Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Kamy100

Football League Suspended

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I really hope there is an in ground and on TV boycott after the way the PL and PFA are behaving. It won't happen but more than ever they are a sewer that needs cleansing. 

Shame it won't happen because the PL and PFA are playing a blinder showing how corrupt they are. 

Edited by Blue blood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MarkBRFC said:

I might be wrong, but in the T&C's of a season ticket purchase, I don't think it guarantees a set amount if games to be valid for, just a guarantee for all games played in the season. So if the season does become void, we have had all our games this season. Obviously opens up questions if they are played behind closed doors though.

That’s all well and good. I didn’t say I’m entitled to it, I said I want my money back.

Why am I - as a tax payer - paying staff to be furloughed when I‘ve already paid them once through my ticket money?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

There seems to be a slight groundswell of support building up for the Premier League players on the basis they're being singled out by the politicians  etc but I think most people are missing the point.

Everyone is making the mistake of putting all PL Clubs in the same bracket. The "big 6" are undoubtedly highly profitable but for the rest, most of the Club's income goes straight into the players pockets. When we were in the PL wages formed 85 - 90% of our turnover so PL players should be taking a wage cut without even batting an eyelid, not to save the Country or the NHS but first and foremost to guarantee the future of their own Clubs and the non playing staff that work there. Then hopefully money can also find its may down to the lower divisions as well to avoid mass insolvencies. The PL Clubs also have the threat of the TV Companies asking for about £35 m each back off them. Not fatal for the big 6 but could be crucial for the rest.

All this crap from the PL and PFA about Clubs"unanimously" agreeing to discuss with the players about the possibility of "conditional" wage cuts and "deferrals" plays out terribly when ordinary people on a few hundred quid a week  have to take a 20% pay cut no questions asked. Maybe Taylor should sell a few of the PFA's Lowry's to help out.

On the other hand its ludicrous that Clubs like Liverpool and Spurs are taking advantage of the furlough scheme so quickly just because it is there. An absolute disgrace all round.

(Apologies if wrong thread. Just seen other one)

Edited by RevidgeBlue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WBA chairman has taken 100% pay drop and other senior management at the club will be pay drop. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Man City owners will continue to pay it's staff wages in full and not used the furlough system. 

Shame that Liverpool and Spurs decide to use a furlough when both are have massive turnover. Shame players havent took a pay cut and use that money to pay normal club staff wages. 

Jacob and Josh Murphy have been helping out the NHS by delivery medication to people who cant leave their homes. 

 

Edited by chaddyrovers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am still at work, but with a 20 percent wage cut. If I had been furloughed, it would have been 45 percent 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, rigger said:

I am still at work, but with a 20 percent wage cut. If I had been furloughed, it would have been 45 percent 

Hows that when the Government will guarantee 80% of your.wage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

Hows that when the Government will guarantee 80% of your.wage

Maybe not UK Chaddy?

Edit: realised he might be a higher rate tax payer/bring home more than £2500 per month which would also skew the 80% issue 

Edited by oldjamfan1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Hows that when the Government will guarantee 80% of your.wage

Because he is a higher tax rate payer. It's 80% up to a cut off figure of around 2500 pcm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Hows that when the Government will guarantee 80% of your.wage

Upto £2500 / month 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Rogerb said:

Because he is a higher tax rate payer. It's 80% up to a cut off figure of around 2500 pcm

Not necessarily a higher tax rate payer. Anyone earning over £ 37,500 per year will not receive 80 percent 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

WBA chairman has taken 100% pay drop and other senior management at the club will be pay drop. 

 

Is there not a logic that says if premier league players take 30% or bigger salary cut, the government will lose out in lost tax and lost NI.

If Liverpool furlough their non-playing staff, but continue to pay tax on their players full salary, is that not better for the government financially?

Ive no idea, just asking.

Regardless clubs like Liverpool should pay the whole lot, certainly for the short term.

Edited by Hasta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

What is now very clear.

Live sporting events will be the last aspect of society to resume when the virus crisis restrictions start very slowly to recede.

So football either has to be prepared to resume behind closed doors or 2019/20 is a non-season. 

At this point the start of 2020/21 is hugely in doubt.

I don't know what the UK might be doing but Governments across the EU have plans for restrictions to contain the virus running to December 2020.

Edited by philipl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I know FUP isn't something that gets much negative press on here but mentioning Burnley should help. 7 leading Premier League clubs and Burnley all signed a letter to try and get Man City banned from Europe. Even before an appeal process which City are very confident of winning. Of course you can see the motives (and downright hypocrisy in some cases) but Burnley's seem different. Hatred of Jack Walker is the obvious agenda and I know how important is is to mention Jack being disrespected when it's Burnley doing it. You could argue that well "they might get a rich backer" but if someone wants to pick a club with a name as dreary as that it would seem strange. Can't imagine kids saying "isn't Burnley a cool name" and smashing down their door for tickets. Also they seem to enjoy being boring. Now I know Rovers had no ambition under greedy family influenced trustees and while many on here thought nobody would buy the club under right circumstances there wasn't total opposition. Burnley seem to enjoy not spending money simply because it's the opposite of Jack Walker. 

I don't know if it's true but supposedly Jack helped them one time financially. This has seemingly angered some of their fans even more. They are probably offended that Jack didn't hate them how perverse is that? That's probably the real reason they are so glad he's dead because that's when Rovers fans started paying more attention to them than they had in a decade. Jack wasn't a hateful man anyway so it wasn't like he was deliberately patronising them by helping out. There's only one club he ever seemed irritated by and that's an extreme case. If you're constantly being sneered at for "buying the title" and constantly harassing the club over your star striker for an entire summer it would test the patience of a saint. Which Jack was as far as I'm concerned.

Should add that there have also been comments from Burnley claiming they could "go bust" over this pandemic crisis. Firstly any club that "goes bust" would surely be granted re-entry to their respective league (or close enough) as things stand given the extreme circumstances. Secondly does that not show Burnley's hypocrisy over "being sustainable". Of course it's an extreme time but they were built on a platform of Tv money (which they seem reluctant to spend any of) and are now pleading poverty. They say what Jack did "wasn't sustainable". Maybe not if you had a crystal ball and could see ever increasing fees capped off by Abramovich in the future. Jack would have downsized without completely starving the club or selling to someone who at least knew what relegation is. If you're not sustainable beyond that what more can you do? That's what Burnley need to ask themselves sitting on a pile of Tv money yet claiming could go bust even if league resumes as soon as August.

Man City can certainly take the hit (obviously FUP will be suspended but they will probably try and cap transfers as another way for United led cartel to hold City down) but many of those clubs that claimed they were "sustainable" are not saying the opposite. Or they are just greedy with Liverpool and Tottenham coming in for criticism in particular. Won't even get started on United. FUP does not work in the real world and it sure as hell does not work in the football world. You want to preach about City not being sustainable. The truth is they are more sustainable than anyone else. United's debt has never been as much of a handicap as fans claim (though it might be now given extreme circumstances) given all money they have pissed away. Goes against what FUP lovers claim it's all about though. Of course United fans don't like people mentioning this as hating the Glazers and crowing about FUP at same time isn't convenient for them.

Rovers were never the biggest spending club (even at the peak Milan and a couple of others prevented Rovers ever being no 1 in world for spending) but in the early 90's Jack's money to many looked like a bottomless pit (except to his family who probably whined when he donated the steel for the new Riverside never mind what happened later) but In City's case it's as bottomless as you can ever get. 

Edited by Vinjay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sponsor
11 hours ago, Vinjay said:

I know FUP isn't something that gets much negative press on here but mentioning Burnley should help. 7 leading Premier League clubs and Burnley all signed a letter to try and get Man City banned from Europe. Even before an appeal process which City are very confident of winning. Of course you can see the motives (and downright hypocrisy in some cases) but Burnley's seem different. Hatred of Jack Walker is the obvious agenda and I know how important is is to mention Jack being disrespected when it's Burnley doing it. You could argue that well "they might get a rich backer" but if someone wants to pick a club with a name as dreary as that it would seem strange. Can't imagine kids saying "isn't Burnley a cool name" and smashing down their door for tickets. Also they seem to enjoy being boring. Now I know Rovers had no ambition under greedy family influenced trustees and while many on here thought nobody would buy the club under right circumstances there wasn't total opposition. Burnley seem to enjoy not spending money simply because it's the opposite of Jack Walker. 

I don't know if it's true but supposedly Jack helped them one time financially. This has seemingly angered some of their fans even more. They are probably offended that Jack didn't hate them how perverse is that? That's probably the real reason they are so glad he's dead because that's when Rovers fans started paying more attention to them than they had in a decade. Jack wasn't a hateful man anyway so it wasn't like he was deliberately patronising them by helping out. There's only one club he ever seemed irritated by and that's an extreme case. If you're constantly being sneered at for "buying the title" and constantly harassing the club over your star striker for an entire summer it would test the patience of a saint. Which Jack was as far as I'm concerned.

Should add that there have also been comments from Burnley claiming they could "go bust" over this pandemic crisis. Firstly any club that "goes bust" would surely be granted re-entry to their respective league (or close enough) as things stand given the extreme circumstances. Secondly does that not show Burnley's hypocrisy over "being sustainable". Of course it's an extreme time but they were built on a platform of Tv money (which they seem reluctant to spend any of) and are now pleading poverty. They say what Jack did "wasn't sustainable". Maybe not if you had a crystal ball and could see ever increasing fees capped off by Abramovich in the future. Jack would have downsized without completely starving the club or selling to someone who at least knew what relegation is. If you're not sustainable beyond that what more can you do? That's what Burnley need to ask themselves sitting on a pile of Tv money yet claiming could go bust even if league resumes as soon as August.

Man City can certainly take the hit (obviously FUP will be suspended but they will probably try and cap transfers as another way for United led cartel to hold City down) but many of those clubs that claimed they were "sustainable" are not saying the opposite. Or they are just greedy with Liverpool and Tottenham coming in for criticism in particular. Won't even get started on United. FUP does not work in the real world and it sure as hell does not work in the football world. You want to preach about City not being sustainable. The truth is they are more sustainable than anyone else. United's debt has never been as much of a handicap as fans claim (though it might be now given extreme circumstances) given all money they have pissed away. Goes against what FUP lovers claim it's all about though. Of course United fans don't like people mentioning this as hating the Glazers and crowing about FUP at same time isn't convenient for them.

Rovers were never the biggest spending club (even at the peak Milan and a couple of others prevented Rovers ever being no 1 in world for spending) but in the early 90's Jack's money to many looked like a bottomless pit (except to his family who probably whined when he donated the steel for the new Riverside never mind what happened later) but In City's case it's as bottomless as you can ever get. 

Bloody hell Vinjay, that is one weird conspiracy theory! To suggest Burnley have only voted to have City banned from European competition because of their hatred of Jack Walker is as daft as the current belief that 5G masts are responsible for corona virus. Do you really believe Jack would bale out the Dingles, when there was a chance of them going bust, leaving Rovers be the only football  club of significance in East Lancashire? How do you think he became successful?  Certainly not by throwing money at lost causes, as Burnley were at the time. Get outside for some fresh air, this lockdown is doing you no good at all!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Other people have said he bailed them out. I don't know whether it's true or not. If you can be bothered to check their accounts most likely any such assistance would come under "donations received". Jack wanted Rovers to be the leading club of significance in modern day Lancashire there's no doubt about that. Only have to look at what Williams said in 1998 about "how we must see ourselves as being Lancashire" and there's zero doubt in my mind that was at Jack's direction. It's other people's fault that the mentality changed. Even though Rovers were clearly the leading club in Lancashire for years after his death by some distance. Far as I'm concerned it still is. If you consider marketability, shirt, badge, stadium and training/academy facilities it's not even close. Preston North End isn't a marketable name. Blackpool obviously has more tourism but there's nothing about the football club that matches Rovers. I despair at the mentality and poor marketing after Jack died and it's not just the club's fault. Fans have to learn how to carry themselves a certain way. That's part of supporting far as I'm concerned. People might say "well we don't want to hear it from you because you hardly ever go to Ewood and don't really support the club anymore." Well they never wanted to hear it from me when I did!

As for throwing money at lost causes. First there's an obvious joke there (not Rovers) but I'll resist. If he helped them out it was paltry money for someone like him. I don't know if Jack made any truly bad deals in business. Other prominent businessmen have made terrible deals, missed opportunities and gone through unstable times. Walkersteel seems to have made consistent profits and never really suffered any severe downturns. Acquiring other steel stockholders also worked out well rather than overloading the company. Strike action didn't hurt the company either as when people picketed outside (union members who didn't even work for the company!) his workers ignored them. His airline also grew though obviously it had more financial capital to begin with. Budget airlines are often very unstable but British European (before it changed to the tackier sounding Flybe after he died) seems like it was consistent as well. Not to mention a perfect safety record. When Walkersteel was sold the city (of London) financial analysts felt Jack had gotten better end of the deal. Obviously there's some bias but the steel industry went into a recession not long afterwards. So yeah I think to sum things up Jack was a safe bet in business.

Edited by Vinjay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, OldEwoodBlue said:

Transfer window and contract end dates to move. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52188913

Oh good - bit more planning time for our European scouting network .If they’re not furloughed by now Waggott wants shooting . We simply have to furlough in our financial position irrespective of the arguments going on in football .

on another note can we expect Holtby to be fit again when it finally resumes??At this rate Dack won’t be too far away .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Stuart said:

Good

Don't think they deserve any credit for it whatsoever. They thought they'd see if they could get away with it and were forced into backtracking because of the backlash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically been embarrassed into a U turn mainly by their own ex players the normally Liverpool loving media and a lot of their fanbase.

Fair play on finally seeing sense but credit for it ?  No chance it wasn't their favoured method they tried it on and would've gone with it if they could.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

That would be massive but its probably fantasy stuff as those with constant money available would just try and gazump on wages for the better players again. This kind of thing starting almost from scratch might suit our lot but you can be cast iron assured they'd mess it up and still only go and overpay players presented to them by the usual 'advisers'.

Something really does need to be done about championship wages though they are ridiculous although obviously still way behind the Premier ones. Clue is in the title though.

As for the agents and advisers, they need side lining altogether at this level if there's to be a radical overhaul. Also it would really need owners writing off debts !

Edited by tomphil

Share this post


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
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.