In my opinion it's because it's now the only option if you want to watch the game. Rather than an option.

A lot of people already pay for subscription sport, so then to be asked to pay an additional £15, potentially once a month, at a time where attending games is not an option and a lot of fans will already have put money down to reserve or buy season tickets seems a bit aggressive.

If it was introduced as an alternative to actually going to the ground and watching the game, then maybe it would be welcome as a cheaper option vs. having to shell out for a match day or season ticket. In that context it seems reasonable.

Then there's also the thought that the money is not going directly to your club, which it would be when shelling out for a match or season ticket. It's going to the PL and then being distributed out. If it was going directly to the two clubs in question, I might be more positive towards it.

I can easily afford it but choose not to pay out of principle. I don't have sky, but occasionally get NOW TV for a month here and there if there's a load of sport on worth watching. But for those people paying £40+ a month for one or multiple services, adding on yet another £15 is not an easy sell.

I also think the cost is too high – 9.99 seems like a sweeter spot when PPV services like Now TV offer passes for about the same price.

Ultimately, I think people with subscriptions should get the extra games included. Those without should pay either for a subscription to or pay for a one off PPV fee per game. THAT makes way more sense to me.

Edited by SW19 CPFC (28 Oct 2020 12.38pm)

I get the first line that I highlighted in bold, but at the same token, these games prior to the current situation were only available as live games or illegally streamed, so it really is no difference in that aspect. The cost is ultimately less than either a season ticket or one off ticket.

I get that many people have paid upfront for season tickets, but clubs are also refunding this on a per game basis, so essentially they should be better off.

I would love the price to be lower, that goes without saying. However, I went into a subscription knowing the approx amount of games that would be televised and this still hasn't changed. The only change is the ability to purchase games that were previously limited to the capacity of the stadiums.

Ultimately, I get that it's not cheap but I also think it is in comparison to actually attending the game. I do also feel that there is an element of self entitlement in the world that is unrealistic.

Like you, I am in a privileged position where the money is less of an issue, but I also know what it is like to have to budget and compromise and ultimately when compared to mortgages/rent/food etc. watching a football match is a luxury and not a right.

The PPV games are not forced on anyone and everyone has a choice, which is why I don't completely understand the viewpoint of this being met so negatively. I won't buy every game, but having the option to buy games I wouldn't have seen otherwise for £15 isn't that bad of a deal all things considering.

Again, love to hear reasoned counters to this as I want to get a full understanding of everything, as I genuinely don't understand the current outrage to it.

I get the first line that I highlighted in bold, but at the same token, these games prior to the current situation were only available as live games or illegally streamed, so it really is no difference in that aspect. The cost is ultimately less than either a season ticket or one off ticket.

I get that many people have paid upfront for season tickets, but clubs are also refunding this on a per game basis, so essentially they should be better off.

I would love the price to be lower, that goes without saying. However, I went into a subscription knowing the approx amount of games that would be televised and this still hasn't changed. The only change is the ability to purchase games that were previously limited to the capacity of the stadiums.

Ultimately, I get that it's not cheap but I also think it is in comparison to actually attending the game. I do also feel that there is an element of self entitlement in the world that is unrealistic.

Like you, I am in a privileged position where the money is less of an issue, but I also know what it is like to have to budget and compromise and ultimately when compared to mortgages/rent/food etc. watching a football match is a luxury and not a right.

The PPV games are not forced on anyone and everyone has a choice, which is why I don't completely understand the viewpoint of this being met so negatively. I won't buy every game, but having the option to buy games I wouldn't have seen otherwise for £15 isn't that bad of a deal all things considering.

Again, love to hear reasoned counters to this as I want to get a full understanding of everything, as I genuinely don't understand the current outrage to it.

The argument for ppv is easily countered in this country by comparing us with every other European country who get EVERY match every week, for a damn sight less and if they choose to go to their local bar to watch, then probably they can see their favourite team all year for free.

I actually find it baffling that there is a general acceptance of the Sky Sports cost, BT Sports cost and now Amazon in the country that invented the damn sport and now exports it across the world at vast profit. If anything, we in the UK should be getting it for free and the rest of the world should be forking out to watch our PL matches.

It is rip off Britain and has been for years.

I no longer subscribe to any of the mainstream provider services. I can get them elsewhere for considerably less.

Edited by Eaglecoops (28 Oct 2020 2.06pm)

I get that many people have paid upfront for season tickets, but clubs are also refunding this on a per game basis, so essentially they should be better off.