League Suspended.

[Trav Le Bleu]

1 hour ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Burnley assistant manager, one of the six 

Sean Dyche has a suspiciously rough voice.

[Ric Flair]

2 hours ago, Foxin_Mad said:

No it's not fair.

 

I have to begin to open up my business again next week, I have no choice else I am bankrupt. I have given folk the choice to return or remain on furlough. Come October I may have to let people go if they can not return. I can not subsidise people sadly without government support. But to be honest even the government support we are going to pay for at some point.

 

The same should apply to any job, football included.

Not so sure furloughing would be the applicable choice for players with concerns about returning to play? I had this argument with my missus earlier who believes it would be extortion to take the stance that if players refuse to return due to health concerns that they are then furloughed. 

 

Has any other industry faced these issues, how have they handled it? 

[st albans fox]

1 minute ago, Ric Flair said:

Not so sure furloughing would be the applicable choice for players with concerns about returning to play? I had this argument with my missus earlier who believes it would be extortion to take the stance that if players refuse to return due to health concerns that they are then furloughed. 

 

Has any other industry faced these issues, how have they handled it? 

I guess if film companies want to start production again and actors refuse to play ball, despite having contractual obligations.......

[Corky]

6 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Not so sure furloughing would be the applicable choice for players with concerns about returning to play? I had this argument with my missus earlier who believes it would be extortion to take the stance that if players refuse to return due to health concerns that they are then furloughed. 

 

Has any other industry faced these issues, how have they handled it? 

Can clubs realistically keep on paying full wages if players aren't available, though? Furloughing might be a bit far but can you expect players who choose to play and those who choose not to receive the same salary? Clubs and the authorities will give them the best care possible I'd imagine, if players then aren't convinced I don't know what more can be done.

 

This is a very difficult situation, and tough (possibly unpopular) decisions will have to be made on both sides. I think the issue comes from not knowing when it will be safer to play than it should be when it resumes so we could be looking at a long wait for the game to return which will bring financial problems.

 

[Steve_Walsh5]

How can football clubs generate any income without playing football matches. It could be over a year yet until we get a vaccine surely they can’t expect to sit at home for 12 months on full pay from a football club that isn’t getting any money in. 

[Hales]

3 watford players tested positive plus burnley assistant manager.

[Super_horns]

11 minutes ago, Hales said:

3 watford players tested positive plus burnley assistant manager.

According to this 

 

2 staff and one player.

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/David_Ornstein/status/1262848345967661057

 

Don't know who but will probably come out.

 

Have got a few youngsters from across the globe and here who maybe haven't done what they ought to have been.

 

2 staff - well we have a few Italians who might have popped over to Northern Italy !

 

Surely not Deeney ..

[brucey]

18 minutes ago, Hales said:

3 watford players tested positive plus burnley assistant manager.

1 watford player, 2 watford staff, 1 burnley staff, 2 unknown

 

So between 1-3 players tested positive out of 500 or so players. That’s not too bad

 

Edited 19 May 2020 by brucey

[ScouseFox]

1 hour ago, Ric Flair said:

Not so sure furloughing would be the applicable choice for players with concerns about returning to play? I had this argument with my missus earlier who believes it would be extortion to take the stance that if players refuse to return due to health concerns that they are then furloughed. 

 

Has any other industry faced these issues, how have they handled it? 

surely there is something in a contract about refusing to play. 

 

players have obviously refused to play before. did we pay mahrez when he didn’t play for two weeks cos he was in an airport? i have no idea but i assume most cases where players haven’t shown up etc. mean they get fined? but still paid? 

[Foxin_Mad]

58 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Not so sure furloughing would be the applicable choice for players with concerns about returning to play? I had this argument with my missus earlier who believes it would be extortion to take the stance that if players refuse to return due to health concerns that they are then furloughed. 

 

Has any other industry faced these issues, how have they handled it? 

I dont know it's a tough choice for each business.

 

I know it's on a much smaller scale but for me the choice is simple. I will furlough workers who dont want to return now as long as the scheme runs. The staff can not be replaced while on furlough. If they choose not to return in the winter when the situation will be worse and more dangerous with seasonal viruses thrown into the mix, then I will have to make them redundant or the whole business folds and everyone loses their jobs and receives statutory redundancy which I think is capped at £400ish a week.

 

I cant see how a club can pay millions of pounds a week if noone is playing for more than a few months. If most players go back then they maybe able to carry a few players but that is up to individual clubs to decide if its viable.

 

The players likely wont have a football industry left otherwise that's a lot of jobs gone in the media, tv, clubs etc. That's the reality. 

 

Just think of Leicesters weekly wage bill probably millions. How is that sustainable with major out bankrollingby the owners? The club have next to no income at present, in reality every football club in England is insolvent, every revenue stream except a small amount of merchandise has dried up. The TV companies wont pay whilst games aren't happening, not forgetting even Sky will lose money as noone will be subscribing to Sky Sports at present.

[FoyleFox]

4 hours ago, TiffToff88 said:

Wouldn't surprise me if we're one of the affected clubs. Hasn't Fuchs spent the majority of the last 2 months in New York? The most infected city in the most infected country in the world. 

From all of his social media posts he lives miles out of NYC in the sticks somewhere. Obviously had to go to the City and to fly home. But then anyone who's been to the shop could've contracted it. 

 

Presumably all of these people were asymptomatic, which goes to show how many more people have it than the numbers are, which is scary.  We're ask going to have to go back to work sometime soon, if your not already and most of us aren't going to be tested. 

Edited 19 May 2020 by FoyleFox

[jammie82uk]

1 hour ago, brucey said:

1 watford player, 2 watford staff, 1 burnley staff, 2 unknown

 

So between 1-3 players tested positive out of 500 or so players. That’s not too bad

 

So the 2 unknown are from the same club.

also seen that only 19 clubs had tests done, the 20th club was having there tests done today so could have more results available in a few days 

[SemperEadem]

11 hours ago, nnickn said:

Depends where he stayed in New York, many boroughs escaped unscathed, or had very small rates.

He lives way out in the sticks. In New York state not City.

[CosbehFox]

7 hours ago, jammie82uk said:

So the 2 unknown are from the same club.

also seen that only 19 clubs had tests done, the 20th club was having there tests done today so could have more results available in a few days 

Norwich are the 20th club 

[stripeyfox]

8 hours ago, Foxin_Mad said:

I dont know it's a tough choice for each business.

 

I know it's on a much smaller scale but for me the choice is simple. I will furlough workers who dont want to return now as long as the scheme runs. The staff can not be replaced while on furlough. If they choose not to return in the winter when the situation will be worse and more dangerous with seasonal viruses thrown into the mix, then I will have to make them redundant or the whole business folds and everyone loses their jobs and receives statutory redundancy which I think is capped at £400ish a week.

 

I cant see how a club can pay millions of pounds a week if noone is playing for more than a few months. If most players go back then they maybe able to carry a few players but that is up to individual clubs to decide if its viable.

 

The players likely wont have a football industry left otherwise that's a lot of jobs gone in the media, tv, clubs etc. That's the reality. 

 

Just think of Leicesters weekly wage bill probably millions. How is that sustainable with major out bankrollingby the owners? The club have next to no income at present, in reality every football club in England is insolvent, every revenue stream except a small amount of merchandise has dried up. The TV companies wont pay whilst games aren't happening, not forgetting even Sky will lose money as noone will be subscribing to Sky Sports at present.

The whole thing is a house or cards really which could collapse at any time. Take a club like Leicester - assuming no "proper" football next season it's going to take the owner to prop it up to the tune of £150m - some owners might be willing and able to do that, but a lot won't. You have the strange relationship between the PL clubs and Sky - they rely on each other to a certain extent and so it doesn't make sense for one party to damage the other too much so they're going to have to work together.

 

I can't see "average" PL players walking away with £150,000 a week contracts for some time though....

 

[Foxin_Mad]

1 hour ago, stripeyfox said:

The whole thing is a house or cards really which could collapse at any time. Take a club like Leicester - assuming no "proper" football next season it's going to take the owner to prop it up to the tune of £150m - some owners might be willing and able to do that, but a lot won't. You have the strange relationship between the PL clubs and Sky - they rely on each other to a certain extent and so it doesn't make sense for one party to damage the other too much so they're going to have to work together.

 

I can't see "average" PL players walking away with £150,000 a week contracts for some time though....

 

I suppose the issue for Sky is I imagine their revenue from Sky Sports has dried up whilst there are no sports. So as much as they may want to prop up the Premier League for their benefit, can they? I suppose they can jack up the prices of all the Sky customers to bail it out, although i suspect most will not tolerate this when they are losing jobs etc. 

 

Strange times but unless we sort this out we will lose some historic clubs, perhaps some surprising ones too. 

[fox in the sox]

All this early testing is good and should lessen the chances of somebody positive playing in a match - but it could still happen and what will happen then?

[Super_horns]

23 minutes ago, Foxin_Mad said:

I suppose the issue for Sky is I imagine their revenue from Sky Sports has dried up whilst there are no sports. So as much as they may want to prop up the Premier League for their benefit, can they? I suppose they can jack up the prices of all the Sky customers to bail it out, although i suspect most will not tolerate this when they are losing jobs etc. 

 

Strange times but unless we sort this out we will lose some historic clubs, perhaps some surprising ones too. 

I guess if people are losing money and jobs they won't be worried too much about paying for Sky with others concerns on their mind so Sky probably  wouldn't want the bad PR of increasing their fee - certainly not in the short term.

 

I think players and their agents might be in for a nasty shock ..

 

Less money into their pockets.

 

 

Edited 20 May 2020 by Super_horns

[deep blue]

4 hours ago, fox in the sox said:

All this early testing is good and should lessen the chances of somebody positive playing in a match - but it could still happen and what will happen then?

Like much else in this whole unknown business, all that can be done is to take all steps to minimise risk and deal with each new situation as it occurs.  There are few certainties;  this is all a learning process.

Edited 20 May 2020 by deep blue

[Leicester_Loyal]

Strangely enough some of the Liverpool fans I know are up in arms at the fact schools are going back 'they're risking the lives of our children', but are more than happy for the Prem to resume ASAP.

 

Edited 20 May 2020 by Leicester_Loyal

[Deeg67]

2 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Strangely enough some of the Liverpool fans I know are up in arms at the fact schools are going back 'they're risking the lives of our children', but are more than happy for the Prem to resume ASAP.

 

"False Equivalency" for $1000 please, Alex. 

[Leicester_Loyal]

12 minutes ago, Deeg67 said:

"False Equivalency" for $1000 please, Alex. 

Two groups of people, all coming into contact with each other. Seems 'Truth Equivalency' to me. You're either concerned about Corona or you aren't? One will be gaining vital education for their future which will be needed in life, the other will be kicking around a football.

[Deeg67]

14 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Two groups of people, all coming into contact with each other. Seems 'Truth Equivalency' to me. You're either concerned about Corona or you aren't? One will be gaining vital education for their future which will be needed in life, the other will be kicking around a football.

“You’re either talking about Corona or you aren’t” - seriously?  You make no allowances for different actions having different risk factors?

[Leicester_Loyal]

7 minutes ago, Deeg67 said:

“You’re either talking about Corona or you aren’t” - seriously?  You make no allowances for different actions having different risk factors?

That wasn't my actual quote.

 

I mean the evidence at the moment (from what we've gathered) seems to point to children not being affected by this virus. Additionally education is vital, whereas playing football isn't IMO.

 

But I think it won't be long till we're back to normal, as we should be.

Edited 20 May 2020 by Leicester_Loyal

[Trav Le Bleu]

18 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

Not so sure furloughing would be the applicable choice for players with concerns about returning to play? I had this argument with my missus earlier who believes it would be extortion to take the stance that if players refuse to return due to health concerns that they are then furloughed. 

 

Has any other industry faced these issues, how have they handled it? 

We're just expected to work.

 

If I rang in and said I was concerned it wasn't safe, I'd have no job.

 

Simple.