Jump to content
oneBoro Forum
Neverbefore

Non-Boro Football

Recommended Posts

There is a grey area for sure. I don't think the footballers themselves are wrong to come out and say they're an easy target because they can stand to lose a few quid a week. If players drop their wages and the club still claims back for their non-playing staff then it's utterly pointless for them to lose the money. As the PFA has said something along the lines of, the only people it ends up benefiting are those who actually pay these players, saving them a few quid rather than keeping society at large going strongly. It ends up being more of a conservative approach for people who already have bags of money, people and businesses with plenty more than individual players.

What I would like to see however is players taking their pay packet and coming together away from their own clubs and arranging something with the PFA to distribute some well-needed money to clubs who under very few circumstances would be able to afford to do anything but sack or furlough their staff. I know these are hugely unique circumstances that very few can plan for but clubs like ours, run better, could actually afford to pay our non-playing staff their full wages if we were operating on a more financially sound model than we have been. The fact we've jumped into this along with some other clubs of similar or higher standing shows the haphazard financial bullshit football operates within. What is the point of these different financial levels of society if the higher level claims just as much as the lower? How in our right minds can we accept that top-end Premier League clubs who bring in so much income every year are claiming so much of taxpayers money right now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, boroie said:

Read a thing before by the secret footballer going through that conception that players are loaded. He said that the majority of footballers (especially the high earning ones) have most of their money going directly into investments, property, etc and only get a living stipend out of it (apart from house/car purchase), and that if you cut their income then they can be just as broke as others due to money being tied up. Also there was an element of sob story about it when you have a large wage you tend to have large commitments and may lose your toys. 

Imagine complaining that you earned enough to invest into things like property so you can't afford to lose a quid of your huge wages. The poor sods. Must be awful having to downgrade your car or house to a smaller one when something doesn't work out as planned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, its a real sob story. 

But in normal life, imagine if you could live comfortably on 10% of your takehome after buying your house and car. You would only have day to day expenses, holidays, etc. You take the rest of your salary and put it in one of those long term savings accounts (or whatever) that you cannot touch for 2 years. Then your salary is reduced and that 10% is no longer enough to cover your day to day. Regardless of how much actual money that is, when you try to force people to change their living circumstances you will always have push-back. 

Now of course nobody earning decent money should be in that situation. It is recommended to split your savings, some in short term (easily retrieved), some in medium term (normally a wait period to retrieve) and some in long term (not normally retrievable) eg Property and pension. 

On one hand it does highlight that these are just people, like all of us. On the other hand, they are fabulously wealthy and a target for those less well off who are revered when times are good and reviled when times are bad. 

I don't blame the players for earning what they do, you make hay while the sun shines and we would all probably try to earn the same if circumstances were different. The clubs though are a different story and should be looking after the non mega-rich employees. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wherever you stand on it... Footballers do always seem to be fair game when it comes to having a pop at the rich. Is it the working class nature of football? I've always wondered. 

Where are the calls for musicians, actors, or even athletes from other well-paid sports to give up their earnings for the less fortunate? Or the bankers and CEOs who squirrel millions away into offshore accounts, taking from society and never giving back?

At least footballers bring a bit of joy and entertainment to millions of people a couple of times a week. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, SouthernSmoggie said:

Wherever you stand on it... Footballers do always seem to be fair game when it comes to having a pop at the rich. Is it the working class nature of football? I've always wondered. 

Where are the calls for musicians, actors, or even athletes from other well-paid sports to give up their earnings for the less fortunate? Or the bankers and CEOs who squirrel millions away into offshore accounts, taking from society and never giving back?

At least footballers bring a bit of joy and entertainment to millions of people a couple of times a week. 

I don’t think it’s down to the working class nature of football, boxers don’t get the same flack, I think it’s because clubs are very often the heart of a community.

I remember chatting to a woman I met a few years ago who wouldn’t let her kids watch football because footballers were payed an obscene amount of money. I asked her if she allowed her kids to watch Hollywood movies, of course, she said!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Businesses should be means tested much like people are for social welfare. There is no way bajillionaires like Branson should get away with furloughing staff, neither should businesses with 100's of millions of pounds income per year. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading in trouble again. 

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/52184178

Quote

The full figures for the year ending June 2019, published through Companies House, also showed the Royals spent £225 for every £100 of income on player wages as their wage bill increased by £5.4m from the previous financial year.


The latest accounts do not include the high-profile purchases of strikers George Puscas and Lucas Joao in August.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am probably missing an obvious point but how can Reading post losses of £40m and not be in breach of FFP. I thought you needed to be around £39m over a 3 year period? They seem to have breached total in one season? Or does this mean for the next 2 seasons Reading will need to post a profit to bring them below losses of £39m?

Also. They got any decent players we could maybe look at getting off them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TLF10 said:

I am probably missing an obvious point but how can Reading post losses of £40m and not be in breach of FFP. I thought you needed to be around £39m over a 3 year period? They seem to have breached total in one season? Or does this mean for the next 2 seasons Reading will need to post a profit to bring them below losses of £39m?

Also. They got any decent players we could maybe look at getting off them?

Didn't they spend a small fortune in the summer too? Sure they put 10m into that Puskas as well as decent amounts in Boye and Lucas Joao from Sheff wed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TLF10 said:

I am probably missing an obvious point but how can Reading post losses of £40m and not be in breach of FFP. I thought you needed to be around £39m over a 3 year period? They seem to have breached total in one season? Or does this mean for the next 2 seasons Reading will need to post a profit to bring them below losses of £39m?

Also. They got any decent players we could maybe look at getting off them?

I always think that Meite fella looks decent. No idea how much they’d want for him 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have Boro furloughed any of their staff. It is becoming quite a contentious topic, with it being said that clubs that have done so should not be able to bring players in during the transfer window.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Dan1234 said:

Didn't they spend a small fortune in the summer too? Sure they put 10m into that Puskas as well as decent amounts in Boye and Lucas Joao from Sheff wed.

Yep. Article says figures for them two are not included in the losses. figures for them will be in next years accounts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, thatoldchestnut said:

Have Boro furloughed any of their staff. It is becoming quite a contentious topic, with it being said that clubs that have done so should not be able to bring players in during the transfer window.

I think I read they have but we will cover them as well so they get 100% of their wages. I think championship clubs doing it and elite PL teams is a different thing and football league clubs are being less criticised for given the perilous financial position of clubs outside the PL.

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  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.



×
×
  • Create New...