Random irritations of the day......

Neilds

Assistant Pro
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
891
Location
Wiltshire
My main issue is with the fact that we (taxpayers) are helping clubs pay the wages of furloughed staff, when they could actually cut the wages of the higher paid players and more than afford to pay the wages themselves. Remember, we are all going to be paying for this for years to come
 

bobmac

Major Champion
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
23,347
Location
Lincolnshire
There are 20 premier league teams.
11 players per team plus a few reserves so say 15
£1,500,000 per team
Total PL wage bill £30,000,000 PER WEEK for doing nothing.
 

pendodave

Tour Rookie
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
2,431
My main issue is with the fact that we (taxpayers) are helping clubs pay the wages of furloughed staff, when they could actually cut the wages of the higher paid players and more than afford to pay the wages themselves. Remember, we are all going to be paying for this for years to come
That applies to pretty much every company in the UK who are furloughing staff. Many will have wealthy owners or higher paid staff still in employment. Many will have shareholders to whom they have paid millions of pounds over the years, others will be owned by private equity companies who do all sorts of financial jiggerypokery to extract cash but pay no tax.
Go after that lot, and then I'm fine with footballers getting a bit of stick.
 

Wolf

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
5,682
Location
Lincolnshire
There are 20 premier league teams.
11 players per team plus a few reserves so say 15
£1,500,000 per team
Total PL wage bill £30,000,000 PER WEEK for doing nothing.
Maybe we need to broaden the spectrum and instead of moaning just about premier league footballers we should make the multimillionaire golfer's contribute.
 

Orikoru

Tour Winner
Joined
Nov 1, 2016
Messages
12,925
Location
Watford
Maybe we need to broaden the spectrum and instead of moaning just about premier league footballers we should make the multimillionaire golfer's contribute.
But do they earn a wage? From sponsorship and that I suppose they do, but they have lost tournament earnings obviously. Not saying they're destitute at all, but a bit different to footballers who are making exactly as much as they always do.
 

Lord Tyrion

Money List Winner
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
17,049
Location
Northumberland
But what happens if the season doesn’t finish?
Can’t see Sky & sponsors paying then the full wack.
That is why I believe the season will finish whatever. Whether it re-starts in August or earlier and they play the rest of the season behind closed doors for tv only. There is too much money to lose for clubs not to complete the season.
 

Lord Tyrion

Money List Winner
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
17,049
Location
Northumberland
Maybe we need to broaden the spectrum and instead of moaning just about premier league footballers we should make the multimillionaire golfer's contribute.
Do we have any that live here still? They tend to live in Florida, climate, less travelling as they play most of their tournaments in the US and it is 10% tax there.

Pedantry aside, I get your point :D. Fingers are pointed at footballers but they could be pointed across a spectrum of society. Footballers are an easy target, although the point being made is still valid.
 

Wolf

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
5,682
Location
Lincolnshire
But do they earn a wage? From sponsorship and that I suppose they do, but they have lost tournament earnings obviously. Not saying they're destitute at all, but a bit different to footballers who are making exactly as much as they always do.
My point is its easy to target footballers earning millions but people soon forget other sports where they earn vast sums and want to purely pin it on the Premier League players. Of course they should do more if they can but should they be obligated to just because they do something that pays them so well no they shouldn't. They're the employee of the club yes a well paid one but still the employee. The responsibility of paying the other staff isn't that of the players it's the clubs responsibility to ensure all its workers are paid not the the other way round.

But its easier to dig out those with the money they earn than focus on the people paying them.
 

MetalMickie

Tour Winner
Joined
Oct 1, 2013
Messages
5,616
Location
Four miles too far!
I have a bigger issue with billionaire owners than the footballers. Levi is worth nearly 6bn. Surely he can afford to pay his tee ladies, rather can get the government to pay 80%? Ashley is worth nearly 3bn too.

The owner of Norwich 'only' has 30m. They are different fish, rich, but not super rich.
I think you might mean Mr Louis who owns Spurs.

Don't think Daniel Levy is in the billionaire category. He could, however, well afford to be taking a cut in his earnings from Spurs.
 

woofers

Medal Winner
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
464
I guess the reason we are focusing on PL footballers is because it is the biggest gross revenue generating team sport in the country. Silly amounts are paid for sponsorship, wages and TV rights.
Also because the football clubs employ many other people in support functions.
I think the feeling is that it wouldn’t really hurt the players to take a temporary pay cut, of a considerable magnitude, the saving which could be used to pay the support staff. That way, no one, employee or club, has to go through the red tape of furloughing and claiming the support money.
I don’t think other top ‘celebrities’ (or golfers) have the same support staff / functions that are being laid off, so it’s not directly comparable.
 

bluewolf

Money List Winner
Joined
Nov 30, 2010
Messages
9,479
Location
St. Andish
Rather than take a pay cut (and therefore pay less tax on their earnings), would it not be better to offer to pay the support staff wages? I'm no expert on tax matters so I'm sure someone can do the maths.
 

pauldj42

Money List Winner
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
14,893
Location
Seaham
I guess the reason we are focusing on PL footballers is because it is the biggest gross revenue generating team sport in the country. Silly amounts are paid for sponsorship, wages and TV rights.
Also because the football clubs employ many other people in support functions.
I think the feeling is that it wouldn’t really hurt the players to take a temporary pay cut, of a considerable magnitude, the saving which could be used to pay the support staff. That way, no one, employee or club, has to go through the red tape of furloughing and claiming the support money.
I don’t think other top ‘celebrities’ (or golfers) have the same support staff / functions that are being laid off, so it’s not directly comparable.
Surely it’s down to the owners, ie the Employer, to sort out wages, the Footballers and the support staff are all Employees.

Should all employees everywhere look to help the fellow employed or should we be making the Employer take responsibility.

As others have said what about the Hedge Fund Managers or the Bank Managers etc.

For example: Marcus Rashford has paid for over 400,000 people in Manchester to be fed in the last 2 weeks. Plenty are getting involved without media attention.
 

Wolf

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
5,682
Location
Lincolnshire
Surely it’s down to the owners, ie the Employer, to sort out wages, the Footballers and the support staff are all Employees.

Should all employees everywhere look to help the fellow employed or should we be making the Employer take responsibility.

As others have said what about the Hedge Fund Managers or the Bank Managers etc.

For example: Marcus Rashford has paid for over 400,000 people in Manchester to be fed in the last 2 weeks. Plenty are getting involved without media attention.
How very dare you talk sense, you know that's not allowed 😂
 
Top