I'm sure the current govt will make up for it, when it's time to start rounding up political donations.
PL clubs furlough non-playing staff | Liverpool, Spurs & Bournemouth U-turns
- Thread starter PoTMS
- Start date
which is irrelevant. Footballers have other incomes - we are only talking about their primary roles.
This. He's played a blinder. He'll be wanting Spurs players to take a pay cut for shareholder wealth. Hope they stick it to him and go down the same route we have. Pointless taking a pay cut if it reduces tax whilst benefiting despicable men like Levy and Lewis.
The defence of the players is an odd one. The main argument that people are using to stop the 'vilification' of players is that some rich people (owners) are not giving up their money so the players should not either. What is right to do should not be determined by whether another person does that same thing, otherwise, you will end up with nobody giving up their money. There will always be greedy people in the world that care for nothing but their own welfare and maintaining their disgusting levels of expenditure, but that cannot be used as an excuse by another rich person to do exactly the same thing.
I do not see how anyone can defend players for not giving up a fraction of their wealth to help people who actually need it. Any argument for them to keep 100% of their wages is utterly ridiculous. The fact of the matter is that, among all of these rich players and owners, someone should be giving away a portion of their enormous wealth to those that could be in trouble without it. One cannot be excused for not doing so just because the other does not.
I do not see how anyone can defend players for not giving up a fraction of their wealth to help people who actually need it. Any argument for them to keep 100% of their wages is utterly ridiculous. The fact of the matter is that, among all of these rich players and owners, someone should be giving away a portion of their enormous wealth to those that could be in trouble without it. One cannot be excused for not doing so just because the other does not.
I know it's unpopular but I agree with this.
Are you telling me Spurs cannot afford to pay their staff and players? We are far away from that sort of situation.
For me this is about clubs looking to protect their margins and putting olayers under pressure.
It’s how they’re being told to cut it that’s the issue. A simple pay cut helps no one but the greedy owners and actually decreases money going to the NHS. The way we’ve done it is the only logical solution. Any players for stable PL clubs should follow lead
There are no margins. They currently have no income, high outgoings, with literally no idea when their normal income sources will return.
If people think about this objectively for a second, as opposed to emotionally. We have clubs who's yearly turnover is perhaps £200 million. In the cases of some clubs, their wage bill is up to 80% of their yearly turnover.
Their income sources are
-Prize money (not sure when league will start again)
-TV money (they may demand the money back soon enough as they haven't got what they paid for)
-Matchday income (not going to get the rest of the season and even when football restarts, no idea if crowds will be allowed)
-Sponsorships (still ongoing I guess but who's to say whether the companies will still be around when it all restarts)
-Merchandise (I guess still ongoing but who's buying shirts right now)?
People are still talking as if we know what the next steps are. We don't.
It really wouldn't surprise me if football doesn't restart for quite a few months yet. It also wouldn't surprise me if by the end of this, all clubs have furloughed their non playing staff, and the playing staff have taken cuts in their salaries. It also wouldn't surprise me if a lot of clubs, even in the top flight, end up in financial trouble because there seems to be very little future planning going on at most clubs.
I understand. The main point is we don't know if clubs can't afford to take the hit just yet and there hasn't been any decision on how football carries on. Furthermore, not every footballer earns £100k per week.
I think they should take a pay cut butnInthink it should be negotiated and done in a way that's fair to everyone involved.
Spurs wage bill was below 50% of turnover, the last time I checked. Is cutting non playing staff wages by 20% going to save them?
My thoughts are the club have tried to create a PR pressure campaign for the players and any union worth its salt woul do what the PFA are doing here.
If players are not willing to take a pay cut then it would be a good gesture to donate 25% of their wages to good causes and help the non-playing staff that have been hit the hardest at clubs with the current circumstances.
I’m not blaming footballers. I’m blaming the system. And I’m not talking about EPL players alone.
I have nothing against taxing more people and rich people to a certain level but I hope we can all agree that footballers or elitplayers in other sports earn to much money. That is one reason we are paying those prices for tickets or for games on tv.
I am well aware of how economics and business work but I don’t have to agree to 100%.
First, I wish you good luck as a doctor. Especially in these days. You are the heroes. Take care of yourself and people.
I know that my opinion lean towards communist system but I would not go so far. Even without the situation people have to agree that players, owners and so on earn to much. How many times have we talked about season ticket prices? For example, is it normal that Sanchez earns that much in a week? Is it normal that players cost 100-200m?
We should have a system that not only benifits players and owners. But also community and country as well.
This is a perfectly reasonable position to take.
Of course. You explain it a lot better than I can, but we're on the same wavelength.
And yeah, it is interesting to me that the Glazers did all that even before any shitstorm occurred, they've handled it pretty well. With regards to club handling, they've not been very penny-pinching so maybe they're not that type of owner.
Not a chance Levy and Ashley would go for that.
It's not up to them what the players do with their money. If the players go down the route of donating to charities, and these clubs are still furloughing staff - who's the odd one out? Then you'd hope the media and the likes of Hancock have the balls to publicly go after them.
I think it's quite obvious given some clubs are paying 10% of their staff hundreds of thousands a week whilst taking advantage of a government scheme to cover the other 90% of their lower paid staff. This is not a time for businesses to be 'taking advantage' of government schemes. They can afford to pay all staff if the highest earners took marginal pay cuts during this time. This is precisely what is happening at my workplace. The disparity between what the players earn to what the rest of the staff will earn is massive and not really seen in most other business types. It's morally wrong for Premier League football clubs to use the scheme. I don't why some people on here see this as me defending billionaire owners.
Just remember we, as taxpayers, are paying those furloughed staff wages with your taxes and that pot is ever increasing. We will be paying that national debt back for years.
I'm hardly bending over backwards to defend billionaires merely explaining billionaire will lose out as well. Should they do more? They certainly should but most billionaires are rich for a reason. They are selfish cnuts who only care about themselves.
It’s not really. People are complaining they have more than they need. They’re the wrong target.
Completely agree. Imagine the shame of having to see these colleagues after this is all over. I’d feel embarrassed and ashamed.
https://www.football365.com/news/feature-premier-league-player-wage-cut-matt-hancock
I can't say any better myself.
I can't say any better myself.
Nice to see United setting an example and the players have decided to donate 30% of their wages to the nhs.
Is that supposed to be real? Kind of a weird read that.
If it is, my money is on Troy Deeney.
Actually, Milner would make a lot of sense given the information in the article. I just cannot imagine him talking like that.
Last edited:
Troy Deeney earns more than 50k a week.
We have some good souls of a team.
Change for Liverpool:
Paying staff for postponed games and will pay them again if the games are played at a later date.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
So they'll be paying 20%, taxpayer the 80%.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
You'll never walk alone...
...unless you're of no use to us, then you can feck off.
...unless you're of no use to us, then you can feck off.
Pretty gross. Chelsea may end up doing it as well and that will also be gross.
Heh. Liverpool being Liverpool.
Any idea how much this will save Liverpool per month? It can't be millions, can it?
Disgusting.
Would love to see how anyone can defend this, especially if they go and spend millions in the summer transfer market.
Would love to see how anyone can defend this, especially if they go and spend millions in the summer transfer market.
United have a total full-time staff of almost 1000. If you assume Liverpool have 500 non-playing staff, with the goverment paying £2,500 per month (the maximum contribution), that would save the club £1.25m per month. There is also the National Insurance element which might add a little bit more on top.
Who on earth thought this was an appropriate move ? It's beyond comprehension.
Last edited:
Cheers for the answer.
Let's call it £1.5 million a month. We're talking about 1 month at the moment, maybe 2, maybe 3. That's £4.5 million. Liverpool made a profit of over £40 million just last year. They can feck right off going to the taxpayer for help at the moment, there's businesses going under left and right and Liverpool are in no danger of that.
And when/if Chelsea do it, they can feck off as well.
Even if they earn twice that, it's feck all really. They got £18m for selling Danny Ings.
Nice to see sky sports spinning it's as a good deed.
Sorry @FootyGirl88 didn't mean to quote you, sky have changed the wording on their article now from the breaking news story they had before.
Absolute gross decision by the club.
There's not a thing on the planet American billionaires won't exploit for their own bottom line. Scumbags.
There's not a thing on the planet American billionaires won't exploit for their own bottom line. Scumbags.
Embarrassing.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I didn't know this. That makes me proud. Must go look for that article.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date