A way to stop Gam£ 39

[plattamusii]

For legal reasons I'm not suggesting that this approach is adopted but one way of stopping game 39 for certain would be to make it financially unviable for sky.

If we all 'unsubscribed' the sports channels for the month of January , when the games are proposed, it would cost Sky several tens of millions of pounds.

We'd still have the FA Cup on the BBC and , if really necessary, there is the 'going down the pub' option to see any games (other than the '39's) on the tele.

They won't stop you re-subscribing afterwards.

[Baggs]

I don't want to put any noses out of joint but I'm amazed at the reaction to this proposal - as though people have only just realised that football is nothing to do with the fans, and hasn't been for the last 15 years-plus. Only one team (Blackburn in 1994-5) has won the Prem apart from the top 3 (Arsenal/Chelsea/Man U) - hardly an open competition.

Meanwhile I've made a small fortune betting against there being 2 or more goals in plenty of 'tight' Premiership matches over the years, especially the top clubs - the dross that was Liverpool - Chelsea this weekend being a case in point.

It's not just the Premiership's fault - look at all the rubbish that's played in Europe. Do you want to pay £20+ per head to watch Blackburn-Aarhus or Spurs-Panathanaikos in the 433rd qualifying round of the UEFA Cup? Of course not.

There's only one way to vote against stuff like this and that's with your feet - go and stand on the terraces of a smaller local club where a tackle is still a tackle, the team all speak English and so can communicate effectively, and hilarious defensive clangers enliven the afternoon's proceedings.

[plattamusii]

I agree with what you say but I think THE most effective action would be to hit them with your wallet rather than your feet ( in a non-Kung Foo way).

[Northy]

Hitting them in the wallet is a good idea, I don't subscribe to sky sports anyway