Looks to be a new streaming site available for games

Looks decent for a free service.

https://www.soccerstreams100.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interested to see what it’s like - I’ll give it a go

JamesSherbourne wrote:Interested to see what it’s like - I’ll give it a go

Got to be better than yor plex mate as a free solution

I run another now tho if u email me on the old.email addy

I had a look last night. Looks as though whoever runs the Reddit subs that keep getting banned have simply set up a separate website to link to all the streams - it was the same format. I imagine it will also be banned fairly soon.

Foulthrow wrote:I had a look last night. Looks as though whoever runs the Reddit subs that keep getting banned have simply set up a separate website to link to all the streams - it was the same format. I imagine it will also be banned fairly soon.

Irrelevant. Another set up immediately. No way of clamping down on it

I always use http://www.ripple.is" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A bit of simple shenanigans with ads required and hey presto, Fantastic streaming, English commentary and no buffering

theroyaldyche wrote:Irrelevant. Another set up immediately. No way of clamping down on it

I know. I’m with you on that. And when you see, as someone posted earlier, that it’s £8 a day for Sky Sports pass, people are going to use things like this.

Foulthrow wrote:I know. I’m with you on that. And when you see, as someone posted earlier, that it’s £8 a day for Sky Sports pass, people are going to use things like this.

Disguting what sky want just to watch a game

theroyaldyche wrote:Disguting what sky want just to watch a game

What would be acceptable for a live stream in your opinion?

Goobs wrote:What would be acceptable for a live stream in your opinion?

Cost?

I just use first row sports, worked fine last night

Perhaps if fewer people were stealing their content they'd be able to charge less.

Tall Paul wrote:Perhaps if fewer people were stealing their content they'd be able to charge less.

they'd just make more profit not lower costs and everybody knows that

Tall Paul wrote:Perhaps if fewer people were stealing their content they'd be able to charge less.

Bit naive that mate,Sky are just greedy bast@rds who will be in for a rude shock with the competition they are about to encounter....the sooner this company goes bust the better.

Tall Paul wrote:Perhaps if fewer people were stealing their content they'd be able to charge less.

Get ******

Goobs wrote:What would be acceptable for a live stream in your opinion?

Well, Netflix has some excellent content, and that’s £6 a month. So about that much.

Tall Paul wrote:Perhaps if fewer people were stealing their content they'd be able to charge less.

Your naivety is amazing

I can just see the SKY bosses, said in their ivory tower, thinking it will never end

It’ll be interesting to see how streaming services get involved in the coming years, but it’d be bloody stupid to think it’s not a threat that SKY will be taking extremely seriously.

Foulthrow wrote:Well, Netflix has some excellent content, and that’s £6 a month. So about that much.

Netflix is going up in cost soon, but still worth it.

Tall Paul wrote:Perhaps if fewer people were stealing their content they'd be able to charge less.

Tall Paul wrote:Perhaps if fewer people were stealing their content they'd be able to charge less.

On a serious note though describing the big broadcasters and “not being able” to charge less for their content is one of the more bizarre things I’ve read on here for a while.

SGr wrote:On a serious note though describing the big broadcasters and “not being able” to charge less for their content is one of the more bizarre things I’ve read on here for a while.

Willing then, rather than able

Tall Paul wrote:Willing then, rather than able

Still zero chance.

No chance. Streaming will inevitably take over for a set fee