iFollow in the Premier League?

[ClaretTony]

I thought iFollow was for the Football League but I've just seen this on our club's website



iFollow will be back bigger and better for the 2020/21 season, with live match access, highlights and behind the scenes access.

Register here to ensure that you are first to hear about next season’s iFollow packages at your club and to be in with a chance of winning an iFollow pass of your choice for the 2020/21 season.

[Chester Perry]

If they really are doing that on the same principles as the EFL then the big clubs are going to make a killing at our expense - all revenues must and I mean must go into the Premier League distribution pot and be subject to the same formula as the TV monies - I don't care if it is just for the shut out games - if the big clubs get a sniff of the revenues then it is all over and we will quickly have no money to compete

[ClaretTony]

If they really are doing that on the same principles as the EFL then the big clubs are going to make a killing at our expense - all revenues must and I mean must go into the Premier League distribution pot and be subject to the same formula as the TV monies - I don't care if it is just for the shut out games - if the big clubs get a sniff of the revenues then it is all over and we will quickly have no money to compete

That's what I thought - it was just a throw away couple of lines at the bottom of a page, no fanfare or article. Very concerning.

[clarethomer]

This is what I was suggesting may happen on the post I made about understanding when we would be allowed back.

Will be interesting to see how this would work with broadcasting rights but I could see this being linked to your season ticket somehow. It would possibly also only allow you to see home games too?

With away games being paid for as a PPV with the exception of blackout games which the broadcasters are showing not to upset their revenue stream. This would potentially allow us to increase our revenue if you are not limited to a 2-3k away following. You could see 30-40k away following for the bigger clubs if they are not being televised.

Could be the change of things to come for football.

[Wellsy1882]

its cos leeds have moved up a division

[clarethomer]

They are always on TV anyway because they are massive

[ŽižkovClaret]

I suspect its due to us still using the EFL platform for the website, although i believe that will be changing shortly.

[Chester Perry]

blocked by the Premier League agreement with the Broadcasters - from the Mail - I cannot believe the stupidity of the clubs supposedly behind it

Premier League clubs' bid to stream their own matches to fans FAILS, meaning thousands will be unable to watch their team in action next season
- A request by a group of Premier League clubs to screen own matches has failed
- The next Premier League season is set to kick-off behind closed doors again
- Not all matches are set to be televised leading to fear illegal streams will be rife
By MIKE KEEGAN FOR THE DAILY MAIL

PUBLISHED: 22:35, 18 August 2020 | UPDATED: 09:27, 19 August 2020

A request by a group of Premier League clubs to screen their own matches has failed.

Next season is set to kick off behind closed doors — and if and when supporters are allowed back into stadiums it is likely to be on a reduced-capacity basis.

Unlike the situation following the restart, not all matches will be televised — and there are fears that illegal streams, on which fans can watch for free, will be rife.

Sportsmail understands that a number of top-flight sides wished to show non-televised matches on club websites, charging a subscription fee in the process.

The iFollow model, an official streaming service widely used throughout the EFL, was used as an example to show that it could work — and could be lucrative.

The group in favour is thought to have included Crystal Palace and West Ham and the idea was discussed at the recent meeting of all top-flight clubs.

However, it was quickly shot down. It is thought that the prospect of broadcasters — who have paid sizeable sums to show matches — giving the green light would have been highly unlikely.

'It seems unfair,' one official explained. 'We're pretty sure that thousands of fans are going to be unable to watch matches.

'Given they are not going to be televised, charging them to watch games on the club website would satisfy demand, impact on illegal streams and raise some extra revenue at a time when it is needed.'

Following Government pressure, the 92 matches played after the restart were broadcast live with 33 made available for free.

[ClaretTony]

I posted on this board recently that the games would not all be televised as they were in project restart but it seemed I wasn't to be believed. Interestingly, for whatever reason, the club are still promoting iFollow on the official site which is pretty embarrassing.

[clarethomer]

I still find it difficult because all this is going to do is push people to illegal streams.

I can't see the sense in this at all. Surely they can 'black out' games which are being broadcast platforms commercially?

[ClaretTony]

I still find it difficult because all this is going to do is push people to illegal streams.

I can't see the sense in this at all. Surely they can 'black out' games which are being broadcast platforms commercially?

The companies who legitimately pay for a set number of games will clearly see their product being devalued if the other games are being shown elsewhere.

[claptrappers_union]

Maybe it's something that clubs using EFL Digital Limited websites have been asked to include on the home page - promoting the iFollow information, the two are part of the same thing, I think.

I suspect the club is looking to migrate to a different online provider as it was alluded to in a recent tweet in response to the delay of the streaming of the POTY Awards.

I might be wrong though.

[clarethomer]

The companies who legitimately pay for a set number of games will clearly see their product being devalued if the other games are being shown elsewhere.

Broadcasters and the League could make this work commercially surely?

The cameras are there and broadcasting so its hardly unlikely to cost that much more to switch these onto the UK audience.

Don't you find it bizarre that all EFL fans will have an option to follow their team, all PL fans outside of the UK can follow the PL and their team but those fans who have paid, or are paying to see their club next season and apparently make their product worth what it is, are treated in a way where the only option to see their club is via illegal streams.

Are any of the supporters clubs/fans federations you are involved with planning to push this issue further?

[claptrappers_union]

Maybe it's something that clubs using EFL Digital Limited websites have been asked to include on the home page - promoting the iFollow information, the two are part of the same thing, I think.

I suspect the club is looking to migrate to a different online provider as it was alluded to in a recent tweet in response to the delay of the streaming of the POTY Awards.

I might be wrong though.

Just following on, it looks like its a contractual thing or maybe thats content auto-generated - as it says exactly the same thing on Preston North End and the Blackpool FC website in exactly the same place in the template. I don't know which other Premier League clubs and National League clubs use that platform, so it might be worth looking at those, as I suspect they will include it as well.

EDIT - Looked at Sheffield United's site, like Burnley, they are using the EFL Digital platform and its states the same information - https://www.sufc.co.uk and also Notts County who are in the National League - https://www.nottscountyfc.co.uk

[ClaretTony]

Broadcasters and the League could make this work commercially surely?

The cameras are there and broadcasting so its hardly unlikely to cost that much more to switch these onto the UK audience.

Don't you find it bizarre that all EFL fans will have an option to follow their team, all PL fans outside of the UK can follow the PL and their team but those fans who have paid, or are paying to see their club next season and apparently make their product worth what it is, are treated in a way where the only option to see their club is via illegal streams.

Are any of the supporters clubs/fans federations you are involved with planning to push this issue further?

Yes, and pushed hard, but like everything else in the Premier League it has to be approved by a majority and there were very few clubs with an inkling of interest in supporting their fans on this. There was a national meeting yesterday with the Premier League with this as part of the agenda. Once the minutes have been approved and circulated I'll update on it, but there won't be any change of heart from the clubs who have the power who will be right alongside the main broadcasters.

[clarethomer]

Ah well - Im sure there will be plenty of streams.

I wonder if a government petition would help -persuade the clubs and broadcasters to not forget about their homegrown fans?

[burnmark]

Darren Bentley tweeted on the Awards Evening that we were moving to our own website and ‘Player’ service.

[jtv]

Anyone tried to register? Burnley is not on the drop down list for Club supported. Also the videos part of the main page on the official site seems to have gone missing.

[Local cricketer]

Darren Bentley tweeted on the Awards Evening that we were moving to our own website and ‘Player’ service.

Doubt he has much idea. To busy blowing smoke up the twitteratis arses

[boatshed bill]

Is this I Follow malarky the reason I can't access Claretsplayer?