Live Streaming

[SwindonCanary 455]

Those of us who use it, when not going to the match, bad news.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23004880

[nu_matik 167]

I always use First row too. I suppose when they close that and win the court case, all the other sites will follow quickly.

How will this affect the main one that pubs use in norwich? the name escapes me...

[Leedscanary 337]

There will always be someone one step ahead

[Stig 0]

A proxy site will appear in a day or two of the initial block, and when that proxy is blocked the same will happen. It''s just like the pirate bay being blocked by isps - doesn''t stop me using it at all. Nothing to worry about folks, it will just stop the people too lazy to type an extra word into google!

[iron_stan 0]

uk service providers blocked pirate bay, kickass torrents, and lots of others, its still very easy to get on those sites.first row isnt the only streaming site, theres thousands, all most of these sites do is host links, they arent necessarily responsible for the streaming. the funniest thing is that i actually expect there to be even more streams and higher quality ones next season, what with other TV companies having the rights to show more footballyoull never stop it until the internet is fully regulated and only allows restricted sponsored content, which is what big business wants, but thats (kind of) another long winded story completely

[Monty13 2,229]

You can''t stop this, it''s a pointless waste of effort.

You block one site more will spring up it''s place. Sky need to realise why people are watching streams and work out a way to make those individuals paying customers by providing them the service they clearly want, with a higher quality and at a price point they are prepared to pay for it.

Their only other option is to not broadcast any games anywhere in the world, but I think that might be a bit drastic....

[kick it off 1,948]

Yup, agreed with the others, won''t make any difference whatsoever.

MyP2P was shut down. Wiziwig popped up shortly after with an identical site layout, and is still going strong. Waste of time and effort by the Premier league, there''s a million and one ways to get round ISP blocks anyway.

[Rolf Harris 31]

If they are smart they will set up shop in china where there is no copyright law.

[nu_matik 167]

Can anyone remind me of the name of the european broadcast channel all the pubs use? the one that was involved in the court case with

the pub in portsmouth

[AJ 1,218]

Viasat?

[Norwich or die tryin! 0]

If its blocked by UK ISP''s rather than shutdown like Pirate bay then all you have to do is find a Proxy and bookmark it, job done. Piece of piss.

[nu_matik 167]

THANK YOU!! Literally being doing my head in, an couldnt find a combo of words in Google that led me to it. Pint on me if you can ever find me :)

[Thorny 0]

As people say, plenty of ways around it from direct IPs to servers in other countries, getting a VPN connection to a server/hosting machine in another country and streaming that way (a way for people to watch BBC based content abroad), proxies not always the most reliable.

Attempting to shut sites down could force them into a similar operation of old BBSs in the underworld - potentially leading to nastier things.

It has been possible since 2005/6 to broadcast from a game with early smartphones (pre iPhone!) to selected people and with todays phones, a heck of a lot easier/better quality (unless you''re with Vodafone). Not the same as a stream but that''s an option.

Not saying it will but the above could lead to whole host of scenarios.

[AJ 1,218]

Can never say no to a free pint!

Maybe we can arrange some pink''un meet ups in pubs in the city to watch the games instead, especially away games!

[nu_matik 167]

I usually go to The Rose, Queens Rd.NCFC, Pink Un, Ale friendly and shows all the games...

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="Monty13"]Sky need to realise why people are watching streams and work out a way to make those individuals paying customers by providing them the service they clearly want, with a higher quality and at a price point they are prepared to pay for it.[/quote]My problem wasn''t about SKY''s pricing, it was about our lousy coverage - especially compared to other ''big'' clubs like Liverpool, Arsenal and Man Utd etc.Last season, we had 5 games shown as part of the standard SKY Sports package (excluding ESPN), Liverpool had SIXTEEN!!! Every single one of the ''big five'', along with Everton, Spurs and Newcastle had at least 10 games shown - twice as many as ourselves and Wigan, and six more than Reading ot StokeSo far exactly the same price as I was paying for my subscription, a Liverpool fan got three times as much opportunity to watch his team play than I did!If I lived in Spain or the USA (and many others as well AFAIK), I could watch ANY premier league game live on their version of Satellite/Cable, yet in the damn country where the game is being played, I have to make do with 5 minuts of crap coverage on MOTD...I get the logic of trying to ensure that coverage on TV doesn''t empty the stadiums and damage atmosphere and club finances, but not everyone has the ability or finances to go to each match (especially if they''re not based locally such as myself, or people like LDC), and sites like the one mentioned give us the opportunity to watch our team LIVE each week rather than having to settle for 30 secs of highlights at 11:30 at night...If SKY or someone similar were to offer this service as a legitimate paid option, I''d have no trouble putting my cash down and signing up (assuming the price wasn''t ridiculous or something), but instead they just throw the dummy out of the pram because someone else has the sense to offer a service that they can''t be bothered to, as they continue to focus purely on top six teams and the Champions League instead.Why not simply charge something like £20-25 per month, give a percentage of this to the club, and in exchange you get to watch ALL of your clubs league games during that period, LIVE and in HD? Most fans who want to attend, will still attend, as the atmosphere and everything associated with this can never be replicated at home, and if it means that a few hundred don''t turn up for a midweek evening game against Hull in the middle of a hailstorm, then it''s hardly finance breaking is it?All a bit of a moot point anyway, as it''s already been very sensibly pointed out that there''s plenty of ways to get round simple IP blocks, so not only is it a waste of time the Premier League and ISP''s putting it in place, it completely ignores the underlying issue and reason WHY these sites are so popular, and why the current broadcasters should up their game to offer legitimate alternatives instead of just running to the nearest judge and crying about it...

[The ghost of Michael Theoklitos 0]

You make some good points there Indy, especially around Sky''s match selection.However;"If SKY or someone similar were to offer this service as a legitimate

paid option, I''d have no trouble putting my cash down and signing up

(assuming the price wasn''t ridiculous or something), but instead they

just throw the dummy out of the pram because someone else has the sense

to offer a service that they can''t be bothered to, as they continue to

focus purely on top six teams and the Champions League instead."I don''t think this is something you can blame Sky or anyone else for. The Premier League and Football League state that as part of their broadcasting deals that no Saturday 3pm kick-off games will be broadcast live in the UK. Until the Premier League and/or Football league remove this restriction, we will continue to have this situation where overseas broadcasters will get to show games live that can''t be shown here. As you said above, there is clearly the demand for live football for all games, be that from TV or streaming. I actually agree the reasons the PL & FL give for their stand. The issue is, their stand in unsustainable. Technology will continue to evolve. Live football will become more accessible and the demand will continue to be filled through any means possible. It will be interesting to see how long the PL & FL will take to realise this and make money from it.

[Indy_Bones 441]

I suppose my stance on that would be that SKY et al are the ones who agree the TV deals with the FA/Premier League etc, and if they wanted to they could quite easily demand that they be allowed to show these 3pm games or they''ll take their money elsewhere!The FA/Prem can NOT afford to lose close to a billion in revenue from the TV deals, and whilst players like the BBC would still be interested, they are also NOT going to offer anywhere close to what SKY has been paying, so even then the FA/Prem lose out.If they were smart about it, they could turn this to their advantage, and not only would the league and SKY benefit - more importantly, the fans could, with better more extended coverage.Again, a percentage of any new setup where you pay to watch your club could also go to the league, so SKY would take the lion''s share, some would go to clubs, some to the league and EVERYONE is happy.Or is that all far too logical and sensible for the FA/Prem to consider?

[Leedscanary 337]

Indy,

Not only is it far too sensible for the FA it''s far too sensible a suggestion to be posted on the pink un in fact it is bordering on "Binnerism"! Lol

In all seriousness your posts are the perfect solution for people like myself - I urge you to send your opinions to both Sky and the FA

[The ghost of Michael Theoklitos 0]

The NFL already has a model for this.https://gamepass.nfl.comI''d be interested to know if the PL and FA are even entertaining the idea of doing something similar.

[KeelansGlove 0]

I have always thought an away season ticket was the best way for football to make money out of this situation or indeed have some system

of verifying location of exiles. I''m sure I am not alone in being happy to pay to watch decent coverage of Norwich games I can''t get to.

Like most fans I will still prefer to attend all home games I can and certainly no TV can replace my 5-6 annual away trips.

 

It is very similar in a lot of ways to other forms of piracy in that many that access it have no other way to get it ie cannot afford to or indeed would not watch/listen to certain content if it had to be paid for  so the actual cost to either the club / premier league or even Sky is limited.

People chose to state potential losses on the basis of all people who access the content based on the potential revenue of this despite the fact that a high percentage would/could never go to games.

Given the general health of attendances throughout football  and capacity issues across the league just imagine the cash that could come flowing in if clubs were able to sell away season tickets. Likely to dwarf current revenues. Sure the rich will get richer but if premier league are smart in terms of limiting squad sizes and maybe other restrictions you could probably guarantee all the best players in the world would be in the premier league.

Imagine what a team NCFC could have then !

[Browno 36]

In all honesty, from every experience I''ve had with first row, it''s been utter crap. Streams are all hosted on external sites, so the streams get taken down fairly quickly. Pay for a streaming site such as plus1hd.com , which is where most people screen record and then restream back to these free sites, hence the worse quality picture. Using plus1hd I get every prem game on Saturdays, Sundays and midweek, in 720p for £9 a month. No streams dropping out, if you want to enjoy watching football, then I wouldn''t bother with the free sites.

[Indy_Bones 441]

In actual fact, our move into the prem completely screwed me over from an away perspective as the away games I could have gone to locally such as Sheff Wed/Utd, Barnsley, Leeds, Doncaster etc are now gone, and the closest this season is going to be either Hull (dear god no) and Man Utd (fat chance of getting an away ticket for that one as a non member etc).I simply cannot afford to attend home games due to the transport cost, ticket price and other associated problems, therefore I''m left with trying to watch the games on TV.The reason I DON''T see watching streams as piracy in this instance is because they are being sent to plenty of other places for either free or a small charge, yet I''m not being given the same option. If I could pay to watch at home my like those in the US do with FOX etc, then I would, but as I don''t have that choice I feel my hands are tied unfairly.There''s meant to be approx 659 MILLION Man Utd fans across the globe, and as they can only fit about 65-70k of them in per game, should the vast majority of the other fans who can''t get in be told to basically f**k off? No, they get to watch the game via TV and satellite link-ups - Unless they''re in the same god damn country as the club they support!!!!The whole situation is a total farce, and there really should be a fan uprising about this if you ask me.

[Yelloow Since 72 54]

Living in Cornwall, I''m even more hard pressed than Indy to get to any City game. I would happily pay for reasonable quality streaming of City games, but I''m not willing to pay Sky prices for 5 games a year, as I don''t have any interest in watching other games. The NFL solution seems sensible and I''ll have a look at the other options mentioned but this all makes me very angry.

[Monty13 2,229]

There shouldn''t have to be a fans uprising. The FA, Clubs and Sky are losing out on potentially millions (billions across the globe?) in extra revenue from customers and advertising by failing to tap into a market that is clearly there on mass and currently being serviced by pirates.

The number of people who watch streams across the globe must be in the hundreds of thousands if not millions. If clubs think showing 3pm games will lose on ticket sales, well the current evidence doesn''t seem to suggest that trend is occurring and if they feel they don''t need to tap into the wallets of potentially millions who can''t cram into 20-80k seater stadiums then they are moronic.

It makes absolutely no business sense for all the parties to not adopt this model at some point, when they all wake up from the early 90''s business vision and smell the profits, things will change. I honestly can''t understand the mindset, I can understand Sky being worried about loss of TV subscriptions, but I can''t understand Clubs not realising the potential massive revenue available.

[Syteanric 1]

an ISP block eh...hasnt blocked the pirate bay, the ISP''s will do the minimum they need to do so. which is block the main site, Proxy sites wont be affected.of course if you go to an ip hider site you can get around the ISP filter and still watch the game... run a VPN.

[Redders Right Foot 22]

Easy. plenty of downloads that will allow you to mask your IP with that of a foreign countries. and I''m sure WIZ* has a few sites he uses under his *WIG

[The ghost of Michael Theoklitos 0]

[quote user="Monty13"]There shouldn''t have to be a fans uprising. The FA, Clubs and Sky are losing out on potentially millions (billions across the globe?) in extra revenue from customers and advertising by failing to tap into a market that is clearly there on mass and currently being serviced by pirates.

The number of people who watch streams across the globe must be in the hundreds of thousands if not millions. If clubs think showing 3pm games will lose on ticket sales, well the current evidence doesn''t seem to suggest that trend is occurring and if they feel they don''t need to tap into the wallets of potentially millions who can''t cram into 20-80k seater stadiums then they are moronic.

It makes absolutely no business sense for all the parties to not adopt this model at some point, when they all wake up from the early 90''s business vision and smell the profits, things will change. I honestly can''t understand the mindset, I can understand Sky being worried about loss of TV subscriptions, but I can''t understand Clubs not realising the potential massive revenue available.[/quote]This isn''t the whole reason for the 3pm Saturday. It''s more for clubs smaller than those making up the Premier League.When I used to live in East London, quite often my mates and I if we had nothing to do on a Saturday, we''d go up and watch Leyton Orient play. It was good. They became our 2nd team, and we had a great time going.Had we had the option to go and watch one of our sides at a pub, or at home, would we have went to Brisbane Road? Maybe not. I assume this situation would be even worse for non league teams, like Lowestoft, or Kings Lynn.That''s the main reason for the rule. Not attendances at Premier League games.

[SwindonCanary 455]

I''m not really IT savvy (it took me an age to get pictures on this site !) so when the time comes and we have to bypass First row, could someone on here post how they are doing it please ?

[Rolf Harris 31]

There will never be a game pass due to the fact they''re not allowed to show 3o''clock kick offs. A safe way to watch the games would be to use a Peer 2 peer streaming program like sopcast.