Football and the Coronavirus

Absolute holes , all of them on anything more than £1500 a week .


How about they support the clubs they play for instead of getting the government to bail them out . Scumbags everyone of them
 
BaZ87 said:
Just looking at the PL table, there isn't too much of an issue with deciding European qualification if the season can't be finished. Liverpool, City and Chelsea would all qualify for the CL whether you went on current standings or last seasons table and similarly both Utd and Wolves would be in the Europa. It's only Leicester/Spurs for the CL and Sheffield Utd/Arsenal for the EL that are up for grabs. Given how far ahead Leicester are of Spurs it would be difficult to argue that Leicester didn't deserve that CL spot but the last Europa spot is a much closer call. It sounds like UEFA might be twisting Leagues' arms on that decision though.
Click to expand...

I disagree. If City's ban is upheld. Sheffield have potentially missed out on a champions league spot due to having a game in hand. Likewise with Chelsea. United are right on their heels and have already played all the big team whereas Chelsea still has to play a lot of the big six.

In my view the season should be finished first then have a 4/6 week break before the next season whenever that will be. Restart next season but have no cup competitions with the exception of Europe. With Europe have the knockout stages 1 game in a Neutral venue to play less games.
 
Bald-Eagle22 said:
Absolute holes , all of them on anything more than £1500 a week .


How about they support the clubs they play for instead of getting the government to bail them out . Scumbags everyone of them
Click to expand...
This is exactly the reaction Daniel Levy and Matt Hancock wanted. Footballers are and always have been an easy target and will now be used to cover up the failings and greed of others.

Who benefits from PL players taking pay cuts? There will be some clubs that aren't generating huge amounts of cash and aren't owned by multi billionaires that will need players to take cuts or deferals to survive however a big chunk of PL clubs do generate significant cash and or are owned by extremely wealthy individuals.

Take Spurs as an example. They just released their accounts for last season and had an EBITDA (basically cash profit before interest and tax is paid and some paper expenses are deducted) of £168m - they are generating more than enough cash to pay everybody at the club in full without the need for outside help. Even if they did need outside help, their accounts also showed that Daniel Levy paid himself a £3m bonus for completing their new stadium project, despite it being massively delayed and over budget. That £3m was on top of his £4m salary which was already considerably more than any other PL director. Levy owns just under 30% of Spurs (worth well in excess of £1bn) with the other 70% owned by a multi billionaire tax exile Joe Lewis. If Spurs players take a pay cut then who benefits? Well not the government as there will be less tax being paid on players saleries. The only people that benefit are Daniel Levy and Joe Lewis. Matt Hancock got his cheap headline to cover up his own failings though.

Millionaires taking pay cuts to benefit billionaires.
adam cool dude said:
I disagree. If City's ban is upheld. Sheffield have potentially missed out on a champions league spot due to having a game in hand. Likewise with Chelsea. United are right on their heels and have already played all the big team whereas Chelsea still has to play a lot of the big six.
Click to expand...
You didn't read the "if the season can't be finished part" did you? ;)

If the season cannot be finished then there are two extreme options, void the season and use last seasons table (something UEFA reportedly are against) or use the current standings, whether that be exactly as things stand or based on points per game to make up for games in hand. PPG or current standings still wouldn't have Sheffield Utd in 5th. And whether we use last season or the current standings/ppg, Chelsea would still be in the CL.
 
adam cool dude said:
Where did you get this PPG thing as Chelsea have been on diabolical form recently? They were 11 points ahead of United in January!
Click to expand...
Points per game is the number of points divided by the number of games played. It can (and will in some Leagues) be used to calculate the final table when some teams have played more games than others.

Chelsea's points per game is 1.655, Utd's is 1.552, Sheffield Utd's is 1.536 and Wolves' is 1.483. Worst case scenario and the League cannot be finished (and they don't void things) then the most likely outcome would be calculating the final table based on teams points per game rather than the exact current standings.
 
BaZ87 said:
This is exactly the reaction Daniel Levy and Matt Hancock wanted. Footballers are and always have been an easy target and will now be used to cover up the failings and greed of others.
Click to expand...

You missed his point.

"How about they support the clubs they play for instead of getting the government to bail them out "

There should be no football club that is allowed to furlough the staff that allow the club to operate if they still pay the players 100% of their wage, which is always going to be massively higher in the top tier clubs.

Are you happy to be paying the wages of the staff of the football clubs through your taxes, or would you rather the players who are also supposedly part of the club pay for the staff that allow them to earn that wage in the first place?

Someone somewhere higher up the food-chain of the stakeholders in football needs to take action, as you already pointed out the most important stakeholders (the fans) don't have any say at all, they just get treated like money sponges.
 
Last edited:
200sols said:
Why cant they furlough the players as well?
Click to expand...

I would imagine that would lead to further scrutiny, claiming 80% of their salary through the government and then it being passed on to the taxpayer.

Edit: As below, not even sure it would be possible given the complexities of their employment contracts with clubs.
 
Journey said:
You missed his point.
Click to expand...
No I didn't but you clearly missed mine. I absolutely agree that no PL club should be furloughing their non playing staff however the vast majority, if not all PL clubs can do this without needing players to take pay cuts hence the "millionaires taking pay cuts to benefit billionaires" comment.

Football clubs/club owners, at the top level at least, are furloughing staff and wanting players to take pay cuts to protect their own wealth. So rather than people directing their anger at players, who do get paid far too much but at least are paying tax on it, they should first be looking at the multi billionaire owners like the tax exile Joe Lewis. And of course all the other big businesses/billionaires that pay next to no tax.
 
BaZ87 said:
Football clubs/club owners, at the top level at least, are furloughing staff and wanting players to take pay cuts to protect their own wealth. So rather than people directing their anger at players, who do get paid far too much but at least are paying tax on it, they should first be looking at the multi billionaire owners like the tax exile Joe Lewis.
Click to expand...

Can those club owners put the money that'd be required in though even if they wanted to? I thought there were rules about how much owners could pump into the club?
 
200sols said:
Leave to go where? Everything is locked down. The current situation makes football look like a joke.
Click to expand...

Pretty much whereever you want. If Spurs Furloughed Kane and broke his contract i'm 99% sure there'd be a huge list of clubs queuing up to sign him as a free agent!

Obviously i don't know the legal elements of player contracts but i'm imagine you can't just cut their wages as easily as regular salaried staff.
 
Marvt74 said:
Pretty much whereever you want. If Spurs Furloughed Kane and broke his contract i'm 99% sure there'd be a huge list of clubs queuing up to sign him as a free agent!

Obviously i don't know the legal elements of player contracts but i'm imagine you can't just cut their wages as easily as regular salaried staff.
Click to expand...

If this was mandated from the top down that wouldn't happen, all clubs would do the same. If they cant furlough they can use another setup, they dont need to cut them down to £2500/euro or whatever. Something reasonable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom