Swindon and Subbuteo - The Sun

[Gemmel]

Ahhh I see,thought we'd banned everyone from taking pictures.

 

We probably would but league rules dont allow it

[Kingsbridge Saint]

LOL...some of the comments on here are funny.

 

Lets get things back to their most basic form;

 

Q: Why did Cortese introduce the ban on photographers in the first place ?

 

A: To make money

 

Q: How much money is it making

 

A: Jack , Didly Squat. It's actually costing the club money.

 

Q: Was it / is it a successful business venture

 

A: Do the maths

 

This. Plus it makes us look stupid. Just don't get it at all. Why?

[St_Tel49]

Why is he an idiot? if we can get money from papers from selling pics and that gets money back in then surely that makes sense? we need to generate income from every possible avenue in order to be self sufficient, good business i say. I think your being naive mate if you cant see the big picture.

The amount of money we would make from selling photos would be the equivalent of a snowflake in a blizzard. If there was money to be made from it everyone else would be doing it. They aren't. Cortese needs to catch himself on - if I might use an Ulster expression.

[Tractor_Saint]

Official club photographers are allowed in, they just can't sell to press.

 

Huh? Thought the whole point was that the saints photographers could sell to the pa to make money for the club but sfc dont want 3rd parties to make money...

[itchen]

I'm not a big fan of the decision - seems an unnecessary distraction - but can you explain how it is costing the club money? I don't mean may cost in future if we want a shirt sponsor. I mean how is it costing the club money today as has been asserted?

[scotty]

I'm not a big fan of the decision - seems an unnecessary distraction - but can you explain how it is costing the club money? I don't mean may cost in future if we want a shirt sponsor. I mean how is it costing the club money today as has been asserted?

 

its not, in any meaningful sense. Thats the point many on here seem to be missing.

[maysie]

Ok so The Sun hear that a middle of the road Premiership club is slightly interested in Lallana. They then publish article that Fulham are after South Coast Club England under 21 player who scored 20 goals from midfield last year, in an an attempt to unsettle the player. The echo then picks this up and publishes. Player unnecessarily unsettled...

 

The key is ... YOU TRY TO KEEP THE PRESS ON YOUR SIDE! they have power whether we like it or not.

[scotty]

Ok so The Sun hear that a middle of the road Premiership club is slightly interested in Lallana. They then publish article that Fulham are after South Coast Club England under 21 player who scored 20 goals from midfield last year, in an an attempt to unsettle the player. The echo then picks this up and publishes. Player unnecessarily unsettled...

 

The key is ... YOU TRY TO KEEP THE PRESS ON YOUR SIDE! they have power whether we like it or not.

 

they do that whether theyre "on your side" or not. Dont ever credit the gutter press with good intentions or loyalty, the terms are not in their vocabulary.

[maysie]

they do that whether theyre "on your side" or not. Dont ever credit the gutter press with good intentions or loyalty, the terms are not in their vocabulary.

 

Maybe you are right. But if you **** them off intentionally I'd assume they are more likely to print something that under other circumstances they would not.

 

For the record I hate The Sun, my girlfriend is from Liverpool and their behaviour during Hillsborough was disgraceful, but they unfortunately hold some weight in this country.

[CB Fry]

+1, and a point I made when this all kicked off. I cant understand why its supposed to be 'bad' for the club that some tabloid rag only fit to wipe your ar5e with decides to refer to us as "The South Coast Club" and whine pathetically to mummy that the nasty mans wont let them take their piccy wiccys inside the gwound. I say f*ck them, and back the people who run the club. Our club.

 

 

 

The only person whining about "don't take piccy wiccys" is Cortese acting like a selfish infant wahhhhh I'm bigger than Man United and a picture of Dan Harding taking a throw in is worth more than gold wahhh wahhh wahhh. Pointless, infantile, pathetic.

 

The Sun aren't whining, just mocking the utter stupidity of this pointless action.

 

You people making out this photo ban is the greatest business decision since the invention of powered flight are the foolish ones.

[a1ex2001]

Last season I thought we had seen the end of the days when our club was dragged through the mud in the gutter press and everyone in the land knew more about our chairman than our first team. Sadly it looks like a return to the dark days when the only stories in the press were negative and our Chairman in becoming more well known than our star players, it is at time like this I wonder if I made the right decision when I picked the saints all those years ago. I hope I haven't lost the faith before our club is finally dragged kicking and screaming from the mire, all I want is to support a football team.

[scotty]

The only person whining about "don't take piccy wiccys" is Cortese acting like a selfish infant wahhhhh I'm bigger than Man United and a picture of Dan Harding taking a throw in is worth more than gold wahhh wahhh wahhh. Pointless, infantile, pathetic.

 

The Sun aren't whining, just mocking the utter stupidity of this pointless action.

 

You people making out this photo ban is the greatest business decision since the invention of powered flight are the foolish ones.

 

Why on earth would you regard it as a business decision? And Ive got no particular feelings about it either way, but as long as its the club's stance then I'd rather support Saints than the S*n. I cant see that it makes any significant difference to us at all, if theres anyone that can only get their Saints news via the S*n I feel sorry for them....

[saintjay77]

It does still seem a mad decision and will fail ultimately if we are the only club that takes it on. I have a feeling that we will stick to our guns until others follow suit. Many other clubs are run by business men and if they see a way to generate even a small bit of revenue then they may give it a go.

 

If every club in L1 did it then the press would not be too bothered. But if it spread to championship or prem level then the lack of football pics would screw up there sports pages to the point that someone would have to give in.

 

I don't actually give a monkeys at the mo cause we wouldn't get much press anyway. In fact we are prob getting more because of this ban than we otherwise would. And any pics that would have made it to the press would have been free anyway so we are not losing anything.

[Gemmel]

I'm not a big fan of the decision - seems an unnecessary distraction - but can you explain how it is costing the club money? I don't mean may cost in future if we want a shirt sponsor. I mean how is it costing the club money today as has been asserted?

 

Because we are now paying a minimum of 6 (That i saw) photographers to cover all the pitch, but not selling any pictures. On top of that the Echo used to give the club pictures to use from away games, now we have to buy them or pay photograhers to go to the away matches

[SFC Forever]

As has been said above, not if nobody is buying them. And I'm not sure that everyone is aware how little a paper pays an agency for sports pix. If all the nationals were buying them NC would create a few hundred quid each game, thats all.

So for the chance to make that pittance, he's made us a publicity blackout. So yes he's an idiot.

 

Worse than that is the fact that I as editor of a small saints site have contacted the club three times to try to purchase images of the players etc. Twice y email with just one blank email reply and by phone. I was put on hold and then disconnected. Draw your own conclusions because I have.

[docker-p]

If every club in L1 did it then the press would not be too bothered. But if it spread to championship or prem level then the lack of football pics would screw up there sports pages to the point that someone would have to give in.

But with respect Saintjay, the other 91 clubs aren't going to follow suit, because it isn't worth it, even to small clubs. I used to work in the industry and I know we're talking in the low hundreds, sometimes less than that for pictures.

If the CEO of Hartlepool United thought they were going to have a splash in the Sunday Times, not only would he probably pass any photos over for free, he would walk them down himself to fleet street, anything for the exposure.

Every Sports Editor knows this, and every CEO knows this, bar one. Thats why Fleet street will just ignore us, except the Sun that will continue to mock us.

[saintjay77]

But with respect Saintjay, the other 91 clubs aren't going to follow suit, because it isn't worth it, even to small clubs. I used to work in the industry and I know we're talking in the low hundreds, sometimes less than that for pictures.

If the CEO of Hartlepool United thought they were going to have a splash in the Sunday Times, not only would he probably pass any photos over for free, he would walk them down himself to fleet street, anything for the exposure.

Every Sports Editor knows this, and every CEO knows this, bar one. Thats why Fleet street will just ignore us, except the Sun that will continue to mock us.

 

This pictures of the top players and top games are obviously worth something as otherwise the papers wouldnt bother putting them on there rags. They put the storys and pictures in because they want to sell papers. it means nothing to them if they dont have any league 1 pics in as they are not the pics and storys that sell papers. but if every prem club did this then what would the papers do?

 

Start doing storys with no pictures? Not name the top teams? Report on the Championship instead? Or pay up and shut up?

 

What im saying is, the papers couldnt give a stuff as we are just a L1 team and they think they can do what they like and make us look silly. Which will be what happens if no other club follows suit. NC's job on this is not to convince the rags that they should pay for pics. (they would pay you for a story with pic if you had something worth printing BTW) But to convince the other clubs that its the right thing to do. Will only work if all clubs do it. We are in a position were we dont need the publicity to earn us money so can afford to flick the V's at the press. If we get to the prem and are still in this position we will either get publicity for being "A South Coast Team" or sell a few pics.

 

I dont see how we can lose really. But we and every other club can gain (even if just a little) if this becomes the norm.

[JackanorySFC]

How can you tell that all the other nationals are ignoring us? I don't recall the last time I saw any reports, and certainly not pictures in any national newspaper about Saints, other than the JPT, unless it is a regional variation issue. Most papers don't print anything more than 1 line about any team outside the top 2 divisions, even the Championship is hardly worthy of a mention in most. I don't think the nationals are boycotting Swindon, The Gas, Rochdale, Hartlepool etc. The Sun is actually printing more about us than all of the others would normally put together. Then again even the Sun's coverage is only really reporting what is in the Swindon Adver - Subbuteo pics made the front page banner today.

 

This will only really be an issue if/when we get back to the Prem, and after last night that looks a dim and distant prospect.

 

I'm glad you mentioned this as it appears to be a theme that papers such as The Sun don't cover anything more than "a few lines" on teams outside the top flight.

 

I (along with 8 million others) read the Sun every day. I have just had a look at Monday's edition and their Super Goals pull out, I've made a list below of match reports from outside the Premiership that included a picture. I've marked with an * the games that carried as much text as some Premiership games too.

 

Watford v Leeds

Ipswich v Bristol C*

Derby v QPR*

Leicester v Reading

Bransley v Boro

Skates v Cardiff*

Wall v Cov

Donny R v Hull

S****horpe v Palace

Hartlepool v Sheff W*

Dag Red v Tranmere

B'Mouth v N County

L Orient v Exeter*

Oldham v Yeovil

Northants v Wycombe*

Stockport v Shrewsbury*

Cheltenham v Burton

 

Sorry, I've included facts wheras the snobs on here that (whilst ignoring the fact that the Sun has more ABC1 readers than the Guardian, Telegraph, Times, Express, Independent etc) don't read the paper yet slag it off at every opportunity and imply it's readers are "thickos". Seems that whilst your Guardian is delivering mere "lines" on teams outside the top flight, your missing out on a good read lads!

 

Funny you should mention it as, working in London on a team of Arsenal, Palace, Spurs and a lone Man U fan (there's always one), it's only today one of them brought it up. They think we're "mental", and our owner "must be a bit simple" if he thinks that strategy will work long term. The Arsenal and Man U fans especially (people have mentioned they are two of the few clubs that could make our policy work) think it's crazy, their sponsors pay them huge money doe to the exposure they get in front of - for example - 8m Sun readers every day?

 

Oh yeah, and the boycott in Liverpool has really worked hasn't it? Got it in the first shop I saw in the City Centre before the Tranmere game, and it still sells more than twice as many papers every day than that of it's closest red top rival - the Mirror!

[SaintRichmond]

Not really working though, is it? Have we even sold 1 official photo to a media outlet?

 

Not only that, the Car Parking Charges have also proved to be a Financial winner too

[docker-p]

This pictures of the top players and top games are obviously worth something as otherwise the papers wouldn't bother putting them on there rags. They put the stories and pictures in because they want to sell papers. it means nothing to them if they dont have any league 1 pics in as they are not the pics and storys that sell papers. but if every prem club did this then what would the papers do?

 

Start doing storys with no pictures? Not name the top teams? Report on the Championship instead? Or pay up and shut up?

 

What im saying is, the papers couldnt give a stuff as we are just a L1 team and they think they can do what they like and make us look silly. Which will be what happens if no other club follows suit. NC's job on this is not to convince the rags that they should pay for pics. (they would pay you for a story with pic if you had something worth printing BTW) But to convince the other clubs that its the right thing to do. Will only work if all clubs do it. We are in a position were we dont need the publicity to earn us money so can afford to flick the V's at the press. If we get to the prem and are still in this position we will either get publicity for being "A South Coast Team" or sell a few pics.

 

I dont see how we can lose really. But we and every other club can gain (even if just a little) if this becomes the norm.

Yes it's a different ball game when you're talking about the top 5 or 6 clubs. And they're not doing it. Why, because there is little to be gained. It's a mutually benificial arrangement. The big clubs, and there enormous sponsor, want the exposure. The sports editors want the pictures to sell papers. Why upset the arrangement over a few hundred quid?

And if we do get to the premiership and this is still in place don't expect anything to change. The Sun will probably still mock us with the 'South Coast Club' bit but the rest of the papers will still happily ignore us.

You're argument is based on 'if' the other 91 chairmen join in. Well for starters NC could have spoken to them first. But really he should have looked around and see what the situation is. Not only do no british, european or worldwide football clubs do this, Wimbledon doesn't, Cricket doesn't, Rugby doesn't, NBA Basketball doesn't, NFL Football doesn't, Baseball doesn't, etc etc etc.

OF course this business opportunity never occurred to them, lucky we have such a smart CEO.

[CB Fry]

Why on earth would you regard it as a business decision? And Ive got no particular feelings about it either way, but as long as its the club's stance then I'd rather support Saints than the S*n. I cant see that it makes any significant difference to us at all, if theres anyone that can only get their Saints news via the S*n I feel sorry for them....

 

 

Why are you asking me - I don't. But plenty of people on this thread clearly do, you can read it yourself.

 

And why on earth do you think this is Saints v The Sun? Why keep going on about the Sun?

 

I can attack Cortese for his pathetic, childish and pointless action without being a cheerleader for the Sun.

 

And no-one can "only get their Saints news via the Sun". Grow up.

[scotty]

Why are you asking me - I don't. But plenty of people on this thread clearly do, you can read it yourself.

 

And why on earth do you think this is Saints v The Sun? Why keep going on about the Sun?

 

I can attack Cortese for his pathetic, childish and pointless action without being a cheerleader for the Sun.

 

And no-one can "only get their Saints news via the Sun". Grow up.

 

Well, the post I quoted referred to it as a business decision, and I dont see it that way myself, more of a point being made by Cortese. Financially its not likely to make any difference to the club either way at the moment, tho I accept it would if and when we return to the prem. And if the whole of the national press boycott a prem side regardless of the current ban I will fry my hat and consume it with garlic butter.

 

While the press in general are affected by it, the Sun are certainly the most prominent whiners about the ban and the instigators of the name-blanking. Which is also why most posters on here seem to regard it as a spat between the club and the Sun.

 

Corteses action could be viewed as either pathetic, childish and pointless, as you see it, or his prerogative as chairman of the club which is how I do. It doesnt make any difference to me as I never read the dailies at all apart from the condensed versions in the Week.

 

And being 49, theres no point telling me to grow up. If I havent by now I'm not likely to

[aintforever]

You're argument is based on 'if' the other 91 chairmen join in. Well for starters NC could have spoken to them first. But really he should have looked around and see what the situation is. Not only do no british, european or worldwide football clubs do this, Wimbledon doesn't, Cricket doesn't, Rugby doesn't, NBA Basketball doesn't, NFL Football doesn't, Baseball doesn't, etc etc etc.

 

There's good reason as well, basically newspapers want GOOD photos and the more photographers (and better photographers) there are the more likely they will get better photos.

 

If they have to rely on one club photorapher, probably some local inbred with a Cannon EOS400 sat at the wrong end of the pitch they wont get the pics they want. Alternatively the club could pay a host of top photographers for each game and hope that something interesting happens so they can make some money. But if no papers want pics from the 0-0 draw with Wigan they will lose out.

[CB Fry]

Corteses action could be viewed as either pathetic, childish and pointless, as you see it, or his prerogative as chairman of the club which is how I do. It doesnt make any difference to me as I never read the dailies at all apart from the condensed versions in the Week.

 

If you think it is the "perogative of the chairman" to deny access of photos from home matches to the local paper then fine.

 

My view is slightly different - I see the role of Cortese as custodian of the club, not dictator of it. He can make decisions, but if those decisions negatively affect the experience of supporting the club for a significant section of the fan base then no, I don't think "Nicola Cortese's perogative" should swallowed without challenge.

 

It's not much to ask for the thousands of Saints fans reading match reports in the Echo to get to see a picture or two from the match. Really not an unreasonable thing for a fan of say, forty years standing, to be able to enjoy that, especially the older fans who don't go along anymore.

 

So.....Any objection to us turning out in blue at home next season? Or renaming the team the Solent Swiss FC? Or installing himself as manager? When does "Nicola Cortese's perogative" run out in your world, or is he just allowed to do anything he likes, unchallenged, unquestioned, unthinkingly obeyed?

 

But, at 49 years old your response to these things is "it doesn't affect me, I don't care" then no, I don't think you are ever going to grow up.

 

God save us from the Cortese lapdogs.

Edited 3 September, 2010 by CB Fry

[benjii]

We didn't do this last year when we were bound by a sponsorship contract.

 

This year we aren't and we are doing it.

 

I would suggest it's an experiment, carried out a time when its effects are deemed likely to be largely revenue neutral, to see how it goes. Next year things may change, although we may decide to carry it through to the Prem to see what happens.

 

Either way, it is not a big deal and not worth getting excited over unless you need to fill some column inches.

Edited 3 September, 2010 by benjii

[scotty]

If you think it is the "perogative of the chairman" to deny access of photos from home matches to the local paper then fine.

 

My view is slightly different - I see the role of Cortese as custodian of the club, not dictator of it. He can make decisions, but if those decisions negatively affect the experience of supporting the club for a significant section of the fan base then no, I don't think "Nicola Cortese's perogative" should swallowed without challenge.

 

It's not much to ask for the thousands of Saints fans reading match reports in the Echo to get to see a picture or two from the match. Really not an unreasonable thing for a fan of say, forty years standing, to be able to enjoy that, especially the older fans who don't go along anymore.

 

So.....Any objection to us turning out in blue at home next season? Or renaming the team the Solent Swiss FC? Or installing himself as manager? When does "Nicola Cortese's perogative" run out in your world, or is he just allowed to do anything he likes, unchallenged, unquestioned, unthinkingly obeyed?

 

But, at 49 years old your response to these things is "it doesn't affect me, I don't care" then no, I don't think you are ever going to grow up.

 

God save us from the Cortese lapdogs.

 

Theres no point in calling me a Cortese "lapdog", I thought the Pardew sacking was an appalling idea on the face of it, in fact I cant see any point in namecalling over this at all. fwiw I agree with you on your point about the pink/echo not getting pics of the game in consideration of the older fans. However no matter how bad Cortese might or might not be, he could not possibly sink to the depths of contempt in which I hold murdoch and the tabloids. NC and ML saved our club, remember; imo he deserves a hell of a lot of slack for that, particularly on a matter that really doesnt affect the team. And do you seriously think Cortese or anybody working for him would float the idea of changing the team colours to blue or renaming the club?