Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
StanSP

Premier League - 30% Player Pay Cut & Money to EFL & NHS

Recommended Posts

Find those companies that pay no tax here yet have their businesses here... 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Hales said:

I'm a little dumbfounded? The other day it was wrong that clubs are furloughing staff and players were on full pay. The general consensus was the players should take a cut to ensure the non playing staff were paid. They are now doing that and it's still not good enough? There are 500ish premier league players in this country and 2.5 million millionaires. Its hardly seems fair they should take the full media scrutiny. What about the bankers and financiers that are all sat at home earning ridiculous sums too! 

The problem isn't with the players taking a cut. If they agree to do that, then good on them.

 

The problem is with the money going to the clubs. Because a few clubs have laid off non-playing staff (Spurs for example), not because they can't afford to pay them, but because they'd rather save money and let the Government (well, the taxpayer) pay for them. If the money goes straight to the club, the danger is that all this "pay cut" will do is take money from the rich footballers, and give it to the even richer club owners. If I was a footballer, I'd be quite rightly annoyed about that.

 

That's why it would (in my opinion) be better for the 30% paycut money to go straight to the Government (and for the clubs to top up the remaining 20% of wages), then at least none of the non-playing staff are losing out on wages, and the money from the players would definitetly be going to any furloughed playing staff, albeit in a more indirect fashion - it'd go from the players, to the governments finances, to the non-playing staff. That ensures that it's not just making Daniel Levy even richer.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Premier League players will be asked to take a 30% drop in their wages, via cuts or deferrals or both

mmmmmm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Preston Fox said:

Should me more IMHO and the players shouldn’t have been asked-they should have offered 

Before Jumping to conclusions..

Maybe many players offered,but their clubs asked them to put it on hold,until the PL & clubs had this meeting....

Don t ne Surprised in the following weeks,PL players as Groups and individuals & Club management,will be seen offering more Funds and time,to individual

projects...Some already have but have kept low key.....

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

What about the bankers and financiers that are all sat at home earning ridiculous sums too! 

I don't disagree about some huge sums earned - but they will be working from home. Banks do have a huge job now processing all of the applications for and as part of the government's loan for businesses.

 

If the players agree to this, I hope no PL club furloughs non-playing staff and those that have, reverse their decision

Share this post


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

What about the bankers and financiers that are all sat at home earning ridiculous sums too! 

If this is the only argument against them taking a pay cut we can think of then I think they should do it, and do it now.

Share this post


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

If this is the only argument against them taking a pay cut we can think of then I think they should do it, and do it now.

I dont disagree they should do it and they are, I was merely pointing out that there are a lot of other job sectors including bankers and also entertainers and other sports etc. that also earn vast amounts of money. I just feel a little uncomfortable the pressure is on them alone. I totally agree they should take a cut especially to help non playing staff be paid. I dont think any player should have an issue in doing this to help the people that help them on a daily basis.  I am currently still working as I work in children's healthcare looking after very poorly children so they earn a vast amount more than I do yet I am leaving my family every day to care for other peoples families. Absolutely they should help out when they can, all I'm saying is so should others. Many footballers and their clubs do a lot of good in their communities already and many have stepped up already but kept it low key.  I doubt any have argued about the pay cut. I just dont get why there is so much negativity when it was suggested over the last few days they take a 20% cut, they have actually taken 30% yet there is still negativity!

Edited by Hales
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Crystal Palace winger Andros Townsend had spoken of his frustration with Hancock "deflecting blame on to footballers", stating players were an "easy target" and often supported charities."

 

here's my take. No ones blaming you, you ****ing twat knuckle, but the question of why you should be the only people in the world who cant do your job but still get full pay, is indeed a fair question. Furlough the ****ers to £2.5k per month maximun if we are going down that route.

 

dont agree with health secretary's comments but not as much as i dobt agree with this twat.

 

if he'd have said nothing, there'd be bo problem with him specifically, but the phrase "poor little premier league average player millionaire" is very apt here imo.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Charl91 said:

The problem isn't with the players taking a cut. If they agree to do that, then good on them.

 

The problem is with the money going to the clubs. Because a few clubs have laid off non-playing staff (Spurs for example), not because they can't afford to pay them, but because they'd rather save money and let the Government (well, the taxpayer) pay for them. If the money goes straight to the club, the danger is that all this "pay cut" will do is take money from the rich footballers, and give it to the even richer club owners. If I was a footballer, I'd be quite rightly annoyed about that.

 

That's why it would (in my opinion) be better for the 30% paycut money to go straight to the Government (and for the clubs to top up the remaining 20% of wages), then at least none of the non-playing staff are losing out on wages, and the money from the players would definitetly be going to any furloughed playing staff, albeit in a more indirect fashion - it'd go from the players, to the governments finances, to the non-playing staff. That ensures that it's not just making Daniel Levy even richer.

Daniel Levy knew that furloughing non playing staff would look awful. All to save a million or two.He knew that the clubs name would be tarnished.Costing far more in the long run.You would have thought he’d know that his players were close to agreeing a cut.Yet he still went ahead and did it.If I was a Spurs fan I would be very concerned.Yes they turn a good profit these days.They also have a new stadium to pay for.A squad that desperately needs investment so they can maintain CL football,a multi million pound tie up with the NFL and a huge wage bill.Their major assets Kane and Ali’s value have just dropped.Hows it all looking now?

 

Juventus players are being held up as a great example for how this should be done.Juventus players took a cut because if they hadn’t there might well not be a Juventus still left to actually play for.This is where we are at.A giant of the game out with the begging bowl.Good luck to the Watfords.Bournemouths and even us.

Edited by Heathrow fox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gw_leics772 said:

"Crystal Palace winger Andros Townsend had spoken of his frustration with Hancock "deflecting blame on to footballers", stating players were an "easy target" and often supported charities."

 

here's my take. No ones blaming you, you ****ing twat knuckle, but the question of why you should be the only people in the world who cant do your job but still get full pay, is indeed a fair question. Furlough the ****ers to £2.5k per month maximun if we are going down that route.

 

dont agree with health secretary's comments but not as much as i dobt agree with this twat.

 

if he'd have said nothing, there'd be bo problem with him specifically, but the phrase "poor little premier league average player millionaire" is very apt here imo.

But it is a cheap dig at footballers tho, are MP’s taking a pay cut as a lot of them can’t do their job? 
 

are the people in similar positions to Mike Ashley and Richard Branson taking pay cuts or Even actually doing anything to help out? 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

145 million is on average about 7.25 million per club

How much do the combined 20 clubs save if e.g. wages are cut 30% for 1/4 of the year?

 

So I expect we know where a lot of the money is going, EFL+NHS

Edited by Chrysalis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Premier League players to negotiate proposed wage cuts on club-by-club basis - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52181757

 

Glad the players have seen sense in this and rejected the 30% paycut, saying its going to equate in a £200mil+ loss of tax revenue to the government and they don't know where that money is going to the black hole of the clubs/owners pockets.

 

Several players have already said they'd rather give their post-tax earnings as a donation to the NHS or others instead. Which should have been the right call in the first place.

Edited by Sampson
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a complex situation.

Without player wage cuts some pl clubs could go bust.

With the money from player wage cuts then non playing staff can be kept on pay roll... or money given to lower league clubs. 

Yet why should players finance this if say owners have taken money out?

How can pl clubs chose to divert money to lower league clubs when there is no scheme in place? (And again such Scheme would have to consider the wealth of the lower league clubs, their owners, and  any recent dividends paid to owners.... eg cov city owners always seem to snaffle any transfer income etc).

Imo an independent trust should be established to administer such hardship payments....not the pl

This would then leave clubs and their players to decide how to fund the payroll of the non playing staff and a contribution to the "lower league hardship fund "... the owners would have to be open about their recent divs and the clubs inability to finance these sinks... then the wage sacrifice by the players must be accompanied by a contribution from the owners also... as in the end the owners will still own the club.

Edited by foxinsocks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...