What's new

The Athletic

donny1013

Well-Known Member
Nov 4, 2005
5,646
946
“Now, more than ever, we have to show them that we are not money, we are talent,” Pep Guardiola is understood to have told his Manchester City players at a training ground meeting on Saturday.
It came less than 24 hours after UEFA had announced that the club would be banned from the Champions League for two years for allegedly overstating sponsorship revenue and failing to co-operate with the subsequent investigation.
With Guardiola and his players returning to England on Friday night after their winter break, there was always going to be a team meeting before training and the resumption of their season, but nobody expected it to be under these circumstances.
Sources say the mood in the room was defiant, with one describing the message as being along the lines of, “If UEFA don’t love us, fuck it, we’ll show them.”
Guardiola was in full flow as he bid to rally his troops for their biggest match of the season, the Champions League knockout game against Real Madrid on February 26.
He reminded his players of their previous Champions League travails, of the mistakes that have cost them dearly in big games against Monaco, Liverpool and Tottenham. He stressed that he believes in them, echoing the message he had told friends on Friday evening, that he is convinced they can knock out Madrid.
But, in light of the intense focus on the club’s fortunes right now, he urged them to be more concentrated and focused than they have ever been over the next fortnight. Forget about everything else. No parties, no events, eat well and look after yourselves better than ever.
The players looked relaxed as they took to the training pitch afterwards, a contrast to when the news broke on Friday night.
It is understood the squad had no idea the announcement was coming and were in “complete shock”. As The Athletic revealed yesterday, the club contacted the players’ agents on Friday evening and told them to stay calm, assured them that they would overturn the ruling, and to make sure the players did not say anything on social media.
By the time UEFA’s decision was the lead item on news channels across the world, Guardiola was back in his Salford apartment. He had been in Barcelona all week and found out what was coming when he arrived back in Manchester at about 4pm on Friday.
As the world reacted to the news that evening, amid all the analysis of the huge court battle that will follow, the financial hit that City will take, the future of the players, the owners and the manager himself, Guardiola had his mind on the immediate challenges.
He told friends how happy he is that City are playing West Ham in a rearranged fixture next Wednesday, because it will give them extra rhythm before the now seismic game with Real Madrid. Guardiola has been worried about his side’s problems in front of goal of late — even before their 2-0 defeat at Spurs — but on Friday night he spoke of his certainty that his players have what it takes to progress in this season’s Champions League.
And, above all, he let it be known that his future is not in any doubt and privately dismissed any suggestion that he is ready to walk out on his employers a year before his contract ends in 2021.
With as much certainty as he would convey to his players the next day, he stated that he is as committed to City as ever, and extra motivated to triumph in Europe this season.
City had found out what was coming around 2pm on Friday. Ferran Soriano, the CEO and one of only four or five people at the City Football Academy to have been abreast of the situation all the way through, was ready to fly away on a skiing holiday with his wife and daughters when UEFA’s email dropped into the club’s inbox, indicating that they would be announcing their punishment later that afternoon.
City circled the the wagons. Nobody — and they meant nobody — privy to that information should tell anybody else. Many more staff than usual were now aware of the outcome and City’s entire CAS appeal could live or die by leaks to the media.
City asked UEFA for the wording of their statement, prepared their response, and told the governing body to get on with it.
One source indicates that those select City staff expected UEFA to make their announcement hours earlier than they eventually did, which was about 6.30pm on Friday. As the hours passed by some began to suspect that UEFA was playing a game, testing to see whether, at this late stage, a leak would come from City.
Usually UEFA’s message has been more direct. Sources indicate that whenever City employees or lawyers have gone to the Nyon headquarters they have been effectively told “not to waste any more time” because UEFA expected the strength of its case to be crushing.
Certainly the sanction when it came was unprecedented: a two-year Champions League ban and a fine of €30 million, with UEFA damning of City’s “serious breaches” and conduct.
Soriano had to kiss goodbye to his four-day skiing trip to be at the training ground on Saturday morning, and he will be back in the office on Monday, with staff from across the club to be addressed on developments over the past few days.
For a time City had expected to avoid a ban in the first place. Sources close to the club pointed out on Saturday that Silver Lake, who invested $500 million at the start of December, would not have done so without the most thorough due diligence process.
They are a club who are planning to sign at least five players in the summer. If Lionel Messi becomes available, they will go for him. They are not a club expecting to miss out on Champions League revenues and have been preparing a case to take to CAS ever since UEFA announced its decision to investigate the club’s sponsorships in November 2018.
City’s appeals could drag on and it could suit them if they are allowed to participate in next season’s Champions League pending the outcome. For one thing, a source close to the City squad believes some players will want to leave if the ban is not overturned. The club’s leading names have no need to line up potential moves before the outcome of the CAS case as they know they will not be short of suitors.
There is a recognition that it would be harder to attract new players without the opportunity to play top-tier European football, not least because most players have clauses related to the competition in their contracts.
City posted a profit of £10.1 million last season but brought in £77 million from the Champions League, not including gate receipts.
The financial shortfall for the players is not limited to missing out on Champions League match bonuses, either. Clubs often pay bonuses for awards, such as the Ballon d’Or, which is considered far more difficult to win if a player is not competing in the Champions League.
One agent with experience of working with players in the Champions League suggested players will miss out on commercial windfalls, worth up to five figure sums, through participation in events and sponsorships linked to European competitions.
But the message out of City to stakeholders on Friday night was that none of that would matter. As well as assuring agents that they need not worry, there were messages coming the other way — Jorge Mendes is understood to have offered his support.
Sources at Puma, the club’s shirt sponsor that began a 10-year partnership worth £650 million last summer, were relaxed about the prospect of missing two seasons of European football, if that does come to pass. They pointed out that they are committed to City for the long haul, and that Newcastle’s relegation from the Premier League had barely made any difference to another sponsorship agreement.
Beyond the assurances and the shock at the timing of and perhaps severity of the announcement, there is anger, too. Sheikh Mansour, the owner of the club, has been kept up to date right from the start and is said to be livid with how the affair has played out.
The fight will continue. As City said in their public response on Friday, “the club has always anticipated the ultimate need to seek out an independent body and process to impartially consider the comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence in support of its position.”
Put simply, they believe UEFA’s process has been flawed, and they believe a separate institution will find in their favour. That is the stance privately, too.
Senior figures in the game believe that the most likely outcome of the appeal is that the two-year ban is reduced to one year, while some believe that in a less “political” arena at CAS, City will escape any ban but pay an even higher financial penalty.
There is anger among those in the City hierarchy directed at Qatar and Paris Saint-Germain’s owners. There is mutual antipathy between the two and this latest development is likely to play badly in the region, given it relates to deception and knowingly cheating. If the goal was for Abu Dhabi to bask in the glory of a sporting giant, there is not much glory to bask in right now.
Yet City’s owners believe they have been treated very differently compared to a similar investigation into PSG, and that could gain some traction at CAS, where precedent and proportionality are important factors.
“CAS Two” — following City’s initial failed case in November — could well drag up meticulous records regarding how other top European clubs have been financed in recent years. They will almost certainly refer to UEFA’s decision to absolve PSG’s alleged wrongdoings relating to sponsorship agreements in the year they signed Neymar and Kylian Mbappe.
A dossier on Europe’s biggest clubs’ financial dealings that City have been collating over more than a year could soon come into play. These are all routine dealings but City will ask why their own sponsorship agreements are any different.
City will want answers about the finances Juventus receive from Fiat, which is owned by the Agnelli family. Andrea Agnelli, the Juventus president, is a member of the UEFA executive committee and is said to have brought PSG’s president, Nasser Al-Khelaifi into the fold.
Last year a new deal with Jeep, which is owned by Fiat, increased the car company’s annual sponsorship of the club by £20.7 million per season, bringing the total to around £40m per season.
City may also bring up Bayern’s recent contract extension with official car supplier Audi, which owns an 8.33 percent stake in the club. That was worth between £45 million and £55 million to the club.
City have also been taking note of transfer deals between some leading clubs that would appear to have benefited both parties.
The club also believe the fact that PSG’s president Al-Khelaifi is on UEFA’s executive committee means he has been in a position to exert pressure over the past couple of months, along with Bayern Munich, Real Madrid, “and the English”, as one senior City figure puts it.
Some sources close to the City case acknowledge that the club may have broken regulations along the way but insist that they have done no worse than any other big club, particularly when FFP was starting to take hold. City have always denied wrongdoing.
The main focus of City’s appeal is likely to centre around UEFA’s alleged “abuse of process”, which is something that CAS showed some element of sympathy towards in November’s failed case appeal, which City figures referred to as “CAS One”.
While the appeals body ruled that City could not bring an appeal to them so soon, because there was no decision to actually appeal against, they did admit that their case was “not without merit”.
In its ruling, CAS said it was “worrisome” that there had appeared to be several leaks from UEFA’s operation. The judges were also “puzzled” by UEFA chief investigator Yves Leterme’s assertion that the leaks could not have come from his team — he called the accusation of “unlawful activities” by him and his team “groundless and unacceptable in tone”.
In any case CAS did not believe that any leaks would have prejudiced the process, so City should not be too optimistic that they will be able to hang their hat on that line of attack, but the club did land a few blows on their adversary.
Almost as soon as UEFA’s judgement was announced on Friday, sources close to the situation indicated that City would “go for the throat”, that there would be an “all-out attack” on European football’s governing body as this unseemly row enters a new chapter.
 

spursfan77

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2005
46,680
104,956
I can’t see me renewing unless they change the editors. Every single article is overwhelmingly negative. They can’t help but put a downer on every single article. With us it’s digging out the manager, first Poch and now Mourinho. They seem to feel the need to balance out every positive with a negative, like the reader has no brain. It’s quite tiresome.
 

Gb160

Well done boys. Good process
Jun 20, 2012
23,646
93,313
I can’t see me renewing unless they change the editors. Every single article is overwhelmingly negative. They can’t help but put a downer on every single article. With us it’s digging out the manager, first Poch and now Mourinho. They seem to feel the need to balance out every positive with a negative, like the reader has no brain. It’s quite tiresome.
Dont be tight.

In all seriousness I agree that it all does seem a bit negative about us at the minute.
 

Marty

Audere est farce
Mar 10, 2005
39,885
62,554
Spurs mailbag: Who’s to blame? Should Pochettino have stayed? Time for Skipp?


After a difficult couple of weeks, Tottenham’s seemingly cursed season reached a nadir on Wednesday night. Not only did they exit the FA Cup at home to the Premier League’s bottom club Norwich, but one of their longest-serving players Eric Dier left the pitch to confront a fan in the stands.
You watched the game and have been following everything that’s happened this season — so we asked you to tell us what was on your mind and to send in the questions you wanted answered (and we even recorded a bonus podcast to discuss it too). Here are the best of your questions…

Do you really believe Jose Mourinho is going to ask the board which match he should try to win (Burnley or Leipzig) or was this just more performative face-saving from him? And if he does ask, you think the board would actually provide an answer other than “do your best to win both”? Brian S
Charlie Eccleshare:
Our understanding is that a conversation in these terms is unlikely to take place — it was more of an attempt to take the pressure off his players by reiterating how much work they’re currently getting through. Mourinho and Daniel Levy speak regularly to one another, but there won’t be any sort of summit meeting as some are imagining. Also, we’ve been told that part of the agreement in bringing Mourinho to the club was that the board would not interfere with the football decisions so it’s improbable there will be a “do your best to win both” type message coming from upstairs.
Personally I think there is some logic in prioritising one or other of the matches since many of the players are clearly exhausted. Though, as one colleague pointed out to me, what’s likely to happen is that Mourinho will name a strong team for the Burnley game and then hope they have enough in the tank for Leipzig — which they just about might. Though what then happens by the time of the United game on March 15 is anyone’s guess (at least they’ll have had a few days’ rest by then, I suppose).
Broadly speaking, what everyone at Spurs is hoping for is to remain on the coat-tails of the top four until mid-April when Harry Kane and possibly Son Heung-min start to come back.

A couple of weeks ago I made a comment on an Athletic article regarding my disgust with the lack of fitness of Tanguy Ndombele and had a dig at JPB for his ‘fan-boy’ love for Ndombele. His recent performances have just reinforced my disappointment and the quicker we offload him the better. Steve B
Jack Pitt-Brooke:
Hi Steve! Honestly I agree that Ndombele’s lack of fitness is concerning. He’s almost had a whole season at Tottenham now, and he’s not obviously sharper than he was at the start. He started 11 games out of 17 under Mauricio Pochettino, and just five out of 24 under Mourinho. It feels as if he’s regressing. There are plenty of reasons thrown around for why that might be — lack of application, bad attitude, persistent injury troubles, the physical gulf between Ligue 1 and the Premier League. I certainly don’t think that people at Tottenham are thrilled with him, and the longer this goes on, the more sceptical people will naturally get.
However, I still stand by my comments at various points this season. Ndombele is one of the most exciting players to watch in the Premier League. I have never seen anyone quite like him before. That fluid, inventive, creative and brave. Even on Wednesday night he had some fantastic moments, his weight of pass is always perfect, although of course his performance will be forgotten because of the result and the Dier incident. If that makes me a ‘fan-boy’, well, guilty as charged!

Does the club realise the tightrope they are walking in terms of backing by the fans? If we go eighth and out of Europe, why should we pay highest ticket prices in England? Sure there’s been some amount of ENIC out, but crash out of Europe, have a couple of players demand out, and it could get very fragile, very quickly. — Marcus R
Charlie Eccleshare:
Hi Marcus R, I assume you are not the Manchester United striker currently recuperating from injury — but if you are, best of luck with it and hope to see you at the Euros.
As for your question, this is such an intriguing topic. Speaking to fans after the Norwich game Wednesday night, there was a definite sense that tension had been brewing for a while. One supporter told me: “A lot of people are saying they’re totally disinterested at the moment. The football is drab, the atmosphere is the worst it’s been in my lifetime and it’s showing no signs of improving.”
The ticket prices that you mention is a big issue — and the 1.5 per cent hike for season tickets next season went down extremely badly when it was announced last month. In fact the Tottenham Hotspur Supporters Trust (THST) issued a statement saying: “We consider any rise unjustified at a stadium where fans already pay some of the highest ticket prices in Europe.”
Spurs said the rise was below the level of inflation, while vowing to freeze the price for the season after next “barring any unforeseen or exceptional circumstances”.
As well as frustration over prices, there are concerns about the atmosphere at the ground, with many fans we speak to feeling something has been lost since leaving White Hart Lane.
Should key players start to leave then things will only get worse, but I do think we’re a way off that point yet. Levy is a very shrewd operator who makes it extremely hard for big players to move — just look at how long it took Christian Eriksen.
Speaking of Levy, I’m guessing it’s safe to assume you don’t agree with the view put forward by former director of football Damien Comolli to our colleague David Ornstein last month? That Spurs should erect a statue of the chairman outside the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium.

Jose Mourinho has inherited a mess at Tottenham and the majority of fans cannot seem to accept this.
– We have a squad that is part depleted and part half-fit.
– We still rely on a number of senior players who were identified as being past their prime by Pochettino.
– We have a transfer strategy that has left us light in key positions and significantly worse off in terms of team improvement when compared to our rivals.
This combination has impacted on results and has shredded squad morale. It has also forced Mourinho to adapt his tactics because he currently does not have the players needed to play in his preferred style.
The overall responsibility for our disastrous season lies with Daniel Levy. Mourinho is only speaking the truth. Why can’t fans see this? — Dean F
Jack Pitt-Brooke:
Hi Dean! I think you hit a really important point here. Whatever you may think about Jose Mourinho, and I have been quite critical, he inherited a mess. We all know that the squad was going stale last season, and the magical Champions League run covered up for that. By my rough measurement, this Spurs squad have been on the way down since about January 2019. And the good new recruits — Giovani Lo Celso, Ndombele, Steven Bergwijn — can’t turn it round themselves.
There was an interesting moment in the mixed zone last night. Jan Vertonghen was telling us how long Spurs’ defensive problems have gone on for. “We don’t keep enough clean sheets, we concede too many goals,” he said. “It’s not just now. It’s not just last week. It’s since the start of the season.” Then he paused. “Even for more than a year ago.” The players clearly know that there are deep-seated problems that started long before Mourinho showed up. Problems to do with recruitment and a failure to refresh the squad. (Which is something Paul Mitchell told me when I interviewed him last month.) So for all the legitimate criticisms of Mourinho, we shouldn’t kid ourselves that he’s playing with good cards.

Hey Charlie and Jack. I am Diar from Indonesia. In the future, do you think Troy Parrott will have same path as Mohamed Salah or Kevin De Bruyne and become superstar after working with Mourinho? I mean after Mou said stop comparing Parrott to Harry Kane after the match against Norwich. Diar C
Charlie Eccleshare:
Lots of layers to this question, thank you Diar. So first of all, in case anyone missed this — which quite a few understandably did given everything that happened on Wednesday night — Mourinho gave an interview after the Norwich defeat in which he discussed Parrott’s performance.
Reflecting on Parrott’s 24 minutes on the pitch as a substitute (followed by a penalty miss in the shoot-out), Mourinho told BBC Sport: “Now people can see that he has to work a lot so don’t think that Parrott is the second Harry Kane because he’s just a young kid that needs to work.
“Let’s forget the penalty because we all miss the penalties, it was not Troy.”
What Mourinho was saying was possibly harsh, but essentially a continuation of his repeated message that Parrott has much to do to get to the required level — a message that the player understands. We have reported on the reservations about Parrott’s maturity and application, but it’s worth remembering as well that he’s only just turned 18 so patience is key here (Mourinho spoke well on the topic when talking to reporters on Tuesday afternoon).
Which makes it hard to make comparisons with Salah and De Bruyne. Ability-wise, a source told us recently that, by way of comparison, Marcus Rashford was “in a different galaxy” when he was 18. Though other well-positioned figures in the game have been more complimentary about Parrott when talking to The Athletic and compared him to a young Kane.
He is undoubtedly a prodigious talent but he has only played 96 minutes of senior football in his life and so we need a lot more data to judge him on. But I certainly wouldn’t worry about him moving anytime soon like Salah and De Bruyne did when working with Mourinho.

Personally, I hope people now see Parrott isn’t the answer — he did nothing of note in his time on the pitch. Oliver Skipp showed exactly the kind of difference you get between an 18-year-old novice and a 20-year-old novice who’s trained with the first team and bided his time — thought he was excellent and deserves another go in the midfield three with Harry Winks and Gio Lo Celso. — Paul C
Charlie Eccleshare:
Having discussed Parrott in the previous answer, let’s focus here on Oliver Skipp, the 20-year-old midfielder who impressed against Norwich on Wednesday night.
Skipp’s a player I’ve been watching closely this season having interviewed him back in November, and his lack of minutes have been a disappointment. I made the point on Tuesday’s View From The Lane podcast that amid all the noise around Parrott, Skipp’s lack of game time should actually have been more of a talking point. Yes Spurs have been missing their strikers so there’s a logic to the Parrott clamour, but two years older at 20 Skipp fits more with the profile of a player who should be starting to play in the Premier League. After all he was starting the odd game under Pochettino last season and is someone who is extremely highly-rated at the club.
On Wednesday night, we were able to see why. Skipp has a great engine and the ability to keep things ticking over, and the team looked so much more balanced with him and Harry Winks in front of the defence. The double pivot freed up Lo Celso to get forward and create chances while simultaneously providing the back four with more protection. This dual advantage was highlighted by the tackle Skipp made in the first half that prevented a Norwich attack and started the move that ended with Tottenham winning the corner that led to Jan Vertonghen’s goal.
We’re told that Skipp was surprised when told he was starting but was quickly buzzing at the opportunity. He was obviously gutted to lose the game but was quickly buoyed by hearing Mourinho say of his performance: “Phenomenal. Very, very good. Very, very good, solid performance. Even with the yellow card I kept him for two hours, first of all because Winks was in trouble, secondly because he was so solid, so mature, so confident that I was never afraid of a second yellow card coming. He was always in control of the game.”
With so many players running on empty, we should expect to see a fair bit more of Skipp in the coming weeks — hopefully in the midfield three that you describe (with Ndombele, fingers crossed, in the mix as well).

Does anyone know what the thinking behind hiring Jose actually was? I assume this wasn’t the plan. What did ENIC actually expect? I hope a large portion of Jose’s contract was performance related! — Matt J
Jack Pitt-Brooke:
Hi Matt! Great question! There were a few things. The football reasons were that Pochettino had seemingly taken the squad as far as he could but Levy wanted someone to take them to the next level. Not a long-term builder but a short-term winner. Someone to beat their big-six rivals and to finally win a trophy. That’s why Carlo Ancelotti was so close to the job too. Mourinho, the thinking went, could still give an experienced team a short-term shot in the arm. Top four this season was the target, with bonuses planned to reflect that.
Then there were the non-football reasons. Tottenham are still in the midst of one long brand-building exercise. Look at the £1 billion stadium, the NFL games and the Amazon documentary. Daniel Levy was always desperate for a big name to come in, and no-one is bigger than Mourinho. He knew it was his only way of sacking someone as popular as Pochettino with the fans. And Levy knew it would keep the club in the forefront of the attention of the football world. Because if ENIC wanted to sell the club, or even sell part of it, that global profile would be very valuable indeed. Not that they have plans to do that any time soon.

Was sacking Poch the right plan in hindsight? If yes, is Mourinho still the right man to plan long term around? Seems like Spurs are about to enter a mass squad turnover — are you confident they can come out better off the other side? — Daniel J
Jack Pitt-Brooke:
Hi Daniel. I think about this a lot. Back in November I think I had eventually accepted the conventional wisdom that Pochettino had to go. Because the relationship between him and the squad was broken. They were tired of him. And when that relationship breaks, it is easier and cheaper to get rid of the manager and keep the players. When it’s gone, it’s gone.
But now I’m not so sure. Tottenham sacked their best manager since Bill Nicholson and replaced him with someone whose best days are behind him, and who has no emotional connection to the club. Does it feel like the right decision now, three months on? Less so by the week, I’d say. Maybe if they’d got a more progressive manager things might look different. But they would still be replacing a great with someone much less good. Daniel Levy having to stick with Pochettino for all of this season and rebuild the squad would have been difficult and expensive. But it’s difficult not to wonder whether it would have been the bravest, smartest decision he could have made.

Would finishing outside of the European places be a blessing in disguise? — David K
Charlie Eccleshare:
This is an interesting one, and I can definitely see the logic in answering yes.
First and foremost, having a full week between games is extremely beneficial to teams — look at Liverpool in 2014, Leicester in 2016 and Chelsea in 2017, all of whom excelled in the Premier League without the distraction of European football. You imagine this element of no European football would especially please Mourinho given how often he has lamented the number of games Spurs have played this season and how it has reduced his time to work with the players on the training pitch.
Also the Champions League is one thing but the Europa League has far less appeal for players, while match-going fans will quickly grow frustrated with the Thursday-Sunday routine.
But, and there are a few buts, no European football would be a big dent financially for the club — especially so soon after their stadium move. Even the much-derided Europa League poured £40 million into Arsenal’s coffers last season, which for Spurs would be enough to buy another Bergwijn and be left with plenty to spare.
Then there is the prestige element (as Jack alludes to with Amazon, the new stadium and hosting NFL matches in the previous question). Spurs are relatively new to the status of “super club” — some would argue they are not yet there — and need to be playing regular European football to cement themselves as a heavyweight. Further down the line this could have implications if there is a European Super League breakaway, and in the more immediate term it will affect their ability to attract top-quality players. They are not a club like Manchester United or Liverpool whose prestige will always make them an attractive proposition whether they are in Europe or not.
In short: be careful what you wish for.

What would the narrative about the club have been this morning had we won on penalties? I mean it’s not like we lost 5-0. That said, I switched off before the pens started as there was such an inevitability about the outcome. I also think people are forgetting probably our biggest loss (Christian Eriksen) that the team are having to come to terms with, despite his lethargic performances before he finally left. If Eriksen played yesterday we’d have won comfortably. — Jim L
Jack Pitt-Brooke:
It’s a good question and one that we in the media don’t ask ourselves enough. Honestly a lot of us would be writing something along the lines of “Jose finds a way” and asking whether he can steer his way through the Burnley and Leipzig trips. Obviously the result, being decided by penalties, is very contingent and our coverage should reflect that. That said, I think there’s no avoiding the fact that the performance from roughly 30 to 80 minutes was awful, totally passive and shapeless and weak. Worse than the second half against Wolves, or anything against Leipzig or Chelsea. The team is playing badly and we have to get that across.
I think that Eriksen has been a big loss, even if the rise of Lo Celso has helped to plug that gap a bit. Lo Celso has been fantastic, he’s Spurs’ best player by miles right now. But what Eriksen had was years of knowhow, accumulated over 267 starts for Spurs. To lose that and Kane and Son basically at the same time is devastating to the practical habitual knowledge of the front line. Sometimes in recent weeks Spurs have looked like they have forgotten how to attack, and that is the reason why.
 

Wsussexspur

Well-Known Member
Oct 2, 2007
8,918
10,176
Spurs mailbag: Who’s to blame? Should Pochettino have stayed? Time for Skipp?


After a difficult couple of weeks, Tottenham’s seemingly cursed season reached a nadir on Wednesday night. Not only did they exit the FA Cup at home to the Premier League’s bottom club Norwich, but one of their longest-serving players Eric Dier left the pitch to confront a fan in the stands.
You watched the game and have been following everything that’s happened this season — so we asked you to tell us what was on your mind and to send in the questions you wanted answered (and we even recorded a bonus podcast to discuss it too). Here are the best of your questions…

Do you really believe Jose Mourinho is going to ask the board which match he should try to win (Burnley or Leipzig) or was this just more performative face-saving from him? And if he does ask, you think the board would actually provide an answer other than “do your best to win both”? Brian S
Charlie Eccleshare:
Our understanding is that a conversation in these terms is unlikely to take place — it was more of an attempt to take the pressure off his players by reiterating how much work they’re currently getting through. Mourinho and Daniel Levy speak regularly to one another, but there won’t be any sort of summit meeting as some are imagining. Also, we’ve been told that part of the agreement in bringing Mourinho to the club was that the board would not interfere with the football decisions so it’s improbable there will be a “do your best to win both” type message coming from upstairs.
Personally I think there is some logic in prioritising one or other of the matches since many of the players are clearly exhausted. Though, as one colleague pointed out to me, what’s likely to happen is that Mourinho will name a strong team for the Burnley game and then hope they have enough in the tank for Leipzig — which they just about might. Though what then happens by the time of the United game on March 15 is anyone’s guess (at least they’ll have had a few days’ rest by then, I suppose).
Broadly speaking, what everyone at Spurs is hoping for is to remain on the coat-tails of the top four until mid-April when Harry Kane and possibly Son Heung-min start to come back.

A couple of weeks ago I made a comment on an Athletic article regarding my disgust with the lack of fitness of Tanguy Ndombele and had a dig at JPB for his ‘fan-boy’ love for Ndombele. His recent performances have just reinforced my disappointment and the quicker we offload him the better. Steve B
Jack Pitt-Brooke:
Hi Steve! Honestly I agree that Ndombele’s lack of fitness is concerning. He’s almost had a whole season at Tottenham now, and he’s not obviously sharper than he was at the start. He started 11 games out of 17 under Mauricio Pochettino, and just five out of 24 under Mourinho. It feels as if he’s regressing. There are plenty of reasons thrown around for why that might be — lack of application, bad attitude, persistent injury troubles, the physical gulf between Ligue 1 and the Premier League. I certainly don’t think that people at Tottenham are thrilled with him, and the longer this goes on, the more sceptical people will naturally get.
However, I still stand by my comments at various points this season. Ndombele is one of the most exciting players to watch in the Premier League. I have never seen anyone quite like him before. That fluid, inventive, creative and brave. Even on Wednesday night he had some fantastic moments, his weight of pass is always perfect, although of course his performance will be forgotten because of the result and the Dier incident. If that makes me a ‘fan-boy’, well, guilty as charged!

Does the club realise the tightrope they are walking in terms of backing by the fans? If we go eighth and out of Europe, why should we pay highest ticket prices in England? Sure there’s been some amount of ENIC out, but crash out of Europe, have a couple of players demand out, and it could get very fragile, very quickly. — Marcus R
Charlie Eccleshare:
Hi Marcus R, I assume you are not the Manchester United striker currently recuperating from injury — but if you are, best of luck with it and hope to see you at the Euros.
As for your question, this is such an intriguing topic. Speaking to fans after the Norwich game Wednesday night, there was a definite sense that tension had been brewing for a while. One supporter told me: “A lot of people are saying they’re totally disinterested at the moment. The football is drab, the atmosphere is the worst it’s been in my lifetime and it’s showing no signs of improving.”
The ticket prices that you mention is a big issue — and the 1.5 per cent hike for season tickets next season went down extremely badly when it was announced last month. In fact the Tottenham Hotspur Supporters Trust (THST) issued a statement saying: “We consider any rise unjustified at a stadium where fans already pay some of the highest ticket prices in Europe.”
Spurs said the rise was below the level of inflation, while vowing to freeze the price for the season after next “barring any unforeseen or exceptional circumstances”.
As well as frustration over prices, there are concerns about the atmosphere at the ground, with many fans we speak to feeling something has been lost since leaving White Hart Lane.
Should key players start to leave then things will only get worse, but I do think we’re a way off that point yet. Levy is a very shrewd operator who makes it extremely hard for big players to move — just look at how long it took Christian Eriksen.
Speaking of Levy, I’m guessing it’s safe to assume you don’t agree with the view put forward by former director of football Damien Comolli to our colleague David Ornstein last month? That Spurs should erect a statue of the chairman outside the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium.

Jose Mourinho has inherited a mess at Tottenham and the majority of fans cannot seem to accept this.
– We have a squad that is part depleted and part half-fit.
– We still rely on a number of senior players who were identified as being past their prime by Pochettino.
– We have a transfer strategy that has left us light in key positions and significantly worse off in terms of team improvement when compared to our rivals.
This combination has impacted on results and has shredded squad morale. It has also forced Mourinho to adapt his tactics because he currently does not have the players needed to play in his preferred style.
The overall responsibility for our disastrous season lies with Daniel Levy. Mourinho is only speaking the truth. Why can’t fans see this? — Dean F
Jack Pitt-Brooke:
Hi Dean! I think you hit a really important point here. Whatever you may think about Jose Mourinho, and I have been quite critical, he inherited a mess. We all know that the squad was going stale last season, and the magical Champions League run covered up for that. By my rough measurement, this Spurs squad have been on the way down since about January 2019. And the good new recruits — Giovani Lo Celso, Ndombele, Steven Bergwijn — can’t turn it round themselves.
There was an interesting moment in the mixed zone last night. Jan Vertonghen was telling us how long Spurs’ defensive problems have gone on for. “We don’t keep enough clean sheets, we concede too many goals,” he said. “It’s not just now. It’s not just last week. It’s since the start of the season.” Then he paused. “Even for more than a year ago.” The players clearly know that there are deep-seated problems that started long before Mourinho showed up. Problems to do with recruitment and a failure to refresh the squad. (Which is something Paul Mitchell told me when I interviewed him last month.) So for all the legitimate criticisms of Mourinho, we shouldn’t kid ourselves that he’s playing with good cards.

Hey Charlie and Jack. I am Diar from Indonesia. In the future, do you think Troy Parrott will have same path as Mohamed Salah or Kevin De Bruyne and become superstar after working with Mourinho? I mean after Mou said stop comparing Parrott to Harry Kane after the match against Norwich. Diar C
Charlie Eccleshare:
Lots of layers to this question, thank you Diar. So first of all, in case anyone missed this — which quite a few understandably did given everything that happened on Wednesday night — Mourinho gave an interview after the Norwich defeat in which he discussed Parrott’s performance.
Reflecting on Parrott’s 24 minutes on the pitch as a substitute (followed by a penalty miss in the shoot-out), Mourinho told BBC Sport: “Now people can see that he has to work a lot so don’t think that Parrott is the second Harry Kane because he’s just a young kid that needs to work.
“Let’s forget the penalty because we all miss the penalties, it was not Troy.”
What Mourinho was saying was possibly harsh, but essentially a continuation of his repeated message that Parrott has much to do to get to the required level — a message that the player understands. We have reported on the reservations about Parrott’s maturity and application, but it’s worth remembering as well that he’s only just turned 18 so patience is key here (Mourinho spoke well on the topic when talking to reporters on Tuesday afternoon).
Which makes it hard to make comparisons with Salah and De Bruyne. Ability-wise, a source told us recently that, by way of comparison, Marcus Rashford was “in a different galaxy” when he was 18. Though other well-positioned figures in the game have been more complimentary about Parrott when talking to The Athletic and compared him to a young Kane.
He is undoubtedly a prodigious talent but he has only played 96 minutes of senior football in his life and so we need a lot more data to judge him on. But I certainly wouldn’t worry about him moving anytime soon like Salah and De Bruyne did when working with Mourinho.

Personally, I hope people now see Parrott isn’t the answer — he did nothing of note in his time on the pitch. Oliver Skipp showed exactly the kind of difference you get between an 18-year-old novice and a 20-year-old novice who’s trained with the first team and bided his time — thought he was excellent and deserves another go in the midfield three with Harry Winks and Gio Lo Celso. — Paul C
Charlie Eccleshare:
Having discussed Parrott in the previous answer, let’s focus here on Oliver Skipp, the 20-year-old midfielder who impressed against Norwich on Wednesday night.
Skipp’s a player I’ve been watching closely this season having interviewed him back in November, and his lack of minutes have been a disappointment. I made the point on Tuesday’s View From The Lane podcast that amid all the noise around Parrott, Skipp’s lack of game time should actually have been more of a talking point. Yes Spurs have been missing their strikers so there’s a logic to the Parrott clamour, but two years older at 20 Skipp fits more with the profile of a player who should be starting to play in the Premier League. After all he was starting the odd game under Pochettino last season and is someone who is extremely highly-rated at the club.
On Wednesday night, we were able to see why. Skipp has a great engine and the ability to keep things ticking over, and the team looked so much more balanced with him and Harry Winks in front of the defence. The double pivot freed up Lo Celso to get forward and create chances while simultaneously providing the back four with more protection. This dual advantage was highlighted by the tackle Skipp made in the first half that prevented a Norwich attack and started the move that ended with Tottenham winning the corner that led to Jan Vertonghen’s goal.
We’re told that Skipp was surprised when told he was starting but was quickly buzzing at the opportunity. He was obviously gutted to lose the game but was quickly buoyed by hearing Mourinho say of his performance: “Phenomenal. Very, very good. Very, very good, solid performance. Even with the yellow card I kept him for two hours, first of all because Winks was in trouble, secondly because he was so solid, so mature, so confident that I was never afraid of a second yellow card coming. He was always in control of the game.”
With so many players running on empty, we should expect to see a fair bit more of Skipp in the coming weeks — hopefully in the midfield three that you describe (with Ndombele, fingers crossed, in the mix as well).

Does anyone know what the thinking behind hiring Jose actually was? I assume this wasn’t the plan. What did ENIC actually expect? I hope a large portion of Jose’s contract was performance related! — Matt J
Jack Pitt-Brooke:
Hi Matt! Great question! There were a few things. The football reasons were that Pochettino had seemingly taken the squad as far as he could but Levy wanted someone to take them to the next level. Not a long-term builder but a short-term winner. Someone to beat their big-six rivals and to finally win a trophy. That’s why Carlo Ancelotti was so close to the job too. Mourinho, the thinking went, could still give an experienced team a short-term shot in the arm. Top four this season was the target, with bonuses planned to reflect that.
Then there were the non-football reasons. Tottenham are still in the midst of one long brand-building exercise. Look at the £1 billion stadium, the NFL games and the Amazon documentary. Daniel Levy was always desperate for a big name to come in, and no-one is bigger than Mourinho. He knew it was his only way of sacking someone as popular as Pochettino with the fans. And Levy knew it would keep the club in the forefront of the attention of the football world. Because if ENIC wanted to sell the club, or even sell part of it, that global profile would be very valuable indeed. Not that they have plans to do that any time soon.

Was sacking Poch the right plan in hindsight? If yes, is Mourinho still the right man to plan long term around? Seems like Spurs are about to enter a mass squad turnover — are you confident they can come out better off the other side? — Daniel J
Jack Pitt-Brooke:
Hi Daniel. I think about this a lot. Back in November I think I had eventually accepted the conventional wisdom that Pochettino had to go. Because the relationship between him and the squad was broken. They were tired of him. And when that relationship breaks, it is easier and cheaper to get rid of the manager and keep the players. When it’s gone, it’s gone.
But now I’m not so sure. Tottenham sacked their best manager since Bill Nicholson and replaced him with someone whose best days are behind him, and who has no emotional connection to the club. Does it feel like the right decision now, three months on? Less so by the week, I’d say. Maybe if they’d got a more progressive manager things might look different. But they would still be replacing a great with someone much less good. Daniel Levy having to stick with Pochettino for all of this season and rebuild the squad would have been difficult and expensive. But it’s difficult not to wonder whether it would have been the bravest, smartest decision he could have made.

Would finishing outside of the European places be a blessing in disguise? — David K
Charlie Eccleshare:
This is an interesting one, and I can definitely see the logic in answering yes.
First and foremost, having a full week between games is extremely beneficial to teams — look at Liverpool in 2014, Leicester in 2016 and Chelsea in 2017, all of whom excelled in the Premier League without the distraction of European football. You imagine this element of no European football would especially please Mourinho given how often he has lamented the number of games Spurs have played this season and how it has reduced his time to work with the players on the training pitch.
Also the Champions League is one thing but the Europa League has far less appeal for players, while match-going fans will quickly grow frustrated with the Thursday-Sunday routine.
But, and there are a few buts, no European football would be a big dent financially for the club — especially so soon after their stadium move. Even the much-derided Europa League poured £40 million into Arsenal’s coffers last season, which for Spurs would be enough to buy another Bergwijn and be left with plenty to spare.
Then there is the prestige element (as Jack alludes to with Amazon, the new stadium and hosting NFL matches in the previous question). Spurs are relatively new to the status of “super club” — some would argue they are not yet there — and need to be playing regular European football to cement themselves as a heavyweight. Further down the line this could have implications if there is a European Super League breakaway, and in the more immediate term it will affect their ability to attract top-quality players. They are not a club like Manchester United or Liverpool whose prestige will always make them an attractive proposition whether they are in Europe or not.
In short: be careful what you wish for.

What would the narrative about the club have been this morning had we won on penalties? I mean it’s not like we lost 5-0. That said, I switched off before the pens started as there was such an inevitability about the outcome. I also think people are forgetting probably our biggest loss (Christian Eriksen) that the team are having to come to terms with, despite his lethargic performances before he finally left. If Eriksen played yesterday we’d have won comfortably. — Jim L
Jack Pitt-Brooke:
It’s a good question and one that we in the media don’t ask ourselves enough. Honestly a lot of us would be writing something along the lines of “Jose finds a way” and asking whether he can steer his way through the Burnley and Leipzig trips. Obviously the result, being decided by penalties, is very contingent and our coverage should reflect that. That said, I think there’s no avoiding the fact that the performance from roughly 30 to 80 minutes was awful, totally passive and shapeless and weak. Worse than the second half against Wolves, or anything against Leipzig or Chelsea. The team is playing badly and we have to get that across.
I think that Eriksen has been a big loss, even if the rise of Lo Celso has helped to plug that gap a bit. Lo Celso has been fantastic, he’s Spurs’ best player by miles right now. But what Eriksen had was years of knowhow, accumulated over 267 starts for Spurs. To lose that and Kane and Son basically at the same time is devastating to the practical habitual knowledge of the front line. Sometimes in recent weeks Spurs have looked like they have forgotten how to attack, and that is the reason why.

They have done an “emergency” view from the lane podcast as well answering further questions.. gave it a listen last night wasn’t too impressed though. But then each to their own
 

Marty

Audere est farce
Mar 10, 2005
39,885
62,554
They have done an “emergency” view from the lane podcast as well answering further questions.. gave it a listen last night wasn’t too impressed though. But then each to their own
I think they're much better writers than they are speakers, I too don't bother with that pod but I also subscribe to about 15 podcasts that release once or twice a week and most of them are about football so I have to draw a line at some things.
 

spursfan77

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2005
46,680
104,956
They have done an “emergency” view from the lane podcast as well answering further questions.. gave it a listen last night wasn’t too impressed though. But then each to their own

I’ve listened to it a couple of times since they’ve started it but always end up skipping through it because it’s too dour.

Some good question and answers in there though. Although I’m sceptical how much the guys on there following us actually know.
 

Seafordian Spurs

Well-Known Member
Aug 20, 2013
2,157
4,141
Spurs mailbag: Who’s to blame? Should Pochettino have stayed? Time for Skipp?


After a difficult couple of weeks, Tottenham’s seemingly cursed season reached a nadir on Wednesday night. Not only did they exit the FA Cup at home to the Premier League’s bottom club Norwich, but one of their longest-serving players Eric Dier left the pitch to confront a fan in the stands.
You watched the game and have been following everything that’s happened this season — so we asked you to tell us what was on your mind and to send in the questions you wanted answered (and we even recorded a bonus podcast to discuss it too). Here are the best of your questions…

Do you really believe Jose Mourinho is going to ask the board which match he should try to win (Burnley or Leipzig) or was this just more performative face-saving from him? And if he does ask, you think the board would actually provide an answer other than “do your best to win both”? Brian S
Charlie Eccleshare:
Our understanding is that a conversation in these terms is unlikely to take place — it was more of an attempt to take the pressure off his players by reiterating how much work they’re currently getting through. Mourinho and Daniel Levy speak regularly to one another, but there won’t be any sort of summit meeting as some are imagining. Also, we’ve been told that part of the agreement in bringing Mourinho to the club was that the board would not interfere with the football decisions so it’s improbable there will be a “do your best to win both” type message coming from upstairs.
Personally I think there is some logic in prioritising one or other of the matches since many of the players are clearly exhausted. Though, as one colleague pointed out to me, what’s likely to happen is that Mourinho will name a strong team for the Burnley game and then hope they have enough in the tank for Leipzig — which they just about might. Though what then happens by the time of the United game on March 15 is anyone’s guess (at least they’ll have had a few days’ rest by then, I suppose).
Broadly speaking, what everyone at Spurs is hoping for is to remain on the coat-tails of the top four until mid-April when Harry Kane and possibly Son Heung-min start to come back.

A couple of weeks ago I made a comment on an Athletic article regarding my disgust with the lack of fitness of Tanguy Ndombele and had a dig at JPB for his ‘fan-boy’ love for Ndombele. His recent performances have just reinforced my disappointment and the quicker we offload him the better. Steve B
Jack Pitt-Brooke:
Hi Steve! Honestly I agree that Ndombele’s lack of fitness is concerning. He’s almost had a whole season at Tottenham now, and he’s not obviously sharper than he was at the start. He started 11 games out of 17 under Mauricio Pochettino, and just five out of 24 under Mourinho. It feels as if he’s regressing. There are plenty of reasons thrown around for why that might be — lack of application, bad attitude, persistent injury troubles, the physical gulf between Ligue 1 and the Premier League. I certainly don’t think that people at Tottenham are thrilled with him, and the longer this goes on, the more sceptical people will naturally get.
However, I still stand by my comments at various points this season. Ndombele is one of the most exciting players to watch in the Premier League. I have never seen anyone quite like him before. That fluid, inventive, creative and brave. Even on Wednesday night he had some fantastic moments, his weight of pass is always perfect, although of course his performance will be forgotten because of the result and the Dier incident. If that makes me a ‘fan-boy’, well, guilty as charged!

Does the club realise the tightrope they are walking in terms of backing by the fans? If we go eighth and out of Europe, why should we pay highest ticket prices in England? Sure there’s been some amount of ENIC out, but crash out of Europe, have a couple of players demand out, and it could get very fragile, very quickly. — Marcus R
Charlie Eccleshare:
Hi Marcus R, I assume you are not the Manchester United striker currently recuperating from injury — but if you are, best of luck with it and hope to see you at the Euros.
As for your question, this is such an intriguing topic. Speaking to fans after the Norwich game Wednesday night, there was a definite sense that tension had been brewing for a while. One supporter told me: “A lot of people are saying they’re totally disinterested at the moment. The football is drab, the atmosphere is the worst it’s been in my lifetime and it’s showing no signs of improving.”
The ticket prices that you mention is a big issue — and the 1.5 per cent hike for season tickets next season went down extremely badly when it was announced last month. In fact the Tottenham Hotspur Supporters Trust (THST) issued a statement saying: “We consider any rise unjustified at a stadium where fans already pay some of the highest ticket prices in Europe.”
Spurs said the rise was below the level of inflation, while vowing to freeze the price for the season after next “barring any unforeseen or exceptional circumstances”.
As well as frustration over prices, there are concerns about the atmosphere at the ground, with many fans we speak to feeling something has been lost since leaving White Hart Lane.
Should key players start to leave then things will only get worse, but I do think we’re a way off that point yet. Levy is a very shrewd operator who makes it extremely hard for big players to move — just look at how long it took Christian Eriksen.
Speaking of Levy, I’m guessing it’s safe to assume you don’t agree with the view put forward by former director of football Damien Comolli to our colleague David Ornstein last month? That Spurs should erect a statue of the chairman outside the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium.

Jose Mourinho has inherited a mess at Tottenham and the majority of fans cannot seem to accept this.
– We have a squad that is part depleted and part half-fit.
– We still rely on a number of senior players who were identified as being past their prime by Pochettino.
– We have a transfer strategy that has left us light in key positions and significantly worse off in terms of team improvement when compared to our rivals.
This combination has impacted on results and has shredded squad morale. It has also forced Mourinho to adapt his tactics because he currently does not have the players needed to play in his preferred style.
The overall responsibility for our disastrous season lies with Daniel Levy. Mourinho is only speaking the truth. Why can’t fans see this? — Dean F
Jack Pitt-Brooke:
Hi Dean! I think you hit a really important point here. Whatever you may think about Jose Mourinho, and I have been quite critical, he inherited a mess. We all know that the squad was going stale last season, and the magical Champions League run covered up for that. By my rough measurement, this Spurs squad have been on the way down since about January 2019. And the good new recruits — Giovani Lo Celso, Ndombele, Steven Bergwijn — can’t turn it round themselves.
There was an interesting moment in the mixed zone last night. Jan Vertonghen was telling us how long Spurs’ defensive problems have gone on for. “We don’t keep enough clean sheets, we concede too many goals,” he said. “It’s not just now. It’s not just last week. It’s since the start of the season.” Then he paused. “Even for more than a year ago.” The players clearly know that there are deep-seated problems that started long before Mourinho showed up. Problems to do with recruitment and a failure to refresh the squad. (Which is something Paul Mitchell told me when I interviewed him last month.) So for all the legitimate criticisms of Mourinho, we shouldn’t kid ourselves that he’s playing with good cards.

Hey Charlie and Jack. I am Diar from Indonesia. In the future, do you think Troy Parrott will have same path as Mohamed Salah or Kevin De Bruyne and become superstar after working with Mourinho? I mean after Mou said stop comparing Parrott to Harry Kane after the match against Norwich. Diar C
Charlie Eccleshare:
Lots of layers to this question, thank you Diar. So first of all, in case anyone missed this — which quite a few understandably did given everything that happened on Wednesday night — Mourinho gave an interview after the Norwich defeat in which he discussed Parrott’s performance.
Reflecting on Parrott’s 24 minutes on the pitch as a substitute (followed by a penalty miss in the shoot-out), Mourinho told BBC Sport: “Now people can see that he has to work a lot so don’t think that Parrott is the second Harry Kane because he’s just a young kid that needs to work.
“Let’s forget the penalty because we all miss the penalties, it was not Troy.”
What Mourinho was saying was possibly harsh, but essentially a continuation of his repeated message that Parrott has much to do to get to the required level — a message that the player understands. We have reported on the reservations about Parrott’s maturity and application, but it’s worth remembering as well that he’s only just turned 18 so patience is key here (Mourinho spoke well on the topic when talking to reporters on Tuesday afternoon).
Which makes it hard to make comparisons with Salah and De Bruyne. Ability-wise, a source told us recently that, by way of comparison, Marcus Rashford was “in a different galaxy” when he was 18. Though other well-positioned figures in the game have been more complimentary about Parrott when talking to The Athletic and compared him to a young Kane.
He is undoubtedly a prodigious talent but he has only played 96 minutes of senior football in his life and so we need a lot more data to judge him on. But I certainly wouldn’t worry about him moving anytime soon like Salah and De Bruyne did when working with Mourinho.

Personally, I hope people now see Parrott isn’t the answer — he did nothing of note in his time on the pitch. Oliver Skipp showed exactly the kind of difference you get between an 18-year-old novice and a 20-year-old novice who’s trained with the first team and bided his time — thought he was excellent and deserves another go in the midfield three with Harry Winks and Gio Lo Celso. — Paul C
Charlie Eccleshare:
Having discussed Parrott in the previous answer, let’s focus here on Oliver Skipp, the 20-year-old midfielder who impressed against Norwich on Wednesday night.
Skipp’s a player I’ve been watching closely this season having interviewed him back in November, and his lack of minutes have been a disappointment. I made the point on Tuesday’s View From The Lane podcast that amid all the noise around Parrott, Skipp’s lack of game time should actually have been more of a talking point. Yes Spurs have been missing their strikers so there’s a logic to the Parrott clamour, but two years older at 20 Skipp fits more with the profile of a player who should be starting to play in the Premier League. After all he was starting the odd game under Pochettino last season and is someone who is extremely highly-rated at the club.
On Wednesday night, we were able to see why. Skipp has a great engine and the ability to keep things ticking over, and the team looked so much more balanced with him and Harry Winks in front of the defence. The double pivot freed up Lo Celso to get forward and create chances while simultaneously providing the back four with more protection. This dual advantage was highlighted by the tackle Skipp made in the first half that prevented a Norwich attack and started the move that ended with Tottenham winning the corner that led to Jan Vertonghen’s goal.
We’re told that Skipp was surprised when told he was starting but was quickly buzzing at the opportunity. He was obviously gutted to lose the game but was quickly buoyed by hearing Mourinho say of his performance: “Phenomenal. Very, very good. Very, very good, solid performance. Even with the yellow card I kept him for two hours, first of all because Winks was in trouble, secondly because he was so solid, so mature, so confident that I was never afraid of a second yellow card coming. He was always in control of the game.”
With so many players running on empty, we should expect to see a fair bit more of Skipp in the coming weeks — hopefully in the midfield three that you describe (with Ndombele, fingers crossed, in the mix as well).

Does anyone know what the thinking behind hiring Jose actually was? I assume this wasn’t the plan. What did ENIC actually expect? I hope a large portion of Jose’s contract was performance related! — Matt J
Jack Pitt-Brooke:
Hi Matt! Great question! There were a few things. The football reasons were that Pochettino had seemingly taken the squad as far as he could but Levy wanted someone to take them to the next level. Not a long-term builder but a short-term winner. Someone to beat their big-six rivals and to finally win a trophy. That’s why Carlo Ancelotti was so close to the job too. Mourinho, the thinking went, could still give an experienced team a short-term shot in the arm. Top four this season was the target, with bonuses planned to reflect that.
Then there were the non-football reasons. Tottenham are still in the midst of one long brand-building exercise. Look at the £1 billion stadium, the NFL games and the Amazon documentary. Daniel Levy was always desperate for a big name to come in, and no-one is bigger than Mourinho. He knew it was his only way of sacking someone as popular as Pochettino with the fans. And Levy knew it would keep the club in the forefront of the attention of the football world. Because if ENIC wanted to sell the club, or even sell part of it, that global profile would be very valuable indeed. Not that they have plans to do that any time soon.

Was sacking Poch the right plan in hindsight? If yes, is Mourinho still the right man to plan long term around? Seems like Spurs are about to enter a mass squad turnover — are you confident they can come out better off the other side? — Daniel J
Jack Pitt-Brooke:
Hi Daniel. I think about this a lot. Back in November I think I had eventually accepted the conventional wisdom that Pochettino had to go. Because the relationship between him and the squad was broken. They were tired of him. And when that relationship breaks, it is easier and cheaper to get rid of the manager and keep the players. When it’s gone, it’s gone.
But now I’m not so sure. Tottenham sacked their best manager since Bill Nicholson and replaced him with someone whose best days are behind him, and who has no emotional connection to the club. Does it feel like the right decision now, three months on? Less so by the week, I’d say. Maybe if they’d got a more progressive manager things might look different. But they would still be replacing a great with someone much less good. Daniel Levy having to stick with Pochettino for all of this season and rebuild the squad would have been difficult and expensive. But it’s difficult not to wonder whether it would have been the bravest, smartest decision he could have made.

Would finishing outside of the European places be a blessing in disguise? — David K
Charlie Eccleshare:
This is an interesting one, and I can definitely see the logic in answering yes.
First and foremost, having a full week between games is extremely beneficial to teams — look at Liverpool in 2014, Leicester in 2016 and Chelsea in 2017, all of whom excelled in the Premier League without the distraction of European football. You imagine this element of no European football would especially please Mourinho given how often he has lamented the number of games Spurs have played this season and how it has reduced his time to work with the players on the training pitch.
Also the Champions League is one thing but the Europa League has far less appeal for players, while match-going fans will quickly grow frustrated with the Thursday-Sunday routine.
But, and there are a few buts, no European football would be a big dent financially for the club — especially so soon after their stadium move. Even the much-derided Europa League poured £40 million into Arsenal’s coffers last season, which for Spurs would be enough to buy another Bergwijn and be left with plenty to spare.
Then there is the prestige element (as Jack alludes to with Amazon, the new stadium and hosting NFL matches in the previous question). Spurs are relatively new to the status of “super club” — some would argue they are not yet there — and need to be playing regular European football to cement themselves as a heavyweight. Further down the line this could have implications if there is a European Super League breakaway, and in the more immediate term it will affect their ability to attract top-quality players. They are not a club like Manchester United or Liverpool whose prestige will always make them an attractive proposition whether they are in Europe or not.
In short: be careful what you wish for.

What would the narrative about the club have been this morning had we won on penalties? I mean it’s not like we lost 5-0. That said, I switched off before the pens started as there was such an inevitability about the outcome. I also think people are forgetting probably our biggest loss (Christian Eriksen) that the team are having to come to terms with, despite his lethargic performances before he finally left. If Eriksen played yesterday we’d have won comfortably. — Jim L
Jack Pitt-Brooke:
It’s a good question and one that we in the media don’t ask ourselves enough. Honestly a lot of us would be writing something along the lines of “Jose finds a way” and asking whether he can steer his way through the Burnley and Leipzig trips. Obviously the result, being decided by penalties, is very contingent and our coverage should reflect that. That said, I think there’s no avoiding the fact that the performance from roughly 30 to 80 minutes was awful, totally passive and shapeless and weak. Worse than the second half against Wolves, or anything against Leipzig or Chelsea. The team is playing badly and we have to get that across.
I think that Eriksen has been a big loss, even if the rise of Lo Celso has helped to plug that gap a bit. Lo Celso has been fantastic, he’s Spurs’ best player by miles right now. But what Eriksen had was years of knowhow, accumulated over 267 starts for Spurs. To lose that and Kane and Son basically at the same time is devastating to the practical habitual knowledge of the front line. Sometimes in recent weeks Spurs have looked like they have forgotten how to attack, and that is the reason why.

Thank you for posting this.
 

spursfan77

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2005
46,680
104,956
This is worth a read. I wonder how the virus will impact wages?


The warning came from the accountants.
Twenty-one years ago last week, Deloitte and Touche released a joint report about spiralling costs in the Premier League, where three quarters of the clubs were paying out more than 50 per cent of their annual income on wages.
Chelsea had been the highest spenders in 1997-98, having committed £27 million towards player salaries. Manchester United were second at £26.9 million and Liverpool third (£24 million). The bottom two in English football’s top division were Wimbledon (£9 million) and Southampton (£7 million).
Deloitte and Touche were right. They had taken into consideration the impact of the Bosman ruling three years earlier, as well as Sky’s investment in the game’s coverage to project what was to follow.
Inside the next 12 months, broadcaster interest intensified with Sky (Chelsea, Leeds United and Manchester United), NTL (Newcastle United and Aston Villa), Carlton (Arsenal) and Granada (Liverpool) all taking 9.9 per cent stakes in each of those Premier League clubs.
Sky then ploughed £1.1 billion into its contract when renewing its Premier League deal for a package of 66 matches. This was before Roman Abramovich, the richest man in Russia, came along at Chelsea and created new wage structures that did not correspond with his club’s income. It was also before a nation state bought Manchester City and signed some of the most expensive footballers on the planet.
On Tuesday, Rick Parry, the English Football League’s chairman, outlined the way figures have since accelerated and to what levels they are now allocated differently.
In 2018, the Premier League earned £3 billion from TV money and £2.9 billion went out in wages. Meanwhile, the EFL spent £1 billion in wages despite receiving just £100 million from TV. Parry, formerly Liverpool’s chief executive, described it as a crazy model that requires a “reset.”
The focus, indeed, falls sharpest on those who have benefited most financially from football’s new wealth. If the figures including bonuses relating to David de Gea’s Manchester United salary are to be believed, it means that the Premier League’s highest paid player now almost earns as much by himself as the total 1999 wage bill of the club he now represents.
But how do players feel about the money they earn?
In a month-long investigation, The Athletic learnt how in 1993, shortly after the Premier League was launched, wages were paid through a central system. Because of a glitch, there was one month where all players weren’t paid their match bonuses.
“But nobody noticed until a few weeks later,” says a source formerly with the organisation, who wonders whether they were well paid then and didn’t miss it because it hardly had an impact on their lives, or whether the mistake wasn’t spotted because there were no layers of management looking after their interests, as there are today.
“Nobody was knocking down the doors of Premier League HQ,” remembers the source. “I’m not sure if that would be the case now.”
“We don’t feel comfortable talking about money publicly,” says a Premier League footballer. In the process of speaking to a dozen players from all levels of the game, The Athletic was faced with the same question at the start of each conversation. It went something like this: “I’ll talk but please don’t put my name.”
The reasoning was similar: it is one of the football’s last taboo subjects. Another player, also contracted to a Premier League club, put it this way: “Every footballer knows if they discuss money they earn in either positive or negative terms, a landslide of criticism will come their way. We’ve got a worse reputation than the taxman.”
It seems to frustrate footballers that the money they earn counts against them when they are not performing well but gets forgotten if they are lifting trophies.
For the players, an unhappy moral cycle exists because the better times tend to leave them feeling untouchable and also less relatable to the average supporter. “When this happens,” says one agent, “it ends up with greater financial demands being placed on clubs and then the process starts again the moment a player has a bad game following a wage rise.”
Careers are built around three or four contract negotiations and if they get them wrong, it leads towards another version of unhappiness. In the Netflix documentary series The Last Dance, which details brilliantly the Chicago Bulls’ 1997-98 season, the legendary Scottie Pippen walks out on the team because of a pay dispute.
Pippen had signed a seven-year contract with Chicago in 1991 for $18 million and though he became one of the top players in the sport, he was outside the NBA’s top 100 best-paid players because of the deal — which the club refused to renegotiate. Despite his reputation, he ended up looking greedy. It led to him backing down and when Chicago beat Utah Jazz in the finals at the end of the 1997-98 season, all of what happened earlier on in the campaign was forgotten and forgiven.
The average NBA salary ($7.7 million) is more than double the average pay among Premier League footballers (about £3 million) and basketball’s best paid players are remunerated more generously than the stars of English football.
Pippen’s Chicago team-mate Dennis Rodman says in the same series that he would play basketball for nothing. His pay justified “the rest of the shit we have to deal with.”
When speaking to The Athletic, eight of the 12 footballers mentioned this quote to try to illustrate the way they see their financial world.
One Premier League footballer does not speak for his entire industry of course, but two have admitted they did question whether it was right donating part of their wages towards the NHS recently. Any right-minded person could probably understand why.
“It’s the government’s job in this country to fund the National Health Service and pay doctors and nurses the money they deserve,” one player said. “I’m happy to help but the NHS isn’t a charity and it shouldn’t be considered as one, even in the current climate or going forward.
“It feels as though the government has targeted us because we are mainly from working-class backgrounds and we have worked hard to become wealthy. Where was the rallying call for the bankers? Again, if I put my name to this (article) there would be lots of people who’d condemn me.”
The player thinks footballers are easy targets, not only because of the money they earn but because so few of them talk about politics. “Some of us might not have an opinion on the way things are but I know a few who do, and it feels as though we aren’t allowed to speak our minds about that either because, well, we’re footballers and we’re well paid so we shouldn’t have anything to complain about.”
Another player, formerly with a Premier League club, recognises footballers could be the target again soon. After the health secretary Matt Hancock suggested last month that footballers should take a pay cut, on Tuesday evening Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary, said a resumption of this paused Premier League season would “lift the spirits of the nation.”
“It feels like the government are trying to switch attention away from all of their failures and we’re the scapegoats,” says the player.
He thinks some footballers are wary about returning to the pitch amid a pandemic but there are others who wonder how it will be received if footballers resist attempting to get back to normal while the world around them does.
“If we say, ‘No, it’s not safe,’ but in a month’s time big parts of the country are travelling to and from work every day, they’ll come for us again. I can see the argument now. ‘They are being precious. Look at the money they earn…’”
“They” — footballers — are often bracketed as one entity when it comes to what they earn and what they spend. The reality is very different.
“If footballers seem similar, it might be because they’re categorised as all being the same when, really, they’re not,” says an agent with experience of representing African players.
The biggest common concern among those he’s worked with from Cameroon, Nigeria and Ivory Coast tends to relate to family and their expectations.
“I’ve looked after after three players in the Premier League and the Championship and as much as 60 per cent of each of their wages went home, reaching into extended families and friends,” he says.
“When they’ve lived in England, they’ve lived alone and had modest lives. Their existence wasn’t as lavish as anyone imagines. Semi-detached homes on modern housing estates, that sort of thing.”
“Most players are very interested in money,” says another agent. “But that is because they are motivated first by success on the pitch. And the richest clubs over the last couple of decades have emerged as the most successful teams.
“So what are you supposed to do? Sign for a team that has less finance behind them, knowing they have less chance of winning?”
“Some of the worst critics are the former players,” says a current player, active in the Premier League.
He feels it is partly because of their job descriptions, where pundits are expected to say something outrageous to attract attention. But he also thinks it is because of jealousy “because they feel like they’ve missed out on something. I wouldn’t mind having less pay and enjoying some of the freedoms they had, to be honest.”
Away from the pitch, there are no examples of active footballers calling out another active footballer over his wages and rarely, he says, even in a dressing room argument will the issue arise.
The closest example of this came from Peter Crouch, who was no longer Xherdan Shaqiri’s team-mate when he wrote in his autobiography: “There is a fine line between being mercurial and just doing what you want. People will point out, rightly, that Shaqiri scored eight goals and had seven assists during the 2017–18 season in a team relegated. But for 85 minutes each weekend he would be making everyone else’s job slightly harder. Resentment grew in the squad; resentment grew with management. Neither system nor player could mesh.”
Shaqiri was Stoke City’s highest paid star. “I think this was the equivalent of saying, ‘He needs to run around a bit more to justify what he’s earning’,” says one Premier League player, who believes there is no chance of more open discussion among players about pay because so many feel embattled.
Yet on the pitch, it sometimes happens. In 2016, Newcastle’s Jonjo Shelvey (below) described it as “cashing off” when he admitted to calling Wolverhampton Wanderers’ Dominic Iorfa a “peasant” because he earned more money than him in an ill-tempered game at St James’ Park.
Earlier this year, Manchester City teenager Taylor Harwood-Bellis, who is paid £100,000 a year, was accused by S****horpe United’s Kevin van Veen of saying, “I’ve got more money than you,” in an EFL Trophy match.
Though City denied the allegation, Van Veen also described this insult as “cashing off,” which might imply it is more common on a football pitch than anyone really wants to admit.
“You mention you are a footballer and moods toward you change straight away,” says a League One player who was in the supermarket last week when a cashier, interested in the club badge on his tracksuit, struck up a conversation. After establishing which team he played for (a modest one), the first question that came he way was, “Oh, you must be loaded…”
The public’s general perception, he believes strongly, does not meet reality but if they did align, why is it considered such a reprehensible thing that the players — the central characters in the story of the sport — are paid handsomely?
The median salary for all full-time employees in the UK is £30,353 and outside the Premier League and the Championship, players can earn anything from that threshold up to £120,000. Yet careers in football are much shorter than in other industries. These sorts of figures are relative.
Players outside the top two divisions agonise about what to do after they have retired from the game, which if spent exclusively in the lower leagues is not a life-changing experience financially for the majority of players. One injury, and it could be over way before time.
“The saying about ‘football is nothing without fans’ is true but fans become players, so why should they not be the ones who benefit most from the game, rather than a wealthy owner who might not always be motivated by the sport?” asks the League One player.
He recognises that despite such logic, a balance has probably already been tipped given fair arguments around fans missing out the most due to high prices because of hefty salaries, which is overwhelmingly the biggest outgoing in every professional football club’s turnover. His stance, though, is built around experiences outside the Premier League — the level he started out at before dropping down the divisions.
“Football does not create a nest egg for any player whose career has been spent outside the Championship,” he says. “I am in my mid-twenties and I know this already. I’ve never spent my wages on anything fancy, just rent and a car that doesn’t break down. I’ve been careful and I’m already thinking about what comes after football.”
A footballer’s relationship with a healthier bank balance tends to start much earlier than for the majority of people. When one Football League player joined a Premier League club at the relatively late age of 16, he signed a three-year professional contract. This entitled him to a weekly wage of £800 in the first year and £900 in the second before reaching £1,000 in the third.
He had never used a cash machine before and at the end of his first pay day, went to the bank with another scholar to check his account. This is where he saw what money really looked like for the first time. The screen reflected his signing-on fee: £45,000. “I walked away grinning, though it was a nervous sort of grin. I was excited, but I was almost embarrassed as well. I couldn’t believe it.”
His parents were strict. Some of the money was used as a deposit for a new rented apartment and he was allowed to buy a MacBook, which he still uses. “Quite a few lads were on a similar deal to me and they don’t have a pot to piss in now. I think football could do better with educating players on how to deal with the money we earn.”
The contract he signed as a 16-year-old stipulated that at the end of the second season, the club he played for had the option to secure him on a longer-term deal with better wages. By that point though, the position of the academy director who signed him in the first place had weakened and the first-team manager was having more of a say in the allocation of funding.
A new deal was finally offered but on vastly reduced terms that were not a part of the original agreement. His agent suggested he held off and focused instead on his development. To the first-team manager, he thinks, this approach may have seemed like he was being greedy. This led to stories appearing in the press.
“But I wasn’t,” he stresses. “I was desperate to stay, and the club realised this. It felt like the club was trying to take advantage of my appetite.”
He was not demanding an improved salary, only what was promised to him in the first place if all went well — and it had. By 18, he had played for the first team in friendlies and was included on a pre-season tour.
“I wasn’t particularly fussed by money,” he says. “I’d seen how some players a few years older than me had become less hungry after signing first-team contracts. It felt as though football became less of a priority for them.”
It became a problem in the dressing room because several of the young players shared the same agent. This meant they each knew what the others were making and had a better idea of what they could be earning.
None of the wages, however, compared to what was on offer at one Premier League club, where there were rumours one player was taking home £20,000 a week at the age of 17. “We were on good money but at that age we all agreed it seemed ridiculous,” he says. “I think we were aware of the difference between decent money and a huge amount of money.”
He recognises there are good agents and bad ones, just as there are good players as well as bad. The real problems arrive when clubs stockpile players who use a particular agency. In some instances, this had led to the clubs having as many as five players represented by the same agent playing in the same position.
“It makes you wonder whether they are doing the best for you or just attempting to earn as much money out of the client as possible in the short term. Because of the money, you become paranoid and begin to ask yourself whether anyone is really looking after you,” he says.
The disparity between the Premier League and the Football League is laid bare, he thinks, by the fact he earned just as much playing at under-23 level as he did in League One.
He estimates that three quarters of players who drop down the divisions earn more representing the youth teams of Premier League clubs than they do at senior level in the lower divisions, despite their lack of professional experience.
Do players heading in an opposite direction feel any differently? Another League One player, a latecomer to the professional game, admits that he is trying to earn as much as he can in the short time-frame he has left.
He was still playing amateur football in his late teens then worked his way up through the non-League pyramid before earning a contract at a Football League club in his mid-twenties. It frustrates him when friends tell him how lucky he is to be where he is now because he sees his progress as the consequence of a lot of hard work.
“There’s very little good luck about it, if anything I’ve had a lot of bad luck,” he says.
Unless he earns a move to the Championship or higher in the next couple of years, he thinks he’ll be working on a building site once he retires. This makes it difficult for him to sit back and think about the journey he has been on and the thrill of being where he is now “because unless I continue to push myself really hard — to be obsessed about being the best I can — the future is going to be back where I was a decade ago.”
He is only being honest when he admits, “I’ll move anywhere in England for more money.” Yet if he said this publicly, he thinks he’d be treated by both his own supporters, rivals and even neutrals, “like a murderer.”
 

spursfan77

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2005
46,680
104,956
Only a few footballers end up joining the elite and agents tend to describe the most likely trajectory for clients like this: first decent deal at 16; by 21, a player might be contracted in the Championship or League One but not necessarily in the first team; at 25 – if fortunate — League Two, the National League and the levels below await.
Frequently by end of their twenties, they have left the game altogether or at best — if the motivation is still there — he plays with his mates in the amateur ranks.
“You only have to look at the names in Merseyside’s Sunday Leagues to realise the way it goes for a lot of players,” says one Liverpool-based agent.
He references Adam Pepper, once the subject of a transfer between Everton and Liverpool for a reported £100,000 when he was just 12 years old. Then there is Karl Clair, who in 2009 played in an FA Youth Cup final for Liverpool. In 2011, Dale Jennings (below right) moved from Tranmere Rovers to Bayern Munich.
Jennings and Clair have been team-mates for Kensington Fields in recent seasons, facing Pepper who represented the Black Bull.
“Established Premier League players earn the most amount of dough, that is indisputable; but the majority of players might get good terms in the first three years of their professional careers but that won’t be anywhere near enough to settle on once they’ve finished with game,” says a Manchester-based agent with clients across all levels, as well as abroad.
“Given that it’s a profession they’ve trained for and, in a lot of cases, the only profession they’re qualified for it’s a very short career with enormous risks taken. Is it really that unfair if they get paid well from an early age, considering what may lie ahead?”
Listen to those who broker the deals for players, indeed, and they tend to make similar points relating to industry leaders in other fields.
“In every aspect of western life, if you are one of the best in your business and money is there, you earn the top dollar,” says another agent, who asks, “Why should Premier League footballers be any different?” He mentions the Premier League because he also represents lower league players and he appreciates the reality around their earnings, “which more often than not are relatable to most working people, despite the way it looks.”
He realises too much too soon has the potential to threaten a player’s natural progress but he thinks the clubs escape the focus even though it is their hands that are ultimately on the cash register.
“They need to manage their resources better,” says one agent, who uses the story of Queens Park Rangers as an example following their promotion to the Premier League in 2011. They committed £70,000 a week on each of three new strikers and then even more on the Brazilian goalkeeper, Julio Cesar.
Another agent compared this strategy to that of a restaurant owner who buys luxury ingredients for customers they don’t have in order to fulfil a menu of 200 dishes when there are only 10 tables in the place.
“An agent will never say a player is earning too much money but players don’t have the club’s books sitting in front of them. So clubs have to be more responsible by building a squad they can afford,” he says.
“Football, for some reason, regularly brings out the worst in business people who fail to apply the practices in football which have made them successful in the first place. This often results in salaries going up and up and up. And with that, so do expectations. This builds a pressure — sometimes a hatred towards players when, really, it’s the club that has set the working environment.”
Sometimes you have to fight to be paid what you’re worth too. One agent gives the example of an offer made to one of the teenage Championship players he takes care of.
The player did well last season, breaking into the first team somewhat unexpectedly because of the appointment of a new manager who thought differently to his predecessors. With the player’s contract due to expire, the club offered him £3,000 a week. Yet he was in the team ahead of more experienced campaigners who were on much higher wages than that.
The agent had two conversations with the club, the first one where harsh language was used, then a second in a more reasonable tone. The second offer came in at £16,500 a week.
“The player may have a long career, he might not,” he suggests. “But it shows why he needs someone to have those awkward conversations he might not be comfortable having. If agents vanished tomorrow, players would be taken advantage of — just like they were before.”
 

Saoirse

Well-Known Member
Aug 20, 2013
6,143
15,550
Fuck me. League 1 and 2 players moaning that they won't be able to retire and never work again by the age of 35 as if that's something any of the rest of us can do - despite the fact that they actually could with some financial discipline. The entitlement is absolutely unreal.
 

Marty

Audere est farce
Mar 10, 2005
39,885
62,554
Fuck me. League 1 and 2 players moaning that they won't be able to retire and never work again by the age of 35 as if that's something any of the rest of us can do - despite the fact that they actually could with some financial discipline. The entitlement is absolutely unreal.
I'm astonished that you read any of that as moaning. It's telling it like it is and telling people to stop treating League One and Two footballers like they're loaded when they're in all likelihood not.
 

Saoirse

Well-Known Member
Aug 20, 2013
6,143
15,550
I'm astonished that you read any of that as moaning. It's telling it like it is and telling people to stop treating League One and Two footballers like they're loaded when they're in all likelihood not.

They're not "loaded". But they're extremely comfortable, and earn about as much or more in a 15-20 years as the average person will in their lifetimes. It gives them a choice between living like a normal person but retiring at 35, or living pretty lavishly like the top 5-10% of earners for however long their career lasts. They're not high up the list of people I symphasise with during the worst economic crisis in centuries.
 

'O Zio

Well-Known Member
Dec 27, 2014
7,405
13,785
They're not "loaded". But they're extremely comfortable, and earn about as much or more in a 15-20 years as the average person will in their lifetimes. It gives them a choice between living like a normal person but retiring at 35, or living pretty lavishly like the top 5-10% of earners for however long their career lasts. They're not high up the list of people I symphasise with during the worst economic crisis in centuries.

I think you're massively overestimating how much league 1/2 players earn. Someone's who has played most of their career as a first team regular in the Championship could maybe retire after football but your average league 2 player earns similar money to people doing run of the mill office jobs so they're in no position to retire and having left school at 16 most of them won't have any kind of qualification or skills to fall back on after football.

I agree that in the grand scheme of things there are people much worse off but the way you're making out like if they weren't stupid they'd all be able to just kick back once their career is over is just nonsense, sorry.
 

dontcallme

SC Supporter
Mar 18, 2005
33,985
81,905
I think you're massively overestimating how much league 1/2 players earn. Someone's who has played most of their career as a first team regular in the Championship could maybe retire after football but your average league 2 player earns similar money to people doing run of the mill office jobs so they're in no position to retire and having left school at 16 most of them won't have any kind of qualification or skills to fall back on after football.

I agree that in the grand scheme of things there are people much worse off but the way you're making out like if they weren't stupid they'd all be able to just kick back once their career is over is just nonsense, sorry.
The average League Two salary is £1400 per week. If living outside London and you are sensible with money you could definitely retire at 35.
 
Last edited:
Top