Furlough Leave

I tell you what, if Roger is right with his Nov 21date, best get the pitch sorted now, give it time to bed in etc.

 

Bradford City owner can afford to pay his staff in full. Most football owners can pay their staff but then want to hide by a situation.

Spurs and Newcastle are a disgrace.

However, let's not aim it solely at players. The owners have do more and don't do enough. Leeds owners are a disgrace also.

However, clubs will take what's entitled to them and you can blame some of them for doing it.

 

What are you actually getting at?

Bradford City ARE continuing to pay full wages above and beyond the amount eligible under the government's scheme.

That is entirely commendable considering the club is not a profitable business.

We're not talking about a Premier League side that makes money season after season, are we?

 

EFL clubs are owned buy extremely rich people.

I suppose what I am getting at is that footballers are in the front line but owners of clubs can do more in situations like we are in.

Why can't Leeds owners, Rupp and many more put money in for the NHS etc?

 

Well Stefan Rupp is German, so there's every chance he'll donate to his own national health service without us ever knowing!

 

And that would be good.

Just think you shouldn't force people in situations like this.

The government just need to get results and get on top of all this so we can all get back to normality of some kind.

 

That can't happen until we have a vaccine, until then this horrible disease can reap havoc around the world again and people will be forever aware of that.

 

Unfortunately mate you're correct.

 

What?? Where do you get the content of your first paragraph from?
In my 7 years on the Board and 4 years since I can count on one hand how many owners of L1 & L2 clubs fall in that category and I suspect only half those in the Championship.

 

Once, twice, three times a lady

 

What are we saying our owner is short of a penny or two? This isn't 1940's when the local corner shop man can own a football club. A lot of the owners are millionaires (cash/assets or both)or wealthy people.

Owners disappear in situations like this and I feel for players at all levels but the PFA did hang them out to dry a little but Hancock shouldn't have said what he did.

Footballers do a lot for the clubs and help out in different ways.

 

Unless I missed something, didn't Hancock suggest that as a way of retaining jobs and avoiding staff being furloughed?

Heck, didn't Harry Redknapp make the same suggestion?

Haven't several individuals already done it?

Hancock has only outlined an idea that is both popular and worthwhile with a good outcome.

You can continue to say all owners should pay all staff, but when businesses have been offered the chance to furlough staff, that's what most will do - rightly so - but the reason it's morally wrong with Premier League clubs is because they're paying certain footballers incredible amounts of money that could and should be able to be redistributed elsewhere, not just for the good of the staff, not just for the good of the club, but actually for the good of the nation.

Whatever your agenda against club owners, there's is absolutely nothing wrong with the suggestion of PL players taking a pay cut and EVERYTHING wrong with the PFA's approach to the situation and the 'advice' they appear to be giving.

 

No Hancock didn't mate. He was suggesting giving money to the NHS!

Like anyone can do including football owners.

 

I'm not sure that's true at all.

He said they should 'share the burden', and the conversation was around clubs furloughing non-playing staff.

I think it's been misconstrued.

 

Yes mate that's what he said.

Why should PL players pay the wages for their clubs. Man Utd make enough money. He was on about supporting the NHS who he looks after .

You're not fooled by Newcastle and Spurs actions are you? Seriously?

 

I just have no idea why you're arguing what you're arguing.

Many PL players can afford to help out their clubs, and avoid the country paying non-playing staff's wages as a direct result.

These huge earners are doing nothing to earn their huge wages - unlike Boris, unlike Hancock, and unlike anyone else you choose to blame. I think you'll find once the union that is the PFA back down, PL players will gladly take pay cuts - but they can't, because the union is too busy protecting it's own interests.

Smarten up, Fordy, you're being played by Taylor.

 

Taylor is a tool.

PL clubs don't need helping out with wages mate that's the point.

Hancock was on about NHS. Hancock just needs to concentrate on the NHS and making us we can get out of this lockdown ASAP.

 

No, Hancock wasn't talking about the NHS - but his words were fairly well timed, as it's now positioned the PFA and PL players against the NHS, at least according to your narrative - and there's only one winner at this point.

You're right that Taylor has thrown the players under the bus - but you're wrong to try and give Taylor the easy get out that owners up and down the country should ALL fund EVERYTHING.

Stop being a PFA apologist. They're an overly powerful union with nobody's best interests at heart beyond overly powerful players. You have no reason to side with them.

 

He’s not arguing anything. He doesn’t take a position. He just makes noise.

 

You’re right. Hancock made no mention whatsoever of football players giving money to the NHS.