What's new

Premier League officially postponed until 17th of June

Cambridge Spur

Well-Known Member
May 13, 2015
346
1,133
I haven’t got a problem with players not playing due to fears for their health, however if they are unable to do their jobs then they need to be treated like everyone else. They need to take pay cuts in order for their employers to survive and that includes all clubs. It bothers me when larger businesses are criticised for furloughing their staff. Yes Joe Lewis is ‘worth’ billions but he is not Scrooge mcduck with a vault full of cash under his house. The richest people in the world are asset rich and at the moment how much do you think their assets are worth? I don’t want football to come back until it is safe to do so, until then players need to take pay cuts.
 

rightwayup

Well-Known Member
Jan 31, 2011
351
1,232
All over the country, people are having to make decisions regarding health v finances. Why are footballers on their huge salaries any different. NHS workers on the front line must look at football and wonder WTF?! If footballers as a group do not want to play that is fine and is their decision, but do not expect to continue to be paid these extortionate amounts for doing nothing.
 

Yid-ol

Just-outside Edinburgh
Jan 16, 2006
31,097
19,276
All over the country, people are having to make decisions regarding health v finances. Why are footballers on their huge salaries any different. NHS workers on the front line must look at football and wonder WTF?! If footballers as a group do not want to play that is fine and is their decision, but do not expect to continue to be paid these extortionate amounts for doing nothing.

NHS workers are essential to save lives, people working in shops are essential for people to get food and drink ... Tell me what is essential for footballers to be playing?

It's not about the money they earn, it's about the job not being essential or safe to do at social distancing.
 

rightwayup

Well-Known Member
Jan 31, 2011
351
1,232
NHS workers are essential to save lives, people working in shops are essential for people to get food and drink ... Tell me what is essential for footballers to be playing?

It's not about the money they earn, it's about the job not being essential or safe to do at social distancing.
A lot of players seem to have been quite happy not social distancing in the last few months. If the argument is social distancing then you can wave goodbye to next season as well. If the authorities/scientists deem it safe to play and the players refuse to play you can expect the owners of football clubs to change their tune very quickly and start cancelling contracts. Danny Rose might just have added himself to the top of the hitlist.
 

Yid-ol

Just-outside Edinburgh
Jan 16, 2006
31,097
19,276
A lot of players seem to have been quite happy not social distancing in the last few months. If the argument is social distancing then you can wave goodbye to next season as well. If the authorities/scientists deem it safe to play and the players refuse to play you can expect the owners of football clubs to change their tune very quickly and start cancelling contracts. Danny Rose might just have added himself to the top of the hitlist.

A lot? I would guess it's a very low % of players have done this.

You don't have to wave good bye to next season, just start when the players heath and welfare are not in danger. No one knows when that will be yet. Players are still testing positive and are still at risk in a non essential job.

I don't think what Danny rose has said is wrong at all, I would be worried for not only my health but others round me and my family if I was made to go to work when it's not safe to do so yet.
 

wayneg

Well-Known Member
Mar 5, 2020
461
1,952
A lot of players seem to have been quite happy not social distancing in the last few months.

A lot of society hasnt been good at social distancing the last few months, you can't tar everyone with the same brush.

If the argument is social distancing then you can wave goodbye to next season as well.

I think the argument is, players cant even see their own families as in grandparents, brothers, sisters etc. but are expected to go on the pitch and play 11v11 contact sport, not to mention come into contact with club staff, catering staff, referees, media etc.


If the authorities/scientists deem it safe to play and the players refuse to play you can expect the owners of football clubs to change their tune very quickly and start cancelling contracts.

Imagine the public reaction to clubs cancelling contracts for players who have genuine concerns for playing, for players with health implications, for players whose family maybe vunerable, in short I cant see it happening, the legal ramifications would be huge.
 

rightwayup

Well-Known Member
Jan 31, 2011
351
1,232
Imagine the public reaction to clubs cancelling contracts for players who have genuine concerns for playing, for players with health implications, for players whose family maybe vunerable, in short I cant see it happening, the legal ramifications would be huge.
But that's the point for any worker in the UK. If you are vulnerable or shielding you don't work and keep full pay, makes complete sense.
If you look at the stats for death by age group, the risk to players is tiny. They have more chance of writing themselves off driving to the ground.

If there is any argument it should probably come from the support staff who are maybe in a higher risk age group.

However saying all that I have always believed the season should not be completed.
 
Last edited:

Maxtremist

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2014
1,530
3,300
But that's the point for any worker in the UK. If you are vulnerable or shielding you don't work and keep full pay, makes complete sense.
If you look at the stats for death by age group, the risk to players is tiny. They have more chance of writing themselves off driving to the ground.

If there is any argument it should probably come from the support staff who are maybe in a higher risk age group.

However saying all that I have always believed the season should not be completed.

The risk for the players may be 'tiny'... it's still a risk.
I'd like to think they may also be thinking whilst it's not a major risk to them, they still could catch it and spread it and then it's a risk to someone else.

I think when talking about the 'risk' of it, it's important to talk about the difference between the risk of them catching it, the risk of them spreading it to others as well as the risk of them dying from it.

It's then, if you wanna minimise that risk then it's the whole neutral grounds, players effectively staying in their own unique location till the season is finished and over which would take what, a month and a half? Where they'd have to be away from their family etc... for that length of time (which I can only imagine would not be great for their mental health)

So there's a few things to consider/take into account when talking about risk.
 

brasil_spur

SC Supporter
Aug 25, 2006
12,669
16,715
Why do you keep comparing it to other businesses?

Ffs, people down at the local hardware store arn't running around a football pitch tackling the fuck out of each other.

It's in no way a comparable environment.
Have you been to a supermarket recently? I was in my local Tesco yesterday morning and there are multiple shelf-stockers in the same aisle, passing each other and being constantly passed by shoppers within the 2m distance recommendations. None of the staff had any PPE except for gloves. None of them are being tested and quarantined each day and none of them have access to onsite medical professionals.

IF all players are tested before a game to ensure they do not have C-19, then staying in a quarantined environment in the hours between the test and the game, the risk will be very, very low of them catching C-19 during the actual game as there shouldn't be anybody on the pitch that they are in contact with who have the virus.

IMO given the amount of precautions that can be put in place for footballers versus the general lack of precautions being put in place in other professions, I think the risk is similar.
 

worcestersauce

"I'm no optimist I'm just a prisoner of hope
Jan 23, 2006
26,894
45,042
A lot of pomposity in this thread, I don't know of any players that have said they won't play but still demand their money yet people in this thread are talking like that's the norm.
There really is no reason to play these games, nobody needs football especially not in the closed season which is just about where we are now.
 

NickHSpurs

Well-Known Member
Mar 14, 2004
13,626
11,875
They really need to change the narrative and I believe coming to an agreement with broadcasters to sell the behind closed doors packages and send that money all the way down the football leagues would do that.

It would give the players the sense that they're not doing it for "nothing", I know they get paid a shit load of money but that doesn't make them immune to any of the fears me or you have. They'd be helping save many of the football league clubs that are going to be in a desperate state over the next year, some may even fold and I believe it would make them feel a lot better about playing by doing something for the broader good of the game.
 

brasil_spur

SC Supporter
Aug 25, 2006
12,669
16,715
You’re asking players to go way way beyond what most are being asked to do. Nobody else is being asked to make physical contact the way they are. I would guess massage therapists won’t be allowed back until there is a vaccine. What’s the difference? Close physical contact. It’s like some kind of freak show under the current conditions.

This just isn't true.

There is even mention in the government report yesterday about the potential for hairdressers (as an example) to return as early as 4th July. That might be 2 weeks after football. A hairdresser or beauty salon is getting a lot of close physical contact and won't have the testing and quarantine and onsite medical facilities that football has.

From the report:

"The next step will also take place when the assessment of risk warrants further adjustments to the remaining measures. The Government’s current planning assumption is that this step will be no earlier than 4 July, subject to the five tests justifying some or all of the measures below, and further detailed scientific advice, provided closer to the time, on how far we can go.

The ambition at this step is to open at least some of the remaining businesses and premises that have been required to close, including personal care (such as hairdressers and beauty salons) hospitality (such as food service providers, pubs and accommodation), public places (such as places of worship) and leisure facilities (like cinemas)."


Furthermore there is specific mention in the latest government publications that there might never even be a vaccine. So saying that business will be closed until one is found is not a valid point.
 

brasil_spur

SC Supporter
Aug 25, 2006
12,669
16,715
All over the country, people are having to make decisions regarding health v finances. Why are footballers on their huge salaries any different. NHS workers on the front line must look at football and wonder WTF?! If footballers as a group do not want to play that is fine and is their decision, but do not expect to continue to be paid these extortionate amounts for doing nothing.

NHS workers, teachers, delivery drivers, postal workers, supermarket and takeaway restaurant staff, public transport staff, security staff, police, construction workers, tradespeople, manufacturing workers, farmers..... the list goes on and on.

I honestly think that some people in this thread don't understand how the country operates. There are literally millions of British people at work right now, and within the next 6 weeks we could be getting back to near pre-COVID levels of workers according to the latest government publications.
 

thebenjamin

Well-Known Member
Jul 1, 2008
12,164
38,545
? FA say they won’t allow no relegation or no voiding the season. Going to be PPG, the worst result for us?



there won't be any European football next season anyway, so it's more or less irrelevant. the entire thing is just so they don't have to pay back the broadcasting money.
 

wayneg

Well-Known Member
Mar 5, 2020
461
1,952
[
NHS workers, teachers, delivery drivers, postal workers, supermarket and takeaway restaurant staff, public transport staff, security staff, police, construction workers, tradespeople, manufacturing workers, farmers..... the list goes on and on.

I honestly think that some people in this thread don't understand how the country operates. There are literally millions of British people at work right now, and within the next 6 weeks we could be getting back to near pre-COVID levels of workers according to the latest government publications.


Yes all those industries are back and are applying social distancing measures, wether they are adhered to or not is another thing but they are being applied. The issue with football imo is firstly they wont be applying these measures, to do this they need testing which at the moment takes away from key workers/services etc when this government has continually missed its testing target per day, is hard to justify, also the fact as i have said previously if Liverpool win the league or 3 teams avoid relegation this has the potential to lead to massive street parties thus ignoring all government advice and with thousands on the street could easily lead to the R rate going above 1, the issue is bigger than an 11v11 game behind closed doors.
 

Yid-ol

Just-outside Edinburgh
Jan 16, 2006
31,097
19,276
This just isn't true.

There is even mention in the government report yesterday about the potential for hairdressers (as an example) to return as early as 4th July. That might be 2 weeks after football. A hairdresser or beauty salon is getting a lot of close physical contact and won't have the testing and quarantine and onsite medical facilities that football has.

From the report:

"The next step will also take place when the assessment of risk warrants further adjustments to the remaining measures. The Government’s current planning assumption is that this step will be no earlier than 4 July, subject to the five tests justifying some or all of the measures below, and further detailed scientific advice, provided closer to the time, on how far we can go.

The ambition at this step is to open at least some of the remaining businesses and premises that have been required to close, including personal care (such as hairdressers and beauty salons) hospitality (such as food service providers, pubs and accommodation), public places (such as places of worship) and leisure facilities (like cinemas)."


Furthermore there is specific mention in the latest government publications that there might never even be a vaccine. So saying that business will be closed until one is found is not a valid point.

But that's as long as the five tests for easing lockdown are met. This is a month (potentially) after football could return without these checks being looked at? Because it's good for public to have football?! The main bit should be it's save for players not because some people need football in their lives to be happy.

If the five tests for easing lockdown are met and time, then I can't see a problem with them starting! Bit I never see it mentioned.
 

Mr Pink

SC Supporter
Aug 25, 2010
54,776
99,338
Have you been to a supermarket recently? I was in my local Tesco yesterday morning and there are multiple shelf-stockers in the same aisle, passing each other and being constantly passed by shoppers within the 2m distance recommendations. None of the staff had any PPE except for gloves. None of them are being tested and quarantined each day and none of them have access to onsite medical professionals.

IF all players are tested before a game to ensure they do not have C-19, then staying in a quarantined environment in the hours between the test and the game, the risk will be very, very low of them catching C-19 during the actual game as there shouldn't be anybody on the pitch that they are in contact with who have the virus.

IMO given the amount of precautions that can be put in place for footballers versus the general lack of precautions being put in place in other professions, I think the risk is similar.

We've discussed this already but you can't know how effective the testing will be.

It's a contact sport, nobody else in any other working environment has that rate and level of contact.

It's just in no way comparable.
 

vegassd

The ghost of Johnny Cash
Aug 5, 2006
3,356
3,330
There really is no reason to play these games, nobody needs football especially not in the closed season which is just about where we are now.
I kind of agree but at the same time these clubs represent part of our culture, and for many represent their main hobby or source of excitement/love outside of their families. If getting some games going again - with all the relevant safety measures - means that the money can start flowing and we don't lose quite as many clubs up and down the leagues that is surely a good thing.

The reaction to some of the furlough decisions was an example of how football clubs (at least at the top level) get held to a higher moral standard than other businesses. People see them as part of the fabric of our society, and with that in mind I don't think it's out of order to be trying to find a way to keep things afloat.

Saying all that I personally think that the whole thing should be cancelled, but then I'm somebody who could happily live in a world without football. But I know a lot of people don't feel that way, and if we can't even get the PL games going with all the money available there doesn't it spell doom for hundreds of clubs around the country? Those clubs will cease to exist and the game that supports millions of jobs and represents a slice of our national identity will be changed forever.
 
Top