Fixtures - 2012/13

[man in the suite]

2012 -2013 season's fixtures out in july,

[WhitecapTiger]

About the same time as every year then or are you merely attempting to pre-empt the inevitable question........

[BJ.]

As mentioned in the penultimate line here.

[Isambard]

April fool???? What use is a fixture list that will be changed 15/16 times.? Apart from wrapping up chips I suggest it is an indicator of home and away and that is all. Would you buy a car from this club?

[Ads677]

April fool???? What use is a fixture list that will be changed 15/16 times.? Apart from wrapping up chips I suggest it is an indicator of home and away and that is all. Would you buy a car from this club?

I doubt Tigers have anything to do with the changes - almost certainly TV's responsibility (the paymasters), with the occasional clash with soccer having some effect too.

[Isambard]

If Tigers have nothing to do with the changes then what kind of legal team do they employ to allow such a one sided and fan repellent contract.
If a large and important club like Tigers lies down and says yes yes yes then what chance in our sport that there will ever be a decent fixture list. It has happened in cricket and football.

[BJ.]

If Tigers have nothing to do with the changes then what kind of legal team do they employ to allow such a one sided and fan repellent contract.
If a large and important club like Tigers lies down and says yes yes yes then what chance in our sport that there will ever be a decent fixture list. It has happened in cricket and football.

In the ideal world, everybody would kick-off at 3pm on Saturday afternoons and, at the end of the season, all the available silverware would on view in the Tigers' trophy cabinet.

However, in the real world, Premiership Rugby do a deal with the TV companies. In return for large amounts of money (which enables some clubs to remain viable), it is agreed matches will kick-off at different times which, in turn, presents the sport to a wider audience.

I can appreciate the reasons for not having both the Tigers and LCFC at home on the same day and I have come to accept the fact that the Tigers, being one of if not the most marketable and well-known name in the Premiership, can attract a large TV audience.

You cannot please all of the people all of the time. Those who play rugby on Saturdays will be happy if their club's (the one they support, not play for) match is moved to a Sunday. Personally, I hate Friday night matches as it involves me doing battle with rush hour traffic in both Derby and Leicester plus the M1 in between. However, I'm sure there are some folk who welcome Friday fixtures because they have to work over the weekend.

Friday, Saturday and Sunday fixtures are bearable. Just be thankful Sky and ESPN don't want Monday or midweek matches.

[JWM]

Tigers' realistic aspiration is to sell 13-14,000 season tickets.

Even though I live a 150-mile round trip away from WR, I'd buy a Season Ticket tomorrow, if at the start of the season we could be sure when when the games were going to be played. The non-Saturday afternoon business is awkward, the mid-term schedule changes make a ST, for me, unviable.

[BJ.]

I'd buy a Season Ticket tomorrow, if at the start of the season we could be sure when when the games were going to be played.

I'm sorry but you're asking for the moon. The TV companies try to televise matches that have some importance at a particular time of the season, e.g. you can almost guarantee the Wasps v Falcons match will be the one televised on Week 22. At the start of the season, I don't think anyone (except Rob Baxter maybe) would have predicted the Chiefs would be in the fight for a play-off place so perhaps yesterday's match against the Saints would not have been on Sky or ESPN's radar as one to televise until 3-4 weeks ago.

[Isambard]

BJ you trot out this apologetic nonsense. In a business you have two parties. Both have something which the other wants. To roll over and say thank you is not good business and I don't know why sports clubs do this. TV companies are lazy bullies. It is no better than a mafia situation

[tigerburnie]

Seems to me you have a choice,pay or not,personnaly if I lived in England I'd pay,without question.As it is I buy stuff from the club online and shout at the telly a lot.

[BJ.]

Isambard, I'm not saying I agree with the current situation, merely how I perceive it. It would appear Premiership Rugby are happy with it. I suggest you vent your spleen in their direction.

[me2]

BJ you trot out this apologetic nonsense. In a business you have two parties. Both have something which the other wants. To roll over and say thank you is not good business and I don't know why sports clubs do this. TV companies are lazy bullies. It is no better than a mafia situation

Correct, the TV companies want the right to broadcast Premiership rugby games.

The clubs want the TV companies' money.

PRL negotiates the sale of these rights in return for money.

In return for LOTS of money, PRL gives the TV companies a lot of sway over the timing of these fixtures.

If the clubs wanted fixtures to remain unchanged then the TV companies would offer far less money...but they want/need the "LOTS of money" option & so sign the contract that gives the power to the broadcasters.

I bet that privately Tigers also want the "LOTS of money" option, even if publically they may grumble about the fixture changes. Without the financially generous contract even a club as strong as Tigers would stuggle to break-even.

That is the way of the world & the way of business.

The clubs can't turn around late in the day & say they don't want TV companies having the power as they signed up for (and keep renewing) the big money contracts.


It is nothing like a "mafia situation" as the clubs are free to renegotiate the broadcast deals at regular intervals & invariably do so...hence why ESPN are now in on the deal as well as Sky.

I am sorry that you feel unhappy at the deal but I'm sure you would feel even more unhappy if the Prem clubs had less money & were even more uncompetitive in Europe as a result of their financial hardship!

[Nailsworthstiger]

As far as I am concerned, I think all rugby and football should be played on Saturday at 3pm. That is why Saturday was invented for... to play sport.

The real reason why the tv companies do not show games at the same time as the majority of other games is the argument that clubs would loose attendance as the couch potato would rather watch the box than go to a game. But if the choice was Tigers at home and say Wasps v Falcons on the box at the same time I would go to see Tigers obviously, because it is my team.I would never not go to support my team due to others being shown live. This argument has now been proved not to be viable as the last day of the footie season, they show 3 or 4 games live on different channels. Does it affect the attendance figure? No not at all. As there are now numerous channels showing these games then the sport is still offered to a wide audience who can choose their viewing.

To counteract the argument that it gives the sport a wider audience is at the detriment of the true supporter who's views and considerations are never taken into effect ie Friday night and a long drive and a late journey home.

Not that I am , but I guess the vast majority of Man U fans would want Saturday 3pm KO's.

[Tiger_in_Birmingham]

That is why Saturday was invented for... to play sport.

no no no - saturday afternoon is for watching sport, Sunday morning is for playing sport