Quote:
|
Originally Posted by skyblueheroes
Sorry but Sky have dragged up football by its collar from the state it was in during the 80's. From 92 when they started the contract its become a glamarous and exciting sport to watch which is awash with money and investment.
However, I do feel that the money is aimed too much at the Premiership and not enough of it is filtered down to the lower leagues.
|
I know it is down to personal preference, so this is expressing my opinion, rather than disagreeing with yours, as such, but I honestly don't find it 'glamourous and exiting'. I find it is full of spoilt, petulant, overpaid, so-called 'sportsmen' who's last thought in the world is sportsmanship. I watched the womens cup final, last year & they were shrugging off knocks that would have premiership players rolling on the ground for half an hour.
As for 'money & investment' - is that why it costs £60 to go & watch Chelsea? I seem to recall they started advertising, recently, as the gates were falling ....
I'm glad we agree about the lower divisions
---------- Post added at 13:13 ---------- Previous post was at 13:02 ----------
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by gazzae
Wigan and West Ham are 9th and 10th, OK Sunderland are pretty crap, but they didn't spend any money.
Cheating and diving happens in every league, even amateur.
|
West Ham are a good example - they always have had a reputation for developing their own talent, rather than buying it in.
It is only my impression, of course, but there seems to be more cheating & diving in the top flight, where the pressure to win is immense.
However, if I am honest, my gripe with Sky Sport is more about now having to pay for what we used to get 'free'
