***Official*** English Football Season 2019-20

[sledger]

Ah yes true. Definitely a far less problematic outcome for the PL than just junking the entire season though.

 

[sledger]

Do you own a football jersey made of the finest lace in all the land.

Yes. I pay prostitutes to wear it whilst I regale them with tales of Scarlett.

 

[Uppercut]

This whole PFA row is getting kind of ugly. Hancock singling out footballers as the one high-paid profession to target makes him look like a snob imo. I don’t really get why clubs furloughing staff is controversial either.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Yes. I pay prostitutes to wear it whilst I regale them with tales of Scarlett.

 

[cpr]

This whole PFA row is getting kind of ugly. Hancock singling out footballers as the one high-paid profession to target makes him look like a snob imo. I don’t really get why clubs furloughing staff is controversial either.

It actually makes sense IMO. There are very few companies with turnover figures of football clubs that employ as few staff as clubs do (even Utd only have 1000 employees), so the actual cost of furlough to the Government is far less than other multi-million pound companies.

Coupled with that, I don't think there are many companies with similar turnovers who have seen so much of their income stream prohibited recently. Big retail outlets might lose feet through the door, but customers can still purchase online - Football clubs have no new product to stream, and wont get money for virtual concession sales.... Likewise other massive businesses are either continuing (eg construction) or can turn their hand to essential work to continue revenue (eg industry manufacturing PPE/ventilators/sanitizer).

The only issue for me is if clubs aren't topping up the other 20%, that would be completely taking the piss. However that's not touched on at all in any of the reports.

 

[Uppercut]

Yeah. It’s hard to escape the conclusion that Hancock sees football as a trivial distraction for plebs.

But even more generally, I understood the furlough scheme as a way for companies to stop people coming to work without accruing large costs. Why would you offer that, actively encourage uptake, and then criticise companies for using it? It makes no sense.

 

[sledger]

The 30% wage cut being proposed will also cost the government hundreds of millions of pounds.

 

[sledger]

Ornstein reporting that players are concerned that whatever agreement is reached will be geared towards benefiting owners rather than non-playing staff, and just not willing to dig wealthy owners out of a hole they can dig themselves out of.

 

[sledger]

Yeah. It’s hard to escape the conclusion that Hancock sees football as a trivial distraction for plebs.

But even more generally, I understood the furlough scheme as a way for companies to stop people coming to work without accruing large costs. Why would you offer that, actively encourage uptake, and then criticise companies for using it? It makes no sense.

I expect he sees it as an easy chance to score some political points tbh. The whole "it's a disgrace footballers get paid so much, nurses and soldiers should be on the same wages" narrative is likely to be very prominent in their target audience I should imagine.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Player contracts are the only issue I can really see with that.

Very much so, depending what happens elsewhere in europe it could open up a right can of worms.

 

[vcs]

The owners pocketing the money and putting it some offshore account is even worse. Footballers will be paying around 50% tax.

 

[Furball]

This whole PFA row is getting kind of ugly. Hancock singling out footballers as the one high-paid profession to target makes him look like a snob imo. I don’t really get why clubs furloughing staff is controversial either.

I just don't think it's a good look for clubs in a league which generates billions of pounds in revenue, some owned by owners worth billions of pounds and which pays players several hundreds of thousands of pounds a week to be relying on government support to pay employees earning normal salaries.

From start to finish I think the Premier League (and football in general) has handled this horribly.

 

[D/L]

I see the billionaire owners of Liverpool Association Football Club have made the decision to take the government's (our) money to furlough their less privileged members of staff on 80% of their probably quite low, on average, pay. This is whilst they continue to pay their "stars" hundreds of thousands of pounds a week.

Yet more evidence that, when it comes to venality, few can hold a candle to those who run our top football clubs.

 

[Uppercut]

I just don't think it's a good look for clubs in a league which generates billions of pounds in revenue, some owned by owners worth billions of pounds and which pays players several hundreds of thousands of pounds a week to be relying on government support to pay employees earning normal salaries.

From start to finish I think the Premier League (and football in general) has handled this horribly.

Yeah I mean how distasteful you find it is just a matter of opinion, it'll bother some of us more than others. But the government itself can't criticise businesses for participating in a program it encouraged them to participate in.

 

[sledger]

Well, it's a slightly grey area for mine. It's definitely not really in "the spirit of the policy" imo. But as you allude to, I'm not sure it's the role of the government to give a view on that.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Well, it's a slightly grey area for mine. It's definitely not really in "the spirit of the policy" imo. But as you allude to, I'm not sure it's the role of the government to give a view on that.

why not? football clubs' operating income will be collapsing because the television companies are unlikely to pay out for the cancelled matches and matchday income has flatlined, but they still have to pay wages

 

[Uppercut]

I don't think it's against the spirit of the scheme at all, personally. The policy was sold as unconditional - its accompanying slogan was "whatever it takes". It wasn't sold as a safety net for companies that might struggle to survive otherwise. They could very easily have made it means-tested, like Universal Credit, but they chose to make it open to all, like the NHS.

 

[sledger]

why not? football clubs' operating income will be collapsing because the television companies are unlikely to pay out for the cancelled matches and matchday income has flatlined, but they still have to pay wages

Well, it obviously will differ from club to club, and the difference between clubs like Man Utd and Yeovil will obviously be massive, for instance. But the notion of a club with billionaire owners, for example, dipping into a pool of public funds to subsidise the wages of their non-playing staff (which, for arguments same, say the total value of is about £100k per week) whilst continuing to pay their players out of their own pockets (to a total tune of millions of pounds per week) will not sit well with a lot of people. Similar to millionaires who claim job-seeker's allowance and other unemployment benefits.

 

[sledger]

I don't think it's against the spirit of the scheme at all, personally. The policy was sold as unconditional - its accompanying slogan was "whatever it takes". It wasn't sold as a safety net for companies that might struggle to survive otherwise. They could very easily have made it means-tested, like Universal Credit, but they chose to make it open to all, like the NHS.

Yeah but come on, reading between the lines that's exactly what it is.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Well, it obviously will differ from club to club, and the difference between clubs like Man Utd and Yeovil will obviously be massive, for instance. But the notion of a club with billionaire owners, for example, dipping into a pool of public funds to subsidise the wages of their non-playing staff (which, for arguments same, say the total value of is about £100k per week) whilst continuing to pay their players out of their own pockets (to a total tune of millions of pounds per week) will not sit well with a lot of people. Similar to millionaires who claim job-seeker's allowance and other unemployment benefits.

so it would be better if the players were furloughed too?

plus the fact that the owners are millionaires are a red herring. Virgin trains will be furloughing people by the thousands but it doesn't mean that the money to pay for that should come out of Branson's bank account