Plenty of over 70's have no interest in seeing City or any team play or to watch on screens whilst isolation continues. If people are put at risk or resources diverted then football must be a low priority.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Coronavirus: Football Discussion Thread
- Thread starter berryblue
- Start date
Plenty of over 70's have no interest in seeing City or any team play or to watch on screens whilst isolation continues. If people are put at risk or resources diverted then football must be a low priority.
Tim of the Oak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2012
- Messages
- 18,127
I don't get this greedy thing. I had a look online and from what I could make out, last season all premier league clubs made just over £400 million between them. More than half of that was split between Arsenal and Liverpool. Now i don't know about this, put I would presume that 400 million was pre tax.
Now to put that into context, McDonalds made £337 million profit after tax, last year in the UK. No one is calling McDonalds greedy bastards. They will be open soon and everyone will flock back to them, even if it is just take aways and drive thru. Last year BnQ's and screwfixes, 6 monthly pre tax profits dropped to £255. Thats is more than double what any premier league made.
Now I don't want to see football back till it is safe. If that means next year, then so be it. But as far as the actual football clubs are concerned, I don't think they can be accused of being greedy. For a lot of them this pandemic is going to leave them very close to the bone in regards to staying afloat.
The media, the broadcasters and football authorities (FA,Premier League, PFA) are the ones who deserve all the ire. The football clubs themselves are just doing what every single sensible business in the country should be doing at the minute and thats looking to survive.
People talk about football clubs and riches. When you look at the figures in comparison to real businesses, the turn overs are negligible and the profit margins are pretty small. Yet everyone loves to give clubs and players shit all the time.
My reference to greed was mainly about the Premier League.
I think profit as an indicator of greed is too simplistic. As soon as player’s agent hears that a club is making a surplus, they are likely to be in touch asking the club to increase “their” players’ wages. Hence profits are restricted.
I do find it a bit disappointing that City players wouldn’t defer part of their wages. Thief are working their rights but this adds to the pressure on clubs to restart the season.
Tim of the Oak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2012
- Messages
- 18,127
No that was Paul McCarthy - former boss at News of The World.
Thanks for that info Tolmie. Yes, I now remember Paul being on Talkshite when he commenced his PR work for Carlos.
tolmie's hairdoo
Well-Known Member
Thanks for that info Tolmie. Yes, I now remember Paul being on Talkshite when he commenced his PR work for Carlos.
No probs - he had a link through Kia Joorabachian. Previously, former NOTW editor Phil Hall had Tevez.
Paul also looked after PR for Lescott.
Tim of the Oak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2012
- Messages
- 18,127
Plenty of over 70's have no interest in seeing City or any team play or to watch on screens whilst isolation continues. If people are put at risk or resources diverted then football must be a low priority.
I was taking about people who are forced to isolate and Indidn’t claim it was all over 70s wishing to watch / hear City. The Prem / Clubs will either pay directly for the resources used or have already done so through general taxation. Yes some resources may be scarce but we’ve seen the Government send out a test kit to anyone on the Conservative Party mailing list who wanted one, so 4,000 tests aren’t going to change the world and we already have a testing centre at the Etihad.
All the talk about sport returning to boost morale is mis-direction at best.
It is all about money with the betting industry leading the charge. What is horse racing about if not gambling? How much gambling is football related? Look at the amount of sponsorship of football and which level of clubs benefit and how much the exchequer receives in betting tax?
Little thought for the plight of many businesses that will go bust, including football clubs, so why make the Premier League an exceptional priority? It stinks.
It is all about money with the betting industry leading the charge. What is horse racing about if not gambling? How much gambling is football related? Look at the amount of sponsorship of football and which level of clubs benefit and how much the exchequer receives in betting tax?
Little thought for the plight of many businesses that will go bust, including football clubs, so why make the Premier League an exceptional priority? It stinks.
Franny's toilet roll
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Dec 2013
- Messages
- 1,580
Yes, you can put a nought on the end of their quotes number. I had my tongue firmly in cheekPlease don’t believe the 4500 mate, it’s bollocks
I was taking about people who are forced to isolate and Indidn’t claim it was all over 70s wishing to watch / hear City. The Prem / Clubs will either pay directly for the resources used or have already done so through general taxation. Yes some resources may be scarce but we’ve seen the Government send out a test kit to anyone on the Conservative Party mailing list who wanted one, so 4,000 tests aren’t going to change the world and we already have a testing centre at the Etihad.
I differ on most of your points. There is so much misinformation by lobby groups, politicians and MSM that none can be trusted. My view is based on my circumstances and personal experience, you on yours and with your mother. No point in debating further when we are so far apart.
ninjamonkey
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 17,152
And there we have it, temporary rule changes means the legitimacy of the season is completely lost now and therefore no reason to continue it. 5 subs favours the bigger squads massively. You think man united don’t gain an advantage over Sheffield United in the race for the top 4 with the bigger squad? At the bottom a squad like say West Ham gains more from this over say a team like Norwich. It allows for higher intensity games knowing you’ve got more options in reserve and extreme defensive tactics late in to preserve leads, you could conceivably bring on an entire extra back 4 now. Just a few instances from throughout the season off the top of my head, Do you think we could have held on with 10 men against wolves if we had an additional two fresh legs to throw on when we were visibly absolutely fucked physically? Do you think some of those last minute goals Liverpool have got over the season could have been prevented and points dropped if the opposition had been able to bring on an extra defender? There’s endless what if’s now. you can’t change the rules halfway through and still claim its legitimate. I no longer care what they do as the asterisk has been well
And truly stamped on the season.
And truly stamped on the season.
manimanc
Well-Known Member
'Teams allowed five subs per match; VAR can be dropped'
http://www.skysports.com/share/11985236
Well there you go. The amount of damage done by VAR not just to us but a whole host of other clubs and now they aren't going to do it anymore.
Why not?
Please don't tell me it's about social distancing as you can easily spread the four or five nobheads who are at operation Liverpool* win the league headquarters.
As if it didn't stink already.
http://www.skysports.com/share/11985236
Well there you go. The amount of damage done by VAR not just to us but a whole host of other clubs and now they aren't going to do it anymore.
Why not?
Please don't tell me it's about social distancing as you can easily spread the four or five nobheads who are at operation Liverpool* win the league headquarters.
As if it didn't stink already.