Covid19: The Football Thread

1…78101213…22

Comments

  • KuchinghammerKuchinghammer
    Maddison, Barkley and Arteta.... :yercoat:
  • HammerwombatHammerwombat
    Bremner, Clarke, Lorimer.
  • KuchinghammerKuchinghammer
    ...and Hunter. And all Leeds players.
  • mikemike
    Interesting article in thursdays daily mail about how much premier clubs rely on television income.
    In the figures which are provided by financial analysts vysyble for 2018-19 it shows which clubs rely on television cash the most.It says that bournmouth reliance on money from tv is a whopping 88.2%.We are middle of the table at 66.8%.
    I can't actually show you the link directly from the mail as they wanted to disable my Adblocker so i have copied it from pressreader.

    https://www.pressreader.com/uk/daily-mail/20200409/282926682512457
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    edited April 2020
    I see that a leading sports lawyer has said that out of contract players can walk away from their clubs on 30 June regardless of what FIFA/UEFA say even if the season hasn’t been completed.
  • buffybegoodbuffybegood
    thornburyiron said:

    I see that a leading sports lawyer has said that out of contract players can walk away from their clubs on 30 June regardless of what FIFA/UEFA say even if the season hasn’t been completed.

    I'm sure that may be true, but FIFA/UEFA may be able to make it difficult for them to play anywhere else till the new season begins, so few players will do so imo. The whole issue of transfers and finding time for a transfer window does complicate ending this current season though.
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    Not sure how FIFA/UEFA can do that. If it’s illegal to stop someone leaving when their contract ends how can they legally stop them for signing for someone else. It’s also obviously illegal to enforce a contract extension. The Bosman freedom of contract law ties their hands a bit.
    They’ve got themselves in a mess by desperately trying to ensure they finish the seasons and their competitions without really seemingly grasping the health situation.
  • ASLEFshruggedASLEFshrugged
    The Bosman ruling only applies to EU countries so the UK is now exempt

    Just sayin...
  • LukerzLukerz
    edited April 2020
    West Ham players agree to wage deferral of a % or their salaries, whilst G&S (plus other stakeholders) agree to inject £30m into the club. David Moyes & Karen Brady have also agreed to 30% pay-cuts.

    Whufc.com
  • whupathmanwhupathman
    #respect
  • IronHerbIronHerb
    https://www.whufc.com/news/articles/2020/april/10-april/west-ham-united-statement
  • Dodger58Dodger58
    An interesting spin on the comments regarding end of June contracts expiring - taken from BBC Gossip:

    "Out-of-contract Premier League players are worried about being released before the season, currently suspended due to the coronavirus pandemic, finishes. (Telegraph - subscription required)"

    As always it cuts both ways ...
  • Cuz1Cuz1
    I know it’s only the Sun but I’ve read an article where clubs could be in trouble by putting players on furlough as well as giving them training schedules to do whilst at home there saying they are effectively working
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    edited April 2020
    Players aren't on furlough, are they?

    The furlough thing, and 'employees' not working as a requirement of being classified as that, is only for employers participating in the official govt furlough scheme (and taking money from it). I think.

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2020/apr/09/furlough-volunteer-work-pay-coronavirus

    And in any case, the govt regulations (according to that article) allow 'training'.

    And... you know. The Sun.
  • Cuz1Cuz1
    Sunderland and Burton Albion are two teams I believe that are placed on furlough
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    edited April 2020
    Ah, didn't know that. I've just had a look and in fact several lower league clubs are using the scheme (Crewe, Coventry and so on). :ok:

    The scheme seems to say that the club can't employer can't require furloughed staff to do any activities that make money for the employer.

    It's a good example of why hastily drafted and rushed-through legislation should be avoided where possible. I expect if the govt tries to challenge the clubs, the lawyers will get plenty of work out of it!
  • Cuz1Cuz1
    :ok:
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    edited April 2020
    I seldom agree with this bloke, and it smacks a little bit of 'whataboutery', but thought in this article he highlights some of the hypocrisy, or maybe opportunism, underpinning the criticisms of one particular sector (football).


    https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2020/apr/11/julian-knight-rishi-sunak-furlough-furore-premier-league-ignores-aim-protect-jobs
  • SuzanneClaretSuzanneClaret
    Footballers are an easy target... visible and visibly paid huge amounts of money.

    When the health secretary said what he did I was surprised he was not struck by lightning.

    Political party donors, owners of multimillion pound corporations, politicians themselves are not expecting to take a 30% pay cut to fund the NHS. Something the government failed to do properly for a decade.
  • buffybegoodbuffybegood
    SuzanneClaret said:


    Political party donors, owners of multimillion pound corporations, politicians themselves are not expecting to take a 30% pay cut to fund the NHS. Something the government failed to do properly for a decade.

    I'm not sure it's fair to compare politicians, who admittedly earn what most of us would call a very decent salary, to Premier League footballers, many of whom earn more in a week than a politician earns in a year.

    Footballers are an easy target, mainly because the majority playing in the Premier League earn obscene amounts of money; the issue has been brought into focus because some of the clubs paying those obscene salaries are at the same time effectively pleading poverty and effectively making the government (ie you and me) pay the wages of other members of staff. If the footballers reduced their wage demands for the time being, the clubs would more readily be able to pay all the wages of the non-playing members of staff without having to furlough them.
  • buffybegoodbuffybegood
    edited April 2020
    The transfer of players whose contracts expire this summer in Rugby Union is already being highlighted

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/52257511
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    Experts suggesting that football may have to wait until a vaccine is readily available before clubs can play in full stadia. Given that, especially in the top leagues, most of the attendance are season ticket holders that will present huge problems for clubs to sort.
  • ASLEFshruggedASLEFshrugged
    Ticket sales aren't as important as TV revenue, a BBC report found that 11 Premier League clubs would have made a profit in 2016-17 if they'd played to empty stadiums.

    The Premier League meets again on Friday, the Mirror is reporting that 9 clubs want the season to end by 30 June no matter what although no mention which clubs are supporting the proposal.

    Liverpool must obviously be keen to finish the season, Leicester and Sheffield Utd must be pretty happy with their positions as they are right now.

    Bournemouth, Villa and Norwich would be happy to see the season scrapped while, Watford, Brighton and West Ham would vote for anything other than playing more games.
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    Aslef I can’t see clubs or the authorities happy to play in empty stadiums for 12-18 months or so or until a vaccine is available As for making profits that way I’m pretty sure the idea of watching games on tv with no atmosphere for months on end would soon get boring for most fans and they’ll turn off.
    As for how this season ends I saw today that if the remaining games are not played but points are awarded based on average points per game so far we’d be safe and the current bottom three would go down. However if the points are averaged separately on a home and away basis we’d go down so I think an end as is or null and void scenario would suit me fine.
  • buffybegoodbuffybegood
    edited April 2020
    The most popular choice (39%) among those who voted was to null and void the season, lots of scouse haters methinks :lol: .
  • YeoldhammerYeoldhammer
    I literally forgot David Moyes was our manager until i saw a picture of him on the West Ham Facebook page.... depressing still.
  • OutcastLondonerOutcastLondoner
    buffybegood said:

    The most popular choice (39%) among those who voted was to null and void the season, lots of scouse haters methinks :lol: .

    It’s the only option with any value - it would be very funny.
  • ASLEFshruggedASLEFshrugged
    edited April 2020
    thornburyiron said:

    Aslef I can’t see clubs or the authorities happy to play in empty stadiums for 12-18 months or so or until a vaccine is available As for making profits that way I’m pretty sure the idea of watching games on tv with no atmosphere for months on end would soon get boring for most fans and they’ll turn off.

    As long as Sky, etc. are paying billions of TV money I doubt if the clubs care whether they play in empty stadiums or not.

    I also doubt if TV viewers watch football for the "atmosphere" - if that were the case no one would watch live games from the London Stadium...

    While FIFA have said that contracts can be extended beyond 30 June the Premier League clubs think this might not be possible under English law.
  • mikemike
    Apparently to finish the rest of the season and to stop the spread of the coronavirus the EPL are trialling this :lol:
    :
  • BubblesNeverDiesBubblesNeverDies
    edited April 2020
    Not wishing to brag, but has anyone noticed what my pic is.
    ;)

    I must be cyclops, I mean sidekick, I mean psychic. :biggrin:

    Definitely ahead of the curve.
Sign In or Register to comment.