I feel the same but just because it's hard to feel the passion with football like I used to. It's just a business these days. The soul has gone out of it.I don’t feel proud or what the club decided to do either.
I feel the same but just because it's hard to feel the passion with football like I used to. It's just a business these days. The soul has gone out of it.
You’re not the ‘phantom’ are you by any chance? If I asked what your favourite colours are would the answer be blue and yellow?We are still in the early stages in terms of knowing what comes next, if the Premier league season looks set to be voided I fully expect more clubs to take the same action we have. What is the alternative? Sacking non playing stuff? Like it or not clubs rely on income which is not coming in, whilst clubs in the Premier league are extremely wealthy, they have huge outgoings and losing gate receipts, match day merchandise sales, presumably reduction in sponsorship, no prize money, potentially losing TV money, etc for potentially several months is significant in the context of how football is financed. Particularly when taking into account the unwillingness of players (seemingly) to play their part.
For us I am sure the issue is far more acute, losing out on other sporting or other entertainment events which were factored in when building the stadium and taking out loans.
For clarity I am NOT happy with the fact any Premier league clubs have taken this action but I can understand it.
That's true actually - there is a decent connection to the local community via the foundation.I accept that sport is big business, but I agree with you the pendulum may have swung to far now.
we do good things as a club and the foundation does excellent charity work which I’m proud of.
But at the time of greatest need, I think we look like opportunist.
I think the board should consider a reversal, right now we are being aligned with folks like Mike Ashley for crying out loud.
Phantom was purple. Or were you taking the piss lol.You’re not the ‘phantom’ are you by any chance? If I asked what your favourite colours are would the answer be blue and yellow?
We are still in the early stages in terms of knowing what comes next, if the Premier league season looks set to be voided I fully expect more clubs to take the same action we have. What is the alternative? Sacking non playing stuff? Like it or not clubs rely on income which is not coming in, whilst clubs in the Premier league are extremely wealthy, they have huge outgoings and losing gate receipts, match day merchandise sales, presumably reduction in sponsorship, no prize money, potentially losing TV money, etc for potentially several months is significant in the context of how football is financed. Particularly when taking into account the unwillingness of players (seemingly) to play their part.
For us I am sure the issue is far more acute, losing out on other sporting or other entertainment events which were factored in when building the stadium and taking out loans.
For clarity I am NOT happy with the fact any Premier league clubs have taken this action but I can understand it.
You’re not the ‘phantom’ are you by any chance? If I asked what your favourite colours are would the answer be blue and yellow?
What was the alternative? call in the players and ask them to consider a reduction pro rato for a few weeks, everyone tightens their belts, send a message to the season ticket holder/fans asking them to forgo their refunds should the matches not be played.
But this would have required unilateral action between the club and players and the many agents involved, what about the players on loan? What would happen if Spurs agreed a 40% cut but Liverpool agree 20% cuts? Do clubs appear to be good/bad in the eyes of prospective players based on what action is taken? If the odd player refuses to comply and it results in legal action for breach of contract? It all becomes very messy and possibly costly. If a single player in the changing room refuses and sours the relationship with the club and other players then what?
Whilst I agree in a perfect world the club should have tried that approach, there has obviously been discussion between the PFA and relevant bodies and these seem to be ongoing. It was reasonable to let them negotiations take its course? If the PFA agree an approach it becomes hopefully more straightforward (although not sure as this is unprecedented).
I agree entirely about the poor optics and said as such in another thread.
The players bring the money and promote the club The staff manage main and of course do other things.They should put the playing staff on furlough. Each player on £100k a week means employing around 150 people on a average wages. The players can live on the £2500 a month or whatever the max is. No football so you don’t need players. You do need staff to look after the property grounds etc but footballers are superfluous right now
They should put the playing staff on furlough. Each player on £100k a week means employing around 150 people on a average wages. The players can live on the £2500 a month or whatever the max is. No football so you don’t need players. You do need staff to look after the property grounds etc but footballers are superfluous right now