Amazon Prime Football

[pool888]

Amazon have coverage of the Premier League over the next 3 nights and on Boxing day and the 27th. First matches start this evening, anyone without Prime could take a one month free trail which will cover all the Amazon games.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/video/storefront/

 

[Lord Tyrion]

I received a letter from Amazon telling me my tv is too old for it to work on . It's a bit spooky that they could know this. Hopefully I can cast it from my phone to the tv and it will work that way. Saying that, it had better be better than the CL final offering last season as the picture quality from that was rubbish, BT online I think from memory.

 

[pool888]

The matches are being shown in 4K UHD, if you have a compatible TV and fast enough broadband the picture should be excellent. Roku 4K stick is a good investment just now at £30 as it is one of the few devices which has all the main streaming services in one place, Now TV, Amazon, Netflix, Sky Store, Google Play Store, You Tube, iPlayer, etc.

https://www.roku.com/en-gb/products/streaming-stick-plus

 

[Orikoru]

Sweet, I just noticed this. Will be interesting to see what their coverage is like. Hopefully they can rival Sky and take more coverage off them.

 

[Piece]

Looking forward to see the picture quality and presentation.

 

[MegaSteve]

Watch a fair bit of tennis on Prime and the picture quality is spot on... Presentation however is ??...

 

[Piece]

Thinking about it, I hope there's no issue with picture quality or buffering. I'll assume that there's going to be lag because of streaming tech, so ~1 min behind actual?

 

[Wolf]

Watch a fair bit of tennis on Prime and the picture quality is spot on... Presentation however is ??...

Absolutely agree I watch a fair bit of the tennis the quality of picture is brilliant but the presenting team are woeful, however looking at the line up on Prime football this should be pretty decent as well.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Thinking about it, I hope there's no issue with picture quality or buffering. I'll assume that there's going to be lag because of streaming tech, so ~1 min behind actual?

My son put the city v newcastle game on our tv via bt on his phone at the weekend. We were watching the match, 2-1 at this point, and his phone buzzed. He started to grin and when I asked why he mentioned he had an alert on his phone for Newcastle goals. The ball was nowhere near the city end at this point but they went up the other end, won the free kick and then scored. I could not believe the time lag. Worth remembering if anyone has alerts on their phone.

 

[USER1999]

I used to pay for Sky, and could watch the footy. Then I needed Sky, and BT. Now I need Sky, BT, and Amazon. This is not a good deal for the customer, splitting the coverage. It is a disgrace.

 

[USER1999]

I also have terrible broad band coverage in my house, and streaming is really not possible.

If streaming is the future, they need to sort out broad band first. It would also help if Sky Go was in proper HD too.

 

[fundy]

Long time since live sport has actually been live on tv sadly, what is interesting is despite technological advances that the lag has got greater, its almost as if this is highly exploitable from a betting perspective lol

 

[Wolf]

My son put the city v newcastle game on our tv via bt on his phone at the weekend. We were watching the match, 2-1 at this point, and his phone buzzed. He started to grin and when I asked why he mentioned he had an alert on his phone for Newcastle goals. The ball was nowhere near the city end at this point but they went up the other end, won the free kick and then scored. I could not believe the time lag. Worth remembering if anyone has alerts on their phone.

happens with other non streamed services to, I've been at my parents watching the footy live on his sky feed whilst having the BBC final score on my phone and the score has come on the phone before its come up on his live sky viewing on tv.

I also have terrible broad band coverage in my house, and streaming is really not possible.

If streaming is the future, they need to sort out broad band first. It would also help if Sky Go was in proper HD too.

Others could argue that more choice makes it more affordable as to what they can afford to watch, some might find sky expensive but prepared to pay amazon cost for fewer games, its not compulsory to buy all the viewing platforms.

 

[Deleted member 1740]

Good luck watching the games tonight, if its anything like the Tennis they streamed then you'll be at least 1 minute behind the actual action.

I know theres a lag on live feeds via sky etc but they keep it to a minimum.

 

[fundy]

Good luck watching the games tonight, if its anything like the Tennis they streamed then you'll be at least 1 minute behind the actual action.

I know theres a lag on live feeds via sky etc but they keep it to a minimum.

do they? news to me lol

i can listen on the radio to a bowler run in and bowl, the shot be played, it be fielded and the delivery discussed. Then on "live" sky tv i get to see the bowler start his run up. Last time I timed it they were 10 seconds behind the radio which itself is a few seconds behind actual live. And if you turn on HD I can make a cup of tea in between lol

 

[Deleted member 1740]

do they? news to me lol

i can listen on the radio to a bowler run in and bowl, the shot be played, it be fielded and the delivery discussed. Then on "live" sky tv i get to see the bowler start his run up. Last time I timed it they were 10 seconds behind the radio which itself is a few seconds behind actual live. And if you turn on HD I can make a cup of tea in between lol

Yeah, the Tennis is around a minute behind. On a IPTV or similar the football is around 45 seconds behind. Sky as you say is sub 10 seconds. Radio has always been quicker than TV, standard physics no?

 

[Bunkermagnet]

I thought all digital broadcasts were behind analogue. The article I read earlier said the games on Amazon would be about 45 seconds behind analogue/radio. It also said BBC now had the technology to broadcast lagless on digital....but it cost quite a bit to implement.

 

[fundy]

Yeah, the Tennis is around a minute behind. On a IPTV or similar the football is around 45 seconds behind. Sky as you say is sub 10 seconds. Radio has always been quicker than TV, standard physics no?

It is but were talking fractions of seconds, the delays to live tv that we see are mainly a choice not a necessity, or has technology really regressed over 20 years

 

[fundy]

I thought all digital broadcasts were behind analogue. The article I read earlier said the games on Amazon would be about 45 seconds behind analogue/radio. It also said BBC now had the technology to broadcast lagless on digital....but it cost quite a bit to implement.

they are but the gaps are ridiculous compared to what they need to be

 

[USER1999]

Others could argue that more choice makes it more affordable as to what they can afford to watch, some might find sky expensive but prepared to pay amazon cost for fewer games, its not compulsory to buy all the viewing platforms.

Very true, but my Sky subscription has not reduced for less content, and neither has my BT.

If it was on one platform, and you could either subscribe to all of it, or selected games, then it would work. But 3 platforms? Really? The customer is getting striped.