|
|
Post by warehamgas on Apr 2, 2020 16:08:28 GMT
The fact that Spurs and other PL clubs have furloughed their non-playing staff says it all for me. Mansfield Town players have taken a pay decrease and some on £2.2k per week! Top to bottom - the games gone and is rotten to the core. I'd canceling Sky Sports subscription info had one! Yes I agree with much of what you say and what others have said about Sky and football. But the thing is whereas many just see that link, the reason I have Sky is nothing to do with football. I rarely watch i5 on Sky. My main reason for having it is the cricket. There has been no cricket at all on terrestrial TV for the past 15 years and without Sky there would be no cricket in the UK. That the cricket authorities have allowed this situation to develop is a whole different thread but they have and us cricket fans have to deal with it as it is. But I agree completely with what others have said about the football-Sky situation. My feeling is that there could well be a re-calibration of all football and sports. Sky appear to have filled their channels with old content which they have to do in the climate of no live sport. As family budgets start to get hit I would imagine that through pure economics subscriptions will get cancelled, household bills and survival will be more important. If Sky survive in their current shape then very little in the PL will change although further down it may with a more realistic expenditure being closer to income. I hope. UTG! |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Apr 2, 2020 16:59:56 GMT
We're going off at a bit of tangent but how is Mike Ashley get away with putting all Newcastle non playing staff on furlough leave when he's one of the richest men in the UK, just a pity Premiership football club's weren't excluded. Although Mr Disney at Pompey can't be sort of money either!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2020 18:22:23 GMT
An employer can elect to furlough employees if they have no work for them.
Premier league footballers (and other league players) are not working and should therefore be furloughed.
They will be entitled to 80% of their normal pay up to a maximum of £2,500 per month - like everyone else!
That is all they should get until they start playing again and maybe the big clubs who are then saving a fortune should be made to make some significant contributions to the NHS.
|
|
|
|
Post by rusho'gas on Apr 2, 2020 18:30:43 GMT
Athletico Madrid playing staff taking a 70% pay cut across the board.
There you go Premier league greedy scum barstewards, that's how you do it. Class.
|
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Apr 2, 2020 21:52:34 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Apr 2, 2020 22:02:54 GMT
I think the players are not the culprits in this rush to the ludicrous wages and transfer fees we see today, or did until a few weeks ago, a lemming-like rush doomed to end sooner or later in a massive fall over a financial cliff.
The top stars are just commodities to the rich clubs, media conglomerates and especially agents.
Players are like dotcom shares. Massively over-valued but worth a lot to those who own them and are willing to trade them and take a hefty cut of the profits.
Their value on the market has no relationship with real life skills, or their talent in comparison to similar players at lower levels.
It's all become so over-inflated and pervasive that the disease has spread to the lower leagues.
Average ball-kickers paid £150,000 a year in front of 5,000 crowds? Madness, when nurses are paid a small fraction of that.
Clubs have to follow the lead of those above them or get left behind and go bust. So they do follow the lead and rack up debts they can never pay off, while the agents get ever-richer.
And the fans have to pay £25 a pop for a deadbeat fixture and £65 for a replica kit.
But the fans keep doing it, and also subscribe to Sky and BT for obscenely large chunks of their low salaries.
Madness.
I sometimes prefer to watch a Sunday morning game in the park with my dog. At least it's real.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2020 22:44:44 GMT
An employer can elect to furlough employees if they have no work for them. Premier league footballers (and other league players) are not working and should therefore be furloughed. They will be entitled to 80% of their normal pay up to a maximum of £2,500 per month - like everyone else! That is all they should get until they start playing again and maybe the big clubs who are then saving a fortune should be made to make some significant contributions to the NHS. Then furlough them! They don’t dare though because they fear the players will claim their contracts are null and void and as much as Spurs are loathe to pay Harry Kane 200k a week+ for nowt they don’t want him to sign for a rival for free. That’s the crux of the whole issue. Football clubs sh** scared of losing their assets so they display a shameless disregard for the harsh economics of the current time. |
|
|
|
Post by Gasshole on Apr 3, 2020 7:17:53 GMT
Things have got to change apres virus. We simply can’t have level 3 footballers trousering $4 grand a week.
|
|
|
|
Post by darkbluegas on Apr 3, 2020 11:29:33 GMT
Seems like the supporters of Premier League footballers are fighting back, snarling at the likes of Matt Hancock for suggesting that those players should redistribute some of their phenomenal wealth.
I’d like to suggest to Gary, Gary and Joey that whilst they’re entitled to their opinions it will be us, the supporters, who pay a significant amount of our income to finance their wages that will decide what’s fair, equitable and sane, thanks very much.
|
|
|
|
Post by gasandelectricity on Apr 3, 2020 11:39:35 GMT
Seems like the supporters of Premier League footballers are fighting back, snarling at the likes of Matt Hancock for suggesting that those players should redistribute some of their phenomenal wealth. I’d like to suggest to Gary, Gary and Joey that whilst they’re entitled to their opinions it will be us, the supporters, who pay a significant amount of our income to finance their wages that will decide what’s fair, equitable and sane, thanks very much. And they said Matt Hancock has cheek! Only they have the cheek to be criticising what he said. While I believe in the right for people to be able to earn as much as they can (even if I don't like how much they're paid) the concept of the taxpayer paying for furlough for club staff at football clubs when the players aren't taking any hit leaves me reeling. We should not be funding premier league or championship clubs at all during this crisis. Their players can bail them out. They earn enough. Meanwhile the BBC and Sky can furlough their pundits too whilst they're at it. Football as a whole needs caps and limits for the good of the game. This is not the struggle that those featured in the English Game (great watch) would have come up against. They don't need to earn stupid amounts. |
|
|
|
Post by Gasshole on Apr 3, 2020 11:48:08 GMT
TBH if it’s a long break, crowds numbers may rocket .Like after the war, Can you imagine the state of the Thatchers bogs, it will be for strong swimmers only.
|
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Apr 3, 2020 13:50:10 GMT
I think every man and his dog could see that the current footballing business model was not sustainable in the longer term and that the bubble was going to burst imminently. However - as mentioned above - this whole situation has only reiterated how utterly ridiculous the money is that footballers get paid. Don't get me wrong, at the top it's largely financed by the TV deals and that is financed through demand - so you can argue it's purely a symptom of supply and demand. However - whilst many of us fans no doubt felt "uncomfortable" with the money in the game prior to this, I think that following this many will believe something HAS to change. The amount of money players are paid to kick an inflated piece of leather around is crazy. It's disgusting frankly. Somehow, some way, the world needs to come together and find a way to cap it. Ironically that applies to a lot of things outside of football too; there is far too much wealth distributed across a small number of people - far more money then they'd ever need. I do wonder how much society will change forever as a result of this pandemic. I agree with all of this except I don’t think the rich will be much worse off in fact I think many will get richer long term. Where as everybody else will be worse off. I’m not saying the governments planned this , perhaps they did , who knows , but they’ll certainly make sure they take any advantage they can during and after it for a very long time. |
|
|
|
Post by gasheadontour on Apr 3, 2020 14:58:43 GMT
Athletico Madrid playing staff taking a 70% pay cut across the board. There you go Premier league greedy scum barstewards, that's how you do it. Class. To be fair, the Premier League is asking players to defer 30% of their wages. The Premier League is to give £20m to the NHS etc. plus £125m to the Football League. Some Premier League clubs have given their players the contact details of elderly and vulnerable fans so they can regularly phone them to check they are OK and help should they need anything. Are Rovers doing that? |
|
|
|
Post by Newton Abbot Gas on Apr 3, 2020 19:09:40 GMT
It seems pretty clear this virus isn’t going away quickly. The consequences for our community don’t need explaining again, except maybe to those who think the rules don’t apply to them. If we, maybe, begin playing football again this year who will be happy to find themselves in a crowd of 75,000 at Old Trafford before a vaccine is found. Who will laud the efforts of our fine young men on £300,000 a week when NHS staff have been treating patients in crowded wards with makeshift protective gear. Will sport emerge from this disaster with any sense of perspective If there is one thing that I could say I love about this pandemic, it’s seeing the premier league react the way it has and, if we’re honest, the way everyone expected it too- companies worth hundreds of millions shamelessly using the government bail out to avoid having to pay their infrastructure staff whilst continuing to pay their top assets full whack simply because they are terrified they will leave on a free transfer due or bring court cases due to their wages not being paid in full. The premier league is pretty much sticking it’s middle finger up to the key workers and wider public at a time when those high paid assets are literally as much use to the public now as an ashtray on a motorbike and the key workers perform critical care in the community for a fraction of clown’s wages. I really hope that the public sticks it’s middle finger up in response, stop paying for the sky subscriptions and these clubs suddenly find themselves with the wages of these expensive assets still on the books but no TV money coming in to pay with and the premier league bubble finally bursts. For me, that would be one thing we could actually thank coronavirus for. Some of us have said for a while that footballers are overpaid for their actual skill set and I think it’s now starting to dawn on society as a whole how trivial football is and it’s role in society is not valuable enough to warrant such vast weekly sums that are driving clubs to the wall in order to keep paying the wages and agents fees. Big fat ditto …...great post |
|
|
|
Post by darkbluegas on Apr 5, 2020 15:31:51 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Apr 5, 2020 18:44:25 GMT
The Premiership players are also refusing to accept the 30% deferred pay claiming that the Government will miss out on tax payments but it was the Government who informed them to take a pay cut! Back to your OP I wonder when it will be safe to mix with other people in large numbers, will we all have to prove we're free from CV before being allowed into places like the Mem, as failing which one fan, or steward etc, with CV could still pass it on to fans just like they can at present, or will all games have to be played behind closed doors until a vaccine is found in a year or so? It does beg the question why football clubs are putting a closing date on when fans can buy season tickets when they haven't a club when next season will actually start. |
|
|
|
Post by nsblue on Apr 5, 2020 19:26:16 GMT
TBH if it’s a long break, crowds numbers may rocket .Like after the war, Can you imagine the state of the Thatchers bogs, it will be for strong swimmers only. I agree, with June looking the earliest resume date, most fans will be desperate to see some live action and who knows summer football may prove popular! Perhaps we will see a 10,000+ crowd at the Mem this season after all. |
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Apr 5, 2020 21:19:17 GMT
This whole PL 30% drop is an interesting debate.
On one side, I understand why PL players are saying it's not fair to target/single them out. They have short careers and the money they make is only really for 10 years or so (for the mega millions). On top of that, there are people far wealthier who make a lot more per year than these players do in their life time, who aren't being called out enough (EG Richard Branson). They're employees, not business owners and I'm not sure it's fair they should be picked on because they earn good money.
One the other side their excuse is absolute bullshit. If they were that concerned about the NHS, they should then donate 30% of their wages directly to it, to make a point. Their sense of entitlement is absolutely pathetic, acting out as the 'poor little rich boys' is sad. On top of that, whilst I said they're employees and not business owners, this is exactly why they should drop down their salaries. If they ever want to connect with fans and the general public then this is what they need to do. The very least is they should pay for the staff wages of those who aren't being paid.
I think its disgusting from Liverpool to put their non-playing staff on furlough. And they have the cheek to say "You'll never walk alone"
|
|
|
|
Post by matealotblue on Apr 5, 2020 21:21:54 GMT
TBH if it’s a long break, crowds numbers may rocket .Like after the war, Can you imagine the state of the Thatchers bogs, it will be for strong swimmers only. I agree, with June looking the earliest resume date, most fans will be desperate to see some live action and who knows summer football may prove popular! Perhaps we will see a 10,000+ crowd at the Mem this season after all. If only I could remember where it is......😢 |
|
|
|
Post by matealotblue on Apr 5, 2020 21:28:47 GMT
This whole PL 30% drop is an interesting debate. On one side, I understand why PL players are saying it's not fair to target/single them out. They have short careers and the money they make is only really for 10 years or so (for the mega millions). On top of that, there are people far wealthier who make a lot more per year than these players do in their life time, who aren't being called out enough (EG Richard Branson). They're employees, not business owners and I'm not sure it's fair they should be picked on because they earn good money. One the other side their excuse is absolute bullshit. If they were that concerned about the NHS, they should then donate 30% of their wages directly to it, to make a point. Their sense of entitlement is absolutely pathetic, acting out as the 'poor little rich boys' is sad. On top of that, whilst I said they're employees and not business owners, this is exactly why they should drop down their salaries. If they ever want to connect with fans and the general public then this is what they need to do. The very least is they should pay for the staff wages of those who aren't being paid. I think its disgusting from Liverpool to put their non-playing staff on furlough. And they have the cheek to say "You'll never walk alone" Whatever the rights/wrongs of the debate about PL players...I can’t work out why the same isn’t being said about/applied to other highly paid sports eg tennis/rugby/golf etc? Surely if the argument is right for one it’s right for all? Or am I missing something here? Maybe it has been said and I’ve missed it amongst all that’s being said/written......🤔 |
|
