.

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

i disagree with your opinion - i think it will be good for the english game- i know the underlying reason is money - but for me to go abroad and people recognise my spurs shirt becauuse the yhave seen them live then is good!!
i get the feeling that if the internet was around 40 plus years ago people woul be complaining thats its a man game why should we have subs.
Know so far has come up with a good reason why this 39th game should not be played.
The game cant stand still - or we would have laces in balls and very long shorts.

Anonymous said...

I suppose you would also like a return to the days when we all wore cloth caps and the tackle from behind was compulsory. Get with the program - if you want to keep signing all those foreign players, then you need to generate extra income. The alternative is for ticket prices to keep going up. You can't blame the premier league for trying to move forward.

N7teen said...

Well arrange more structured pre-season foreign tours/competitions. Find time for a mid-season overseas friendly. Play one of the standard 38 games abroad. BUT DO NOT EXTEND THE LEAGUE TO 39 GAMES AS IT IS NO LONGER FAIR THAT SOME TEAMS GET AN EASIER 39 MATCHES THAN OTHERS.

Anonymous said...

I am not sure why the FSF are against the proposal so I went onto their website to find out.

Apparently, it will widen the divide between the rich and poor, and it shows a complete disregard for fans.

What a load of bull. Firstly, I have yet to meet a fan who thinks there is too much football. What would you rather watch, a Spurs game in Hong Kong, or the omnibus edition of Eastenders. Secondly, the notion that Derby will be unable to compete with Man Utd's new found wealth from this additional fixture, assumes they are able to compete now.

Anonymous said...

Don't turn the English game into a circus. And how about fairness - if Liverpool travel to Amsterdam but Man U have to go to China 3 days before the Lpool v ManU fixture will Fergie be happy and will it be fair?

Man in the stands

Croesus's PR Man said...

The yuppie generation and the greed that goes with it are finally speaking out. Talking about the Premier League as a "product" just shows who is running the game and it is not anyone who remotely understands what football is really about.

Personally, rahter than this, I would like to see the so called G14 clubs form their European super-league that no-one wants to watch, attract all the sky money to that and have the Premier League disappear up its own backside, leaving football to those who understand it and watch it every week.

Anonymous said...

It could undoubtedly be unfair. Who wants to play one of the Big 4 a third time? To argue along the lines of "every team will have to play a game abroad" is lame. The NFL currently allows only one game outside of the US. And it is not an extra game for every team in the league. One franchise accepts their role in expanding THEIRS and the sports popularity and as such the Miami Dolphins last year "hosted" the New York Giants at Wembley, thus sacrificing a true home fixture but allowing the league to market both the game and the two franchises involved abroad! This year the New Orleans Saints will "host" the San Diego Chargers at Wembley. A couple of years previously the NFL had the Arizona Cardinals "host" the San Francisco 49ers in Mexico City. As it stands every team involved in the NFL scheme has been alternated so far. If the proposal was along these lines, i.e. one game for two teams, fixture list remains the same, two different teams each year, I would give it more support. But by conjuring this random factor "third" fixture it will only become cause for complaint, at least for the lesser clubs. "Bo11ock5, we got bl00dy Man Utd in the extra game..." There will be less approvals because in reality there remains a Big 4 vs the rest, so unless you support one of the Big 4 and you see your team get drawn against a Derby County type team you will probably be complaining about how you had a trickier "extra game" tie than Team X, "why did we have to draw Arsenal...?" I would even go on to suggest it is not likely that the "random factor" would conjure a Chelsea vs Man Utd game and an Arsenal vs Liverpool game in the same season either! There will probably be a provision made to prevent that LOL!

N7teen said...

17:33 - you are spot on. My sentiments exactly. Surely this is a compromise that keeps the moneymen happy but also works for the true fan?

Anonymous said...

This is not about improving the beautiful game. It is about multi national organisations making megabucks, if the rules of the game get in the way, the rules will be changed. Big business will be the winners; the local fans and the professional footballers in general will be the losers. I'm already getting tired of the "big Four" so the sooner they disappear to the "Harlem globetrotter circus" so much the better for those left who can get back to a competitive level playing field. As for globalisation, I still can't get my head around 60,000 Arsenal fans cheering on 11 foreigners

Sid said...

Actually I agree with them playing abroad, I am an English Tottenham supporter living in Spain, we rarely get a chance to see the club that we have supported since childhood playing live football, I do not think that the club expect fans to travel abroad to watch these matches but there are plenty of expats and also Spanish Spurs fans (and there are quite a few) that would love the idea to watch some premiership football, next you will be campaigning to have the players passports taken away......the mind boggles at how selfish some so called fans can be!!

Anonymous said...

n17teen - the trouble with these debates is that you demonise the moneymen, and glorify the fan. We all enjoy seeing the best players, sitting in great stadiums, and watching live TV coverage. None of this would be possible unless the fans wanted the so-called money men to organise this. The sooner "fans" realise this, the sooner we can have a rational debate.

Anonymous said...

Sid, FUCK OFF YOU STUPID CUNT

Anonymous said...

Actually, I agree with idea in principle as I live in the far east and would love to see the mighty spurs play there, but I would change the stupid plan to have a 39th game overseas, which is unfair to play one team 3 times. I suggest taking the premiership up to 21 teams and playing two games overseas at the end of the season, so that some teams don't have to get ready to face another team in just three days with long haul flights, 2 games, 2 saturdays. Games in South America, Asia, Africa, Middle East and Europe. Eventually, could even have games in North America and Australia when they grow up and realise what a fantastic game we play! COYS