Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
hulvik

Thank you Sky for nothing

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, Orbiter said:

Sky gave Speedway the chance to maximise its product by exposure Speedway failed. 

Sadly Speedway is not looked on as the same as Prem football,  that is a multi million pound sport, our national sport, when you see packed stands at prem matches people for whatever reason look at it differently, the only time our stadiums get pack is for the play off's and final, otherwise its not appealling to the casual veiwer, could sky have done things diferently ? Can BT do any better ? Im not so sure, could the BSPA have helped, ? Fot whaatever reason speedway has changed a hell of a lot down the years, and personally, i dont think you will attract the type of crowds clubs would get in the early 70's and 80's,. Then you had big sponsorship also national paper exposure, now you have nothing, clubs have to fend for themselves.We at Poole are lucky we are a high profile club that has and can attract good sponsorship thanks to Matt ford and his tireless work, other clubs are not so lucky. And when the casual looker watches speedway on TV and fair play, you have the likes of Pearson and Mr modorbike trying to ramp up 1234 its a bit of a turn off. no matter how hard they try.. Losing the majority of the top boys to Britsh speedway has not helped our cause as a promotional aspect either.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it Sky’s fault? Imagine giving a relation the opportunity of a lifetime in terms of money and in Speedways case TV exposure only to find that any potential gain in from the deal in terms of re-building and re-branding the sport had been squandered.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/11/2018 at 11:34 AM, BWitcher said:

Not sure what planet you are on, or whether you've just copied and pasted the opening post from another source..

The downward spiral of football since Sky? lmao. Seriously?

Then you try and cite a Thursday night Rugby League game as proof that has also had a downward spiral? Rugby League attendances are higher now than they were pre Sky.

Absolute nonsense article/post.

 

 

Crowds are well.down pre sky just look at bradford workington whitehaven etc  when widnes are on 3 parts of stadium are empty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, geoff100 said:

Crowds are well.down pre sky just look at bradford workington whitehaven etc  when widnes are on 3 parts of stadium are empty

No thanks.

I prefer to look at the average attendances for a whole season rather than just one tv game. You should try it, might help you making stupid comments.

Average crowds in 1987 in the top flight of Rugby League were less than 5000. They are now around 9000.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BWitcher said:

No thanks.

I prefer to look at the average attendances for a whole season rather than just one tv game. You should try it, might help you making stupid comments.

Average crowds in 1987 in the top flight of Rugby League were less than 5000. They are now around 9000.

 

My comments are as stupid as yours !sky have killed the game at grass roots level any fan in cumbria will tell u that .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, geoff100 said:

My comments are as stupid as yours !sky have killed the game at grass roots level any fan in cumbria will tell u that .

You have stated that crowds pre sky are higher than now.

You are wrong.

Whatever sky have or have not done at 'grass roots level' is an entirely different argument. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/11/2018 at 11:49 AM, Argos said:

Can anyone tell me a Sport that Sky have got involved in that has not thrived other than Speedway,  

Ice Hockey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tsunami said:

Ice Hockey.

Used to enjoy watching Ice Hockey live but it's another of those sports that doesn't come over very well on TV due to the speed of the puck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/11/2018 at 3:06 PM, PHILIPRISING said:

OR that without him there wouldn't have been a deal in the first place

Not strictly true. I was involved in a bid to get the speedway rights with a large media group, just prior to SKY and Terry, and was stalled in detail and then the BSPA announced the SKY deal without any communication to us. A similar deal could have been achieved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, waytogo28 said:

We can hardly blame Sky for the inability of the BSPA to maximise on what was a wonderful marketing opportunity - wrapped up in a Big Bundle of Cash. Instead, they just took the money and lay back to dream of a glorious future suddenly arriving. Lucky winners were those No.1s who got the majority of it.

Utter bollocks. I have said regularly on here, and it has been confirmed, that the windfall of TV money instead of being used to grow the sport, was in fact used to compete against each other when the riders, usually USA ones, decided they they should be rewarded with massive contracts and sign ons, and the promotors were forced to compete against each other for their services. That drifted down to lesser riders and the windfall just disappeared. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I always thought the money Sky gave to the clubs was merely to offset the fact that whenever they showed a meeting, rather than attracting more support, the fans or at least a reasonable percentage of them, decided to stay at home and watch it on television instead.

It did probably attract an audience from outside but they are the type who watch sport on the TV rather than go to and watch it live.

Some sports just do not come across as well on the TV as they do live, I think this is possibly Speedway's biggest problem, The camera angles make it look so much slower sometimes, at Lakeside in particular it makes it look like they are only going about 20 mph, I know Arena isn't a fast track but it looks a damn sight quicker when I watch there in person with just one visual aspect.

Edited by marko
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, marko said:

I always thought the money Sky gave to the clubs was merely to offset the fact that whenever they showed a meeting, rather than attracting more support, the fans or at least a reasonable percentage of them, decided to stay at home and watch it on television instead.

It did probably attract an audience from outside but they are the type who watch sport on the TV rather than go to and watch it live.

Some sports just do not come across as well on the TV as they do live, I think this is possibly Speedway's biggest problem, 

Agree entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, marko said:

I always thought the money Sky gave to the clubs was merely to offset the fact that whenever they showed a meeting, rather than attracting more support, the fans or at least a reasonable percentage of them, decided to stay at home and watch it on television instead.

It did probably attract an audience from outside but they are the type who watch sport on the TV rather than go to and watch it live.

Some sports just do not come across as well on the TV as they do live, I think this is possibly Speedway's biggest problem, The camera angles make it look so much slower sometimes, at Lakeside in particular it makes it look like they are only going about 20 mph, I know Arena isn't a fast track but it looks a damn sight quicker when I watch there in person with just one visual aspect.

The SKY payment was split between the fixed sum to the sport, to be shared by all the EL teams equally, along with 1 extra share, which then was shared by all the PL clubs. Other monies were paid  for a televised meeting by a fixed payment  compensating the staging club against the problems of missing fans on the night, and also a fixed sum to the opposing team for appearance money.

Only when they use head on shots, the rest is usually quick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Tsunami said:

Utter bollocks. I have said regularly on here, and it has been confirmed, that the windfall of TV money instead of being used to grow the sport, was in fact used to compete against each other when the riders, usually USA ones, decided they they should be rewarded with massive contracts and sign ons, and the promotors were forced to compete against each other for their services. That drifted down to lesser riders and the windfall just disappeared. 

'Usually USA ones'.

I forgot we were inundated with those. Hancock and Hamill I assume you mean? So that's your theory, all the fault of Hancock and Hamill?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BWitcher said:

'Usually USA ones'.

I forgot we were inundated with those. Hancock and Hamill I assume you mean? So that's your theory, all the fault of Hancock and Hamill?

Why should it have to be a theory. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy