Jump to content

Coronavirus Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

Journos go to Rose as he will always give them something.

Players might say silly things but is the hierarchy at the clubs where should direct the anger.

 

I don't think any of them are covering themselves in glory.

 

It wouldn't take a half decent accountant ten minutes to work out what pay cut is needed for each player to cover the non-playing staff for £2500pm. Why this wasn't done and then put the the player I have no idea.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe he 'earnt' £7 million quid last year.

 

I'm really struggling with some of the views on here (and that's not including some of the politically charged rants). Some arguing footballers are great because they've visited a hospital, it's the rock stars who are the enemy. People saying clubs are right to be acting this way because the government provided a fund for this, to save the poor unfortunate low paid workers.

 

People with those views are missing a few simple points.

1) this is not directed at footballers in the sense that we think they are all evil. Many do indeed perform many community actions. However, their leadership via clubs and/or PFA have got he balance massively wrong in terms of performing their duty in protecting their members /prized employees, versus acting fairly in the wider (global) community

2) in terms of rock Stars etc., 2 wrongs don't make a right. If you're rich you should be doing your bit

3) the accountancy argument is utterly wrong and misses the point. If someone could point out the following to Andros Townsend it would be appreciated:

 

Normal times you have income and outgoings. Most outgoings are on staff, and almost uniquely in football, they are massively skewed in favour of a few elite performers. These people are arguably some of the most privileged people on the planet. I'd remember that fact.

The income is being impacted. It could be about to get a whole lot worse depending in tv revenue, but at present its just essentially gate receipts and over priced burgers, not insignificant but not the main revenue stream either, at least at PL level.

 

Elsewhere, there are companies that have lost their entire revenue stream, and have no means to pay their staff, most of whom are on relatively low wages.

 

In order to prevent total social breakdown, the government introduced a scheme to help pay these people. The bill will be picked up by the tax payer. Worth noting the tax payer is not a mysterious man with a funny name, but is you and I, earning our average salary of 20 -30k

 

Now here's where it gets to decision time for football clubs, and where they are basically acting like ****s. Like all companies, they have to rebalance their outgoings with income over this strange period which will last for an unknown time. They can either reduce their outgoings by getting their lower paid staff to be paid by the government, or ask their highest paid staff (some of the most privileged in society) to reduce their wages instead.

 

One action means that the taxpayer (you and I) helps pay for these staff at companies we have no interest in for years to come in higher taxes, the other sees highly privileged people help pay for people they work with and rely on every single day of their current working lives.

 

Of course, from an accounting point of view, it makes sense for a company to take the free money option. And you can argue that in a progressive tax system, we are all paying, and the rich are paying more than the poor.

 

In the real world, however, the rich don't pay more tax, the clubs at the top end of the PL are so awash with money they dump millions at the feet of agents, call girls and god knows what else every year, and the players are enormously well-paid and privileged. And the staff being furloughed are people they work with every day at their own clubs!!!

 

I fail to see how anyone doesn't find this morally abhorrent. There are accountancy arguments, progressive taxation arguments, and discussions about where to draw the line in terms of first team v youth team players, how far down the football pyramid we're talking etc., but for (and I'm sure Harry Kane is a charitable Saint) the England captain at a champions league club on millions a year to be taking no pay cut while his fellow club staff (the club he's famously supported all his life) get laid off at the governments cost, to be paid for by me through my tax, when he's got nothing to do (not his fault) and people all around him in his city, country and world are being laid off in droves, losing businesses they've spent years building, losing loved ones and not being able to attend funerals, and risking lives helping people who are dying in underfunded hospitals because you and I can't really afford any more tax already is 4UCKING DISGUSTING.

 

It is not Harry Kane's fault. He hasn't made this decsision, and might be opposed to it for all we know. But that is the context. He's on millions, and expects me to pay for his masseuse at his boyhood club who he works with every day through my tax because he doesn't want a pay cut. While his boss picks up a £3 million bonus for delivering a late stadium and will no doubt get another bonus for safely navigating Spurs through coronavirus through his brilliant accounting decisions.

 

Utter c4nts.

 

Totally agree.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If as reported the agents are pushing for breach of contract all then clubs need to unite & agree that those players will not be signed

If nobody signs you, you can not play or earn

 

I get the feeling that some players are being forced to not break ranks over a pay cut by others who want to ride the gravy train be it other players or the hanger on’s like agents & entourage

 

Surely the 1st high profile players to make large public donations to good causes will make the money back from sponsors wanting to publicise them

 

Also the question has to be asked if the players take a wage cut is the money then donated to for argument sake NHS/ club shop staff or is it going to Sky/BT? Or to line the owners pockets?

 

Also who is seriously out of love with current football

Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you actually welcome what Spurs have done?

 

No I don’t, but this is really under a general discussion of taxation and incomes.

 

In my view it is down to the players as a whole to take a big hit and put something back into the club that has made them so wealthy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
No I don’t, but this is really under a general discussion of taxation and incomes.

 

In my view it is down to the players as a whole to take a big hit and put something back into the club that has made them so wealthy.

 

Not even that, they just need to TAKE a slightly less obscene wedge of cash, whilst they're sat at home playing X-Box.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe he 'earnt' £7 million quid last year.

 

I'm really struggling with some of the views on here (and that's not including some of the politically charged rants). Some arguing footballers are great because they've visited a hospital, it's the rock stars who are the enemy. People saying clubs are right to be acting this way because the government provided a fund for this, to save the poor unfortunate low paid workers.

 

People with those views are missing a few simple points.

1) this is not directed at footballers in the sense that we think they are all evil. Many do indeed perform many community actions. However, their leadership via clubs and/or PFA have got he balance massively wrong in terms of performing their duty in protecting their members /prized employees, versus acting fairly in the wider (global) community

2) in terms of rock Stars etc., 2 wrongs don't make a right. If you're rich you should be doing your bit

3) the accountancy argument is utterly wrong and misses the point. If someone could point out the following to Andros Townsend it would be appreciated:

 

Normal times you have income and outgoings. Most outgoings are on staff, and almost uniquely in football, they are massively skewed in favour of a few elite performers. These people are arguably some of the most privileged people on the planet. I'd remember that fact.

The income is being impacted. It could be about to get a whole lot worse depending in to revenue, but at present its just essentially gate receipts and over priced burgers, not insignificant but not the main revenue stream either, at least at PL level.

 

Elsewhere, there are companies that have lost their entire revenue stream, and have no means to pay their staff, most of whom are on relatively low wages.

 

In order to prevent total social breakdown, the government I troduced a scheme to help pay these people. The bill will be picked up by the tax payer. Worth noting the tax payer is not a mysterious man with a funny name, but is you and I, earning our average salary of 20 -30k

 

Now here's where it gets to decision time for football clubs, and where they are basically acting like ****s. Like all companies, they have to rebalance their outgoings with income over this strange period which will last for an unknown time. They can either reduce their outgoings by getting their lower paid staff to be paid by the government, or ask their highest paid staff (some of the most privileged in society) to reduce their wages instead.

 

One action means that the taxpayer (you and I) helps pay for these staff at companies we have no interest in for years to come in higher taxes, the other sees highly privileged people help pay for people they work with and rely on every single day of their current working lives.

 

Of course, from an accounting point of view, it makes sense for a company to take the gre money option. And you can argue that in a progressive tax system, we are all paying, and the rich are paying more than the poor.

 

In the real world, however, the rich don't pay more tax, the clubs at the top end of the PL are so awash with money they dump millions at the feet of agents, call girls and god knows what else every year, and the players are enormously well-paid and privileged. And the staff being furloughed are people they work with every day at their own clubs!!!

 

I fail to see how anyone doesn't find this morally abhorrent. There are accountancy arguments, progressive taxation arguments, and discussions about where to draw the line in terms of first team v youth team players, how far down the football pyramid we're talking etc., but for (and I'm sure Harry Kane is a charitable Saint) the England captain at a champions league club on millions a year to be taking no pay cut while his fellow club staff (the club he's famously supported all his life) get laid off at the governments cost, to be paid for by me through my tax, when he's got nothing to do (not his fault) and people all around him in his city, country and world are being laid off in droves, losing businesses they've spent years building, losing loved ones and not being able to attend funerals, and risking lives helping people who are dying in underfunded hospitals because you and I can't really afford any more tax already is 4UCKING DISGUSTING.

 

It is not Harry Kane's fault. He hasn't made this decsision, and might be opposed to it for all we know. But that is the context. He's on millions, and expects me to pay for his masseuse at his boyhood club who he works with every day through my tax because he doesn't want a pay cut. While his boss picks up a £3 million bonus for delivering a late stadium and will no doubt get another bonus for safely navigating Spurs through coronavirus through his brilliant accounting decisions.

 

Utter c4nts.

 

You are absolutely right, but it has always been morally abhorrent yet nothing has been done to change that.

 

Perhaps players’ contracts should have a clause in relating to unexpected serious interruption to the playing schedule.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You might find this table from The Times interesting. Our ‘net worth’ at £3.1 be is higher than Liverpool’s at £2.2bn.

 

There must be some debt in there somewhere.

 

Premier League clubs’ owners and net worth

Arsenal S Kroenke (US) £7.2bn

Aston Villa N Sawiris (Egypt) £5.3bn

Bournemouth M Demin (Russ) £100m

Brighton T Bloom (Eng) £1.3bn

Burnley M Garlick (Eng) £62m

Chelsea R Abramovich (Russ) £10.2bn

Crystal Palace J Harris (US), D Blitzer (US), S Parrish (Eng) £4.2bn

Everton F Moshiri (Iran) £1.6bn

Leicester Srivaddhanaprabha family (Thai) £4.9bn

Liverpool J W Henry (US) £2.2bn

Man City Sheikh Mansour (UAE) £24.7bn

Man Utd Glazer family (US) £3.6bn

Newcastle M Ashley (Eng) £2.4bn Norwich D Smith/M Wynn-Jones (Eng/Wales) £23m

Sheff Utd Prince A bin Musaad (Saudi Arabia) £198m

Southampton G Jisheng (China) £3.1bn

Tottenham J Lewis (Eng) £4.1bn

Watford G Pozzo (It) £93m

West Ham D Sullivan/D Gold (Eng) £1.2bn

Wolves G Guangchang (China) £5.5bn

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the best approach is another month of lockdown, towards the end of which we will have to assess the trends in cases and fatalities and - more importantly - how close to capacity the NHS is operating. As crude and morbid as it sounds, if they’re are coping reasonably well and can handle a modest increase in patients, we can look at reopening certain businesses in strictly controlled and limited amounts.

 

If it were up to me I’d say, in order of priority:

- Shops and shopping centres, possibly with a requirement to wear PPE when inside.

- Self employed businesses. Sparkies, plumbers, hairdressers, etc.

- Banks, council buildings etc.

- Gymnasiums and sports centres.

- Bars, restaurants... basically anywhere food is prepared

- Sporting events, music gigs, religious ceremonies, weddings. Basically anything involving large gatherings of people.

- Air travel. As painful as it, it has to be the last thing to reopen. Nothing spreads a disease as far and wide as international air travel.

 

The whole immune passport thing is the worst thing we can do IMO. Far too many people will deliberately seek infection.

 

Air travel hasn't been shut down! It should have been the first thing to shutter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think poor Mr Rose would be better off directing his ire at the likes of Ashley and Levy for rushing to furlough the person who tops up Danny’s monographed gold-plated water bottle before waiting to see what the players did rather than any politicians questioning the moral validity of this decision.

 

Would rather they chose where it went?? They work with these people every day, they’d be supporting the lowest paid workers at their own football clubs. It’s not a difficult concept.

 

I wouldn't feel sorry for Danny - no doubt he'll cheer himself up by spending more than a EUFA fine on a party tonight

Link to post
Share on other sites
Six weeks ago they reported a profit of £42m. Utter p1ss take.

 

This is a genuinely “wow” moment. Even forgetting that it’s so morally repugnant that it shouldn’t cross their minds, they’ve seen the reaction, the fall-out, the out-cry, they know the political hue of their city and fans. And they do this.

 

Wow.

 

Even the colossal moron Carragher isn’t supporting his club on this one.

Edited by Chewy
For clarity
Link to post
Share on other sites

No football = no wages for players (or at the very least a 70% pay cut) until the end of this current season as i can't see another ball being kicked for a very long time sadly. Then the clubs wouldnt need to use the government scheme

Link to post
Share on other sites
Six weeks ago they reported a profit of £42m. Utter p1ss take.

 

And apparently last year they spent almost £44 million on agents fees. Yep, this is a company in need of tax payer assistance at this time of national crisis.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost feels like this should be the last straw and unless clubs refund the taxpayer in full when this is over, all clubs who participate in this should be boycotted until they do.

 

Not talking a wish-washey boycott where a few thousand stay away, I mean getting average attendances at PL games below 5000.

 

I know it doesn't necessarily hit the clubs hard enough in the pocket, but it would probably be damaging enough PR wise (and crucially would look bad enough on tv) that it might just cause some thought amongst them.

 

Unfortunately we will all be so relieved to have football (and all forms of freedom and entertainment) back after this, that its probably extremely unlikely and next to impossible to organize. Have to admit I would find it hard to stay away after months without it!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Air travel hasn't been shut down! It should have been the first thing to shutter.

 

There would have been hundreds of thousands of people stranded abroad who needed to get home. The services running at the moment are extremely limited and nearly empty.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Almost feels like this should be the last straw and unless clubs refund the taxpayer in full when this is over, all clubs who participate in this should be boycotted until they do.

 

Not talking a wish-washey boycott where a few thousand stay away, I mean getting average attendances at PL games below 5000.

 

I know it doesn't necessarily hit the clubs hard enough in the pocket, but it would probably be damaging enough PR wise (and crucially would look bad enough on tv) that it might just cause some thought amongst them.

 

Unfortunately we will all be so relieved to have football (and all forms of freedom and entertainment) back after this, that its probably extremely unlikely and next to impossible to organize. Have to admit I would find it hard to stay away after months without it!

 

I find it absolutely unfathomable that the government are subsidising 3 of the worlds richest football clubs whilst these clubs continue to pay their players players tens of thousands a week. It’s utterly shameful.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Almost feels like this should be the last straw and unless clubs refund the taxpayer in full when this is over, all clubs who participate in this should be boycotted until they do.

 

Not talking a wish-washey boycott where a few thousand stay away, I mean getting average attendances at PL games below 5000.

 

I know it doesn't necessarily hit the clubs hard enough in the pocket, but it would probably be damaging enough PR wise (and crucially would look bad enough on tv) that it might just cause some thought amongst them.

 

Unfortunately we will all be so relieved to have football (and all forms of freedom and entertainment) back after this, that its probably extremely unlikely and next to impossible to organize. Have to admit I would find it hard to stay away after months without it!

 

How about we use this as a means of determining the table. Liverpool finish fifth bottom for this, no champions league money for them next year.

 

Alternatively, and on a very vaguely and as yet not thought through properly whim, how about companies that use the furlough get nationalised to an extent when we're all done. Could return clubs to some sort of fan ownership afterwards. Because if ever something has finally proved that the football hierarchy are utterly detached from the fan base its this.

 

This is a national crisis and this is a crisis fund, and it is being exploited by billionaire owners to avoid them or their multi millionaire players covering for their low-paid co-workers, and asking everyone else in the country, including our NHS staff, to pay for it with their taxes. Nice.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I find it absolutely unfathomable that the government are subsidising 3 of the worlds richest football clubs whilst these clubs continue to pay their players players tens of thousands a week. It’s utterly shameful.

 

Especially as many of thos players will have various sponsorship details providing enough income to live off of comfortably for a while (even at their standard of living) without taking a penny in wages.

Link to post
Share on other sites
There would have been hundreds of thousands of people stranded abroad who needed to get home. The services running at the moment are extremely limited and nearly empty.

 

There's a definite need to keep flights going for that reason. What's terrible is the fact people are still stepping off planes here and being allowed to just waltz out of the airport without being tested or having enforced quarantine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I was a player I wouldn't be taking a pay cut either, why would I? So that more money goes into the pockets of the billionaire club owners? Because that is where the money would go, not to NHS nurses or the low paid staff at the club. Are people really so naive that they think the likes of Mike Ashley wouldn't use the government scheme even if the players did take a pay cut? They are well within their rights to tell the owners to go fück themselves, take the money and give to a medical charity instead.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If I was a player I wouldn't be taking a pay cut either, why would I? So that more money goes into the pockets of the billionaire club owners? Because that is where the money would go, not to NHS nurses or the low paid staff at the club. Are people really so naive that they think the likes of Mike Ashley wouldn't use the government scheme even if the players did take a pay cut? They are well within their rights to tell the owners to go fück themselves, take the money and give to a medical charity instead.

 

Careful, you’re not allowed to stick up for the players on here, the pitchforks will be out.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
If I was a player I wouldn't be taking a pay cut either, why would I? So that more money goes into the pockets of the billionaire club owners? Because that is where the money would go, not to NHS nurses or the low paid staff at the club. Are people really so naive that they think the likes of Mike Ashley wouldn't use the government scheme even if the players did take a pay cut? They are well within their rights to tell the owners to go fück themselves, take the money and give to a medical charity instead.

 

I don't think it would be that hard for the players to simply say, "take the staff wages out of our wages," on the proviso that the club don't then ask the taxpayer for money.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Almost feels like this should be the last straw and unless clubs refund the taxpayer in full when this is over, all clubs who participate in this should be boycotted until they do.

 

Not talking a wish-washey boycott where a few thousand stay away, I mean getting average attendances at PL games below 5000.

 

 

Good luck with that....

 

You’ve got absolutely zero chance of this making a blind bit of difference to attendances. 3 weeks after the restart it’ll all be forgotten.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
Good luck with that....

 

You’ve got absolutely zero chance of this making a blind bit of difference to attendances. 3 weeks after the restart it’ll all be forgotten.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Kind of what I said at the end of my post.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If I was a player I wouldn't be taking a pay cut either, why would I? So that more money goes into the pockets of the billionaire club owners? Because that is where the money would go, not to NHS nurses or the low paid staff at the club. Are people really so naive that they think the likes of Mike Ashley wouldn't use the government scheme even if the players did take a pay cut? They are well within their rights to tell the owners to go fück themselves, take the money and give to a medical charity instead.

 

So in the argument as to who should pick up the tab you’d side with the multi-millionaires against the billionaires. I suppose they’re technically not as wealthy.

 

And because neither side is prepared to concede to the other, we’ll leave it to the tax payer. I suppose all the overtime the nurses are doing will help swell the tax receipts, so why not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Love the PFA telling us that if players take a pay cut the economy will suffer due to slack of tax

 

How about they tell their members to frame the full wage then donate a large percentage to a good causes fund which is then used to fund 1st responders

 

I hate agents but PFA are just as big a drain on the game, I know they are supposed to look after old pros & lower league players in hardship but don’t try to Vilify the general public

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a season ticket for over 20 years, but I've found myself attending St Mary's less and less over the last few years.

 

After reading that statement from the PFA, and hearing club after club through staff on furlough, I think I'm done with this so-called sport.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I had a season ticket for over 20 years, but I've found myself attending St Mary's less and less over the last few years.

 

After reading that statement from the PFA, and hearing club after club through staff on furlough, I think I'm done with this so-called sport.

 

Absolutely. I won't give the premier league another £.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Absolutely. I won't give the premier league another £.

 

With you there brother. We all knew football is morally bankrupt. The game I fell in love with as a 6 year old is not the game we now see. It’s over, This list of reasons not to go has been steadily growing over the years but now with the richest clubs in the world taking advantage of a government scheme to keep small business alive its time to call it a day until things change.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Clubs like Newcastle, Spurs and Shîte bags LIVERPOOL FFS taking Gov. Handouts... Makes my blood boil. Really really hope SFC don't follow suit.

 

Greedy **** footballers reputations declining heavy each day.

 

Football as a whole has been properly exposed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Love the PFA telling us that if players take a pay cut the economy will suffer due to slack of tax

 

How about they tell their members to frame the full wage then donate a large percentage to a good causes fund which is then used to fund 1st responders

 

I hate agents but PFA are just as big a drain on the game, I know they are supposed to look after old pros & lower league players in hardship but don’t try to Vilify the general public

 

Gordon Taylor and his annual wage has been a key issue IMO all along - time for the press to finally force him to go with some help from the clubs and PL. I get the impression many of players are not happy with the PFA tactics and it’s all a smokescreen to protect him making a fortune. The PFA has been a blight on the game along with agents for many years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would help the players reputation if , even now , they donated a regular sum to help the non playing staff . They would still be paying their tax (or whatever tax they haven't managed to avoid) . However the clubs may see that as a way of not paying their share so managers and others should also contribute.

The PFA have been under scrutiny for some time for not doing enough for players and for the massive and ever increasing pay of Gordon Taylor , perhaps this is the time for him to go but I suspect he will hold on to power for as long as possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is a really tough one, especially for Liverpool. Obviously they are one of the highest profile clubs in the world. Liverpool is also one of the most socialist-supporting regions in this country.

 

To furlough the average-man-in-the-street staff, whilst the very well paid footballers and the very wealthy owners, fail to contribute, will cause a greater ill-feeling there than I suspect the same action has in Norwich.

 

There are a few posters on these threads on this forum who are saying, enough is enough, I can't be done contributing to this morally bankrupt business anymore. I wonder if the average Liverpool fan thinks the same?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This has got me thinking.

 

Our club will be going through the financial scenario planning and looking to make decisions. From the sentiment across England, furloughing your lower paid staff is poor form. One way of balancing the books is for the highest earners to take a pay cut, thus allowing the lower earners to maintain 100% income.

 

Not much any of us can do about those decision, but I wonder if the fan base can influence some of the decision making?

 

If the season gets scrapped, the club will have a large liability to refund the ticket holders for games that didn't take place. This will run into several million quid.

 

Would you support waiving your refund, to help the club pay 100% of wages?

 

Equally, would you support buying next year's season ticket today, without knowing if/when it will kick off?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rubbish. There’s not one person in the country that doesn’t think Liverpool will win the title. If the season is voided it’ll be remembered as the season a freak event robbed them of the title. Only sad sacks and Man Utd fans will deny that. Not that Liverpool will particularly care. I don’t get the hatred for them over this, they’ve acted pretty classy, Klopp in particular. You can bet your bottom dollar that when it comes to clubs putting their self interest above all else and acting without class Liverpool will be way behind the West Ham’s and Newcastle’s of the world by the time this is all over.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

LOL.. told you their class wouldn’t take long to shine through

Link to post
Share on other sites
Clubs like Newcastle, Spurs and Shîte bags LIVERPOOL FFS taking Gov. Handouts... Makes my blood boil. Really really hope SFC don't follow suit.

 

Greedy **** footballers reputations declining heavy each day.

 

Football as a whole has been properly exposed.

It's my understanding, thank goodness, that Saints won't be furloughing staff or taking government grants. I think that, compared with other clubs, their behaviour is commendable.

 

But my blood is also boiling over the PFA stance. The £200m lost is taxes is totally spurious as that's a figure for a whole year assuming players don't subscribe to tax reduction schemes. As it probably wouldn't extend beyond say 4 months the real figure is probably less than £50m.

 

And that shortfall could be easily be covered with an agreement that half of the wage reduction had to be gifted to the NHS with the other half retained by clubs to pay non-playing staff, avoid government grants and support the community. Club still wins.

 

But no, the overriding principles are greed and self-interest. Desperately important to keep the millions flowing into players' (and agents') pockets. Anything to stop the bubble bursting. Power is everything and way too much power lies with the PFA and players.

 

It's hard to see how it can happen, but I am disgusted and really want to see a massive wave of public (including supporter) anger against the PFA.

 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe he 'earnt' £7 million quid last year.

 

I'm really struggling with some of the views on here (and that's not including some of the politically charged rants). Some arguing footballers are great because they've visited a hospital, it's the rock stars who are the enemy. People saying clubs are right to be acting this way because the government provided a fund for this, to save the poor unfortunate low paid workers.

 

People with those views are missing a few simple points.

1) this is not directed at footballers in the sense that we think they are all evil. Many do indeed perform many community actions. However, their leadership via clubs and/or PFA have got he balance massively wrong in terms of performing their duty in protecting their members /prized employees, versus acting fairly in the wider (global) community

2) in terms of rock Stars etc., 2 wrongs don't make a right. If you're rich you should be doing your bit

3) the accountancy argument is utterly wrong and misses the point. If someone could point out the following to Andros Townsend it would be appreciated:

 

Normal times you have income and outgoings. Most outgoings are on staff, and almost uniquely in football, they are massively skewed in favour of a few elite performers. These people are arguably some of the most privileged people on the planet. I'd remember that fact.

The income is being impacted. It could be about to get a whole lot worse depending in to revenue, but at present its just essentially gate receipts and over priced burgers, not insignificant but not the main revenue stream either, at least at PL level.

 

Elsewhere, there are companies that have lost their entire revenue stream, and have no means to pay their staff, most of whom are on relatively low wages.

 

In order to prevent total social breakdown, the government I troduced a scheme to help pay these people. The bill will be picked up by the tax payer. Worth noting the tax payer is not a mysterious man with a funny name, but is you and I, earning our average salary of 20 -30k

 

Now here's where it gets to decision time for football clubs, and where they are basically acting like ****s. Like all companies, they have to rebalance their outgoings with income over this strange period which will last for an unknown time. They can either reduce their outgoings by getting their lower paid staff to be paid by the government, or ask their highest paid staff (some of the most privileged in society) to reduce their wages instead.

 

One action means that the taxpayer (you and I) helps pay for these staff at companies we have no interest in for years to come in higher taxes, the other sees highly privileged people help pay for people they work with and rely on every single day of their current working lives.

 

Of course, from an accounting point of view, it makes sense for a company to take the gre money option. And you can argue that in a progressive tax system, we are all paying, and the rich are paying more than the poor.

 

In the real world, however, the rich don't pay more tax, the clubs at the top end of the PL are so awash with money they dump millions at the feet of agents, call girls and god knows what else every year, and the players are enormously well-paid and privileged. And the staff being furloughed are people they work with every day at their own clubs!!!

 

I fail to see how anyone doesn't find this morally abhorrent. There are accountancy arguments, progressive taxation arguments, and discussions about where to draw the line in terms of first team v youth team players, how far down the football pyramid we're talking etc., but for (and I'm sure Harry Kane is a charitable Saint) the England captain at a champions league club on millions a year to be taking no pay cut while his fellow club staff (the club he's famously supported all his life) get laid off at the governments cost, to be paid for by me through my tax, when he's got nothing to do (not his fault) and people all around him in his city, country and world are being laid off in droves, losing businesses they've spent years building, losing loved ones and not being able to attend funerals, and risking lives helping people who are dying in underfunded hospitals because you and I can't really afford any more tax already is 4UCKING DISGUSTING.

 

It is not Harry Kane's fault. He hasn't made this decsision, and might be opposed to it for all we know. But that is the context. He's on millions, and expects me to pay for his masseuse at his boyhood club who he works with every day through my tax because he doesn't want a pay cut. While his boss picks up a £3 million bonus for delivering a late stadium and will no doubt get another bonus for safely navigating Spurs through coronavirus through his brilliant accounting decisions.

 

Utter c4nts.

 

Wow. Well said. C u n t $ indeed

Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe he 'earnt' £7 million quid last year.

 

I'm really struggling with some of the views on here (and that's not including some of the politically charged rants). Some arguing footballers are great because they've visited a hospital, it's the rock stars who are the enemy. People saying clubs are right to be acting this way because the government provided a fund for this, to save the poor unfortunate low paid workers.

 

People with those views are missing a few simple points.

1) this is not directed at footballers in the sense that we think they are all evil. Many do indeed perform many community actions. However, their leadership via clubs and/or PFA have got he balance massively wrong in terms of performing their duty in protecting their members /prized employees, versus acting fairly in the wider (global) community

2) in terms of rock Stars etc., 2 wrongs don't make a right. If you're rich you should be doing your bit

3) the accountancy argument is utterly wrong and misses the point. If someone could point out the following to Andros Townsend it would be appreciated:

 

Normal times you have income and outgoings. Most outgoings are on staff, and almost uniquely in football, they are massively skewed in favour of a few elite performers. These people are arguably some of the most privileged people on the planet. I'd remember that fact.

The income is being impacted. It could be about to get a whole lot worse depending in to revenue, but at present its just essentially gate receipts and over priced burgers, not insignificant but not the main revenue stream either, at least at PL level.

 

Elsewhere, there are companies that have lost their entire revenue stream, and have no means to pay their staff, most of whom are on relatively low wages.

 

In order to prevent total social breakdown, the government I troduced a scheme to help pay these people. The bill will be picked up by the tax payer. Worth noting the tax payer is not a mysterious man with a funny name, but is you and I, earning our average salary of 20 -30k

 

Now here's where it gets to decision time for football clubs, and where they are basically acting like ****s. Like all companies, they have to rebalance their outgoings with income over this strange period which will last for an unknown time. They can either reduce their outgoings by getting their lower paid staff to be paid by the government, or ask their highest paid staff (some of the most privileged in society) to reduce their wages instead.

 

One action means that the taxpayer (you and I) helps pay for these staff at companies we have no interest in for years to come in higher taxes, the other sees highly privileged people help pay for people they work with and rely on every single day of their current working lives.

 

Of course, from an accounting point of view, it makes sense for a company to take the gre money option. And you can argue that in a progressive tax system, we are all paying, and the rich are paying more than the poor.

 

In the real world, however, the rich don't pay more tax, the clubs at the top end of the PL are so awash with money they dump millions at the feet of agents, call girls and god knows what else every year, and the players are enormously well-paid and privileged. And the staff being furloughed are people they work with every day at their own clubs!!!

 

I fail to see how anyone doesn't find this morally abhorrent. There are accountancy arguments, progressive taxation arguments, and discussions about where to draw the line in terms of first team v youth team players, how far down the football pyramid we're talking etc., but for (and I'm sure Harry Kane is a charitable Saint) the England captain at a champions league club on millions a year to be taking no pay cut while his fellow club staff (the club he's famously supported all his life) get laid off at the governments cost, to be paid for by me through my tax, when he's got nothing to do (not his fault) and people all around him in his city, country and world are being laid off in droves, losing businesses they've spent years building, losing loved ones and not being able to attend funerals, and risking lives helping people who are dying in underfunded hospitals because you and I can't really afford any more tax already is 4UCKING DISGUSTING.

 

It is not Harry Kane's fault. He hasn't made this decsision, and might be opposed to it for all we know. But that is the context. He's on millions, and expects me to pay for his masseuse at his boyhood club who he works with every day through my tax because he doesn't want a pay cut. While his boss picks up a £3 million bonus for delivering a late stadium and will no doubt get another bonus for safely navigating Spurs through coronavirus through his brilliant accounting decisions.

 

Utter c4nts.

[emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122]Well said.

 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
...If the season gets scrapped' date=' the club will have a large liability to refund the ticket holders for games that didn't take place. ....[/quote']

 

I'm not so sure - you would need to read the small print. Force majeure and that sort of thing

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})