Sky eh? Where do you start?

1. Either stuff your coverage full of advert breaks every three minutes, or charge me a pretty penny to tune in. Doing both is a piss take.

2. Your unique selling point for cricket was that your subscribers would 'never miss a ball'. Why then do you think it's OK to cut away from a football match when the ball is in play to show me a series of shots of a manager chewing gum, or a replay of something I just saw for myself, or a section of the crowd carefully chosen for its positive social cross section? Last night sky had to show a replay of Tompkins getting booked because we'd missed it live as sky were showing a replay at the time. Good job nothing important happened during the second replay really. I reckon I miss five minutes of actual football most games due to replays.

3. Patrice Evra. Please explain?

4. By all means have top female former players as pundits. Christ knows they can't do any worse than some of the men (see 3 above), but don't pretend and/or infer that when commenting on the male game they have the same or equivalent experience and potential insight as male former players. It's unnecessary and insults everyones intelligence.

For one thing, when the two genders play the same sport they will inevitably interpret the space differently, resulting in notably different versions of the game in terms of physicality, tactics and approaches. For another, the social and economic context is incomparable. I'm as interested in the views of Alex Scott or Karen Kearney (or a well informed sports journalist) as any male former player, but don't ask them about the pressure of a big Premier league match, or the demands of the high tempo pressing game as they plainly haven't experienced either themselves. Give them a chance to tell me something they do know and I don't.

5. Call a dive a dive, a cheat a cheat. All the time you brush over it or use super slow motion replays to highlight some minor contact, and justify fit strong athletes throwing themselves to the floor the game will continue to be ruined. You're just protecting your precious product. And yes I include Palace players in that.

6. I might be able to agree to disagree on your ongoing support for BLM if you applied the same moral consideration to human rights abusing states funding football clubs, or the incessant, creepy, insidious promotion of gambling, or the role third world sweat shops play in producing football kit, boots, balls etc. All the time your moral, social and political stance is so closely aligned to what is commercially beneficial, it's difficult to conclude that you aren't just virtue signalling.

7. From personal experience, your customer service is genuinely appalling. Spend a bit less on pundits and a bit more responding reasonably when you've failed, yet again, to provide fair value for money.

Rant over. Thanks.

Edited by TheBigToePunt (15 Jan 2021 8.32pm)

Sky eh? Where do you start?

1. Either stuff your coverage full of advert breaks every three minutes, or charge me a pretty penny to tune in. Doing both is a piss take.

2. Your unique selling point for cricket was that your subscribers would 'never miss a ball'. Why then do you think it's OK to cut away from a football match when the ball is in play to show me a series of shots of a manager chewing gum, or a replay of something I just saw for myself, or a section of the crowd carefully chosen for its positive social cross section? Last night sky had to show a replay of Tompkins getting booked because we'd missed it live as sky were showing a replay at the time. Good job nothing important happened during the second replay really. I reckon I miss five minutes of actual football most games due to replays.

3. Patrice Evra. Please explain?

4. By all means have top female former players as pundits. Christ knows they can't do any worse than some of the men (see 3 above), but don't pretend and/or infer that when commenting on the male game they have the same or equivalent experience and potential insight as male former players. It's unnecessary and insults everyones intelligence.

For one thing, when the two genders play the same sport they will inevitably interpret the space differently, resulting in notably different versions of the game in terms of physicality, tactics and approaches. For another, the social and economic context is incomparable. I'm as interested in the views of Alex Scott or Karen Kearney (or a well informed sports journalist) as any male former player, but don't ask them about the pressure of a big Premier league match, or the demands of the high tempo pressing game as they plainly haven't experienced either themselves. Give them a chance to tell me something they do know and I don't.

5. Call a dive a dive, a cheat a cheat. All the time you brush over it or use super slow motion replays to highlight some minor contact, and justify fit strong athletes throwing themselves to the floor the game will continue to be ruined. You're just protecting your precious product. And yes I include Palace players in that.

6. I might be able to agree to disagree on your ongoing support for BLM if you applied the same moral consideration to human rights abusing states funding football clubs, or the incessant, creepy, insidious promotion of gambling, or the role third world sweat shops play in producing football kit, boots, balls etc. All the time your moral, social and political stance is so closely aligned to what is commercially beneficial, it's difficult to conclude that you aren't just virtue signalling.

7. From personal experience, your customer service is genuinely appalling. Spend a bit less on pundits and a bit more responding reasonably when you've failed, yet again, to provide fair value for money.

Rant over. Thanks.

Edited by TheBigToePunt (15 Jan 2021 8.32pm)