Football League Suspended

[Leonard Venkhater]

17 hours ago, Mattyblue said:

I’m not claiming anything, it’s my opinion, as that’s what a message board is.

I’m talking about the UK, couldn’t give a feck about the stances of other nations, good luck to them.

Im sure ITV’s re-showing of Euro 96 is pulling in the viewers too, it’s a novelty at the moment. A year of behind closed doors football will see that novelty wear off very quickly.

Lol..Sometimes a messageboard can seem like a court of law...

[HowieFive0]

18 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

I dont know how you can make that claim of most fans? Spoke to them all? 

But Spanish, Italian, Austria clubs are returning plus German Football has returned. 

BT sport viewing figures were the same as PL games for their coverage of Bundesliga. 

I wonder what the viewing figure for the 1st PL Game? 

 

Todays viewing figure results ..

BT Bundesliga  500 000 ..... Midsomer Murders 886 000  

(Read in a James Alexander Gordon voice .)

[Mattyblue]

11 minutes ago, HowieFive0 said:

Todays viewing figure results ..

BT Bundesliga  500 000 ..... Midsomer Murders 886 000  

(Read in a James Alexander Gordon voice .)

There’s obviously a big public appetite for rural based detective shows then!

Get John Nettles a test ASAP!

Edited May 19, 2020 by Mattyblue

[chaddyrovers]

52 minutes ago, HowieFive0 said:

Todays viewing figure results ..

BT Bundesliga  500 000 ..... Midsomer Murders 886 000  

(Read in a James Alexander Gordon voice .)

How many people actually BT? I don't and look into buying it but aint paying 25 pounds a month. 

 

In other news, 748 players and staff in the PL for the coronavirus and only 6 players test positive and now self isolated now for 7 days

[K-Hod]

25 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

How many people actually BT? I don't and look into buying it but aint paying 25 pounds a month. 

 

In other news, 748 players and staff in the PL for the coronavirus and only 6 players test positive and now self isolated now for 7 days

Ive got it, but I’ve got my broadband with them, so it makes sense. Plus, I can’t justify the cost of Sky Sports. If I want to watch a match enough, I’ll go to the pub.

[rigger]

10 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

Ive got it, but I’ve got my broadband with them, so it makes sense. Plus, I can’t justify the cost of Sky Sports. If I want to watch a match enough, I’ll go to the pub.

I don’t know one that’s open 

[chaddyrovers]

8 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

Ive got it, but I’ve got my broadband with them, so it makes sense. Plus, I can’t justify the cost of Sky Sports. If I want to watch a match enough, I’ll go to the pub.

don't like their broadband when we had them before. Was poor service. 

never had a problem with Sky Broadband or Tv. My Sky Sports package is only 34 pounds per month. More sense for me Sky Sports cos they have my 5 sports I want to watch(Football, cricket, NBA, Golf, F1)

[K-Hod]

25 minutes ago, rigger said:

I don’t know one that’s open 

I don’t know any football that’s on Sky at the moment either....

[RevidgeBlue]

4 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

Fair play to Troy Deeney as well who has refused to go back to training because he has a little boy with breathing difficulties and carrying the further risk of being from a BAME background. He has said that his families health is more important than the financial side and I am sure he isnt the only player with such a stance.

I'm going to have to rain on the Deeney love in I'm afraid, he's had plenty to say on the issue but I'm not aware anyone has said players will be forced back to play against their will so I'm not really sure what his problem is, many players will want to be returning to play.

Also after many years as a highly paid  Premier League or Championshio  footballer he's preaching from an ivory tower on the issue of going skint, he's highly unlikely to ever be short of a bob or two, Watford are far more likely to go bust before he does.

Apparently he also originally said that he would have no problem returning to phase one of training but when push came to shove he has refused to do so.

All he needed to do was say " The health of my son is paramount therefore I won't personally be returning until I'm satisfied that conditions place my son at no risk. However I appreciate that this is not fair on my Club therefore I will not be taking any pay until I return." and I'm sure most people would have applauded him for putting his son first.

Bet he hasn't offered to dock his pay though. If he has, my apologies to him.

[RevidgeBlue]

4 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

"I can't get a haircut until mid-July but I can go and get in a box with 19 people and go and jump for a header and nobody could answer the questions, not because they didn't want to, just because they don't know the information."

This was a quote that showed how illogical it all is.

I'm sure that is a case of Deeney simply trying to justify his position and that he isn't so incredibly stupid he doesn't realise the difference.

The fact you can't go for a haircut isn't a pretty regulation brought in to penalise Deeney in particular or footballers in general , it applies to everyone. If Deeney returns to play he'll be in a sanitised environment coming into contact with other players and staff who have been tested over a period and been shown not to have the virus therefore there's exceptionally little risk.

If hairdressers were open, Anyone going to a hairdresser has not been tested for the virus, nor do they know if the hairdresser has it, nor do they know if any other customers have it.

All the difference in the world although there will come a point when people have to take that sort of risk in general.

[K-Hod]

16 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:I'm going to have to rain on the Deeney love in I'm afraid, he's had plenty to say on the issue but I'm not aware anyone has said players will be forced back to play against their will so I'm not really sure what his problem is, many players will want to be returning to play.

Also after many years as a highly paid  Premier League or Championshio  footballer he's preaching from an ivory tower on the issue of going skint, he's highly unlikely to ever be short of a bob or two, Watford are far more likely to go bust before he does.

Apparently he also originally said that he would have no problem returning to phase one of training but when push came to shove he has refused to do so.

All he needed to do was say " The health of my son is paramount therefore I won't personally be returning until I'm satisfied that conditions place my son at no risk. However I appreciate that this is not fair on my Club therefore I will not be taking any pay until I return." and I'm sure most people would have applauded him for putting his son first.

Bet he hasn't offered to dock his pay though. If he has, my apologies to him.

The full quote- ‘I’m not even talking about football at the moment, I’m talking about my family’s health. If I feel I’m not looking after my family, then I’m not going to do it. I’m not going to risk my family’s health. 
‘What are they going to do? Take money off me? I’ve been broke before, so it doesn’t bother me.’
Surprised you can find an issue with that tbh. 
He’s opened the door to Watford not paying him. Would you? If you were on the contract of your life and coming towards the end of your career, would you?
It’s probably splitting hairs to talk about him offering to dock his pay, in reality.....

[RevidgeBlue]

3 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

6 players in the Prem have tested positive now.

That's a glass half empty or glass half full sort of situation. I'd say it was incredibly positive in that less than 1% of the 748 tests on players and staff carried out were positive and that that probably mirrors the situation within the general population. It proves the tests are working and those six people can self isolate for seven days then crack on free of any further worry.

It would be far more worrying if tests had revealed no cases, that would tend to indicate the tests weren't working.

The Bundesliga apparently had not too dissimilar results in their first round of testing, 10 positive tests out of 1700. That probably reflected the situation in their Country as well.

[RevidgeBlue]

6 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

The full quote- ‘I’m not even talking about football at the moment, I’m talking about my family’s health. If I feel I’m not looking after my family, then I’m not going to do it. I’m not going to risk my family’s health. 
‘What are they going to do? Take money off me? I’ve been broke before, so it doesn’t bother me.’
Surprised you can find an issue with that tbh. 
He’s opened the door to Watford not paying him. Would you? If you were on the contract of your life and coming towards the end of your career, would you?
It’s probably splitting hairs to talk about him offering to dock his pay, in reality.....

By putting it in those terms he's getting his shot across the bows in early making it look like Watford are the bad guys if they refuse to pay him.

Like I say, I've never seen the slightest suggestion that any player Deeney or otherwise, will be forced to play if they feel unhappy with it, so I'm not sure where the issue arises.

 

[chaddyrovers]

0.8% of test conducted tested positive..

Burnley assistant manager Ian Woan test positive but was asymptomatic and need self isolated at home. 

[Oldgregg86]

For me any player should be able to refuse to play. Any player that refuses to play doesn’t get paid . It’s that simple for me

Edited May 19, 2020 by Oldgregg86

[K-Hod]

17 minutes ago, Oldgregg86 said:

For me any player should be able to refuse to play. Any player that refuses to play doesn’t get paid . It’s that simple for me

Can’t say fairer than that.

[RevidgeBlue]

2 hours ago, Oldgregg86 said:

For me any player should be able to refuse to play. Any player that refuses to play doesn’t get paid . It’s that simple for me

Exactly.

As far as I can tell, it's never been in dispute that any player should be able to refuse to play.

There doesn't however seem to have been much suggestion to date that players should not be paid if they do refuse which clearly isn't right. Any normal member of the Public taking that stance would only get SSP and there's no reason why footballers should be a special case.

[Stuart]

So in order to get football back on TV...

- NHS and other key workers have to wait in line as stock they could have had access to is consumed weekly for footballers and staff

- L1 and L2 team having no income and potentially going to the wall is ok

- Footballers with health concerns including their families mean they don’t get paid unless they take their chances

Meanwhile....

- Fans cannot attend because it’s not safe

- Small businesses still cannot reopen (because it’s not safe)

- Everyone’s Summer holidays are cancelled or on hold - because it’s not safe

 

Why is Premier League football any different? (And let’s be honest, Championship football is only being discussed in the same breath because of promotion to the PL or it would already have been cancelled).

The only real concern here is large sums of money being paid to a small number of people who operate the PL and some of their clubs. I can’t believe there are ordinary folk who agree with this. Let’s get shops open before we talk about football.

Yet another symptom of how football doesn’t need paying fans - or at least it sees them as somewhat necessary for atmosphere.

[Hasta]

2 hours ago, Stuart said:

So in order to get football back on TV...

- NHS and other key workers have to wait in line as stock they could have had access to is consumed weekly for footballers and staff

- L1 and L2 team having no income and potentially going to the wall is ok

- Footballers with health concerns including their families mean they don’t get paid unless they take their chances

 

I'm not bothered regarding football coming back at the moment simply because with other changes in life at the moment it isn't a priority. I'd rather draw a line under it and restart behind closed doors further down the line.

However on your 3 points above, the first one we are being told isn't the case. I suspect test will be available privately for anyone, including government, if they pay the fees.

The second one, whether they restart in the Premier or not, is going to be a big issue. If you want hand downs from the top leagues to keep L1 and L2 clubs going then its more likely if the SKY / BT gravy train can keep on rolling.

On the third one, if you are on £60k a year in this country and your employer cannot operate at the moment then your salary is practically halved. Those people do not have a choice about whether they can do anything or not to get their full salary. Therefore players should be able to not play, but their salary should take a huge it - like more than half. The same as most well paid folk who can't do their job have had to.

Edited May 20, 2020 by Hasta

[Stuart]

11 minutes ago, Hasta said:

I'm not bothered regarding football coming back at the moment simply because with other changes in life at the moment it isn't a priority. I'd rather draw a line under it and restart behind closed doors further down the line.

However on your 3 points above, the first one we are being told isn't the case. I suspect test will be available privately for anyone, including government, if they pay the fees.

The second one, whether they restart in the Premier or not, is going to be a big issue. If you want hand downs from the top leagues to keep L1 and L2 clubs going then its more likely if the SKY / BT gravy train can keep on rolling.

On the third one, if you are on £60k a year in this country and your employer cannot operate at the moment then your salary is practically halved. Those people do not have a choice about whether they can do anything or not to get their full salary. Therefore players should be able to not play, but their salary should take a huge it - like more than half. The same as most well paid folk who can't do their job have had to.

The bit in bold seems to be a difficult thing for people to get their heads around.

This is a global pandemic.

Production of test kits is (or should be) effectively a total combined number of all of those manufacturers.

If the PL didn’t pay more to jump the queue and buy those test kits then they would be available to other buyers - I.e. the government. (They are not - or certainly should not - be specific production runs for the PL - or Apple or Amazon or whichever huge money making enterprise feels they ‘deserve’ to not have to wait in line).

What is happening in reality is 100% pure capitalism. Those who can afford it going straight to the top of the list ahead of those in most need.

Now I’m not a socialist per se but in the midst of a global pandemic, profit should not be put ahead of life, and quality of life for the 95% of people who have to wait until the 5% take their snouts out of the trough.

The fact that it is and we do, is disgusting.

The fact that ordinary people (who would - but for the grace of god - be directly impacted as a consequence) are defending this is worrying.

[roversfan99]

I am of the opinion that I dont see how it can be justified to rush through the finish to the season. Another big if maybe slightly less important reason compared to health and safety, player welfare and the immorality of using up testing unncessarily is the inconsistencies it creates in terms of integrity. If any leagues finish then it means that there has to be a stage whereby a league that has been finished meets and has teams relegated to a league that hasnt been finished whereby they have to make up a flawed system to justify then promoting teams to replace those relegated teams. Ive been told that there HAS to be promotions and relegations but never any reasons why. There doesnt. Thats before factoring in teams playing additional home or away games in front of fans prior to the postponement, a 4th and 5th sub, potentially no use of VAR etc.

But it is somewhat unfair to say that Leagues 1 and 2 are being allowed to go to the wall because the financial tapestry of clubs in these leagues is totally different. The Premier League is heavily reliant on TV deals which could theoretically still be completed even if games were behind closed doors. The lack of money from paying supporters is a blow but they would still potentially be able to still fully pay their player wages and also any necessary testing costs. That is totally different from the football league especially Leagues 1 and 2 whereby any TV money is minimal and they are heavily reliant on ticket sales. With this obviously not an option, no matter how much effort was put in to get these leagues on behind closed doors, baring in mind currently furloughed players would need to go back to 100%, that player contracts could need extending beyond June 30th to complete the season with a full team and any testing and hygeine costs, its a no goer, its not negligent or prioritising the strong to say that.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

14 hours ago, Oldgregg86 said:

For me any player should be able to refuse to play. Any player that refuses to play doesn’t get paid . It’s that simple for me

I think any club that took that approach would be on a sticky wicket legally speaking. Plus the damage that would be done to player morale would be massive.

Edited May 20, 2020 by Tyrone Shoelaces

[Oldgregg86]

16 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

I think any club that took that approach would be on a sticky wicket legally speaking. Plus the damage that would be done to player morale would be massive.

If I was an owner that’s what I would be doing. It is what it is. If you don’t want to play after every play has been tested in the most sterilised environment possible then that’s fine but you arnt getting paid. There would be no repercussions on my behalf for not playing and to argue you should get paid for doing nothing after being asked back to work is crazy. I’d love to see what my boss would say if I said no I’m not coming back but I still want a wage. 

[Oldgregg86]

This is going to be controversial but I will say it anyway. Players would have more support if they weren’t being pictured partying and not social distancing etc in public. With the exception of jack Grealish the culprits were all in the BAME category . Just an observation. And yes I accept it’s a small few but it doesn’t help. Discuss

Edited May 20, 2020 by Oldgregg86

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Oldgregg86 said:

This is going to be controversial but I will say it anyway. Players would have more support if they weren’t being pictured partying and not social distancing etc in public. With the exception of jack Grealish the culprits were all in the BAME category . Just an observation. Discuss

This is an interesting observation, and I've noted it myself. Whether it's a case of journalistic bias towards blowing up stories which seem to circulate around BAME footballers, or whether its a genuine difference who knows. It could just be put down to coincidence but if the news is going to focus on a virus being 'racist' then I think at least some discussion should be had about the insinuated correlation between people breaking rules and their class, ethnicity, race, religion, background & upbringing.

When you look at the general population, I'd say I believe that the middle class especially have been most regularly breaking lockdown rules. It's only, however, when somebody younger, or less affluent, or of BAME descendancy breaks lock down rules does the media seem to kick up a huge fuss. It doesn't mean that either is any worse than the other but you often find that people in worse off areas, or from "different" backgrounds to the Queen's English brigade are focused on more seriously.

Statistically speaking, policing in heavy BAME populated areas is significantly less prominent and less effective. Potentially the attitudes in certain areas of the country due to this policing deficit could have an affect. The attitudes in Bradford towards the police for example have lead to harrowing issues in the area going unaccounted for and thus I think a real lack of policing and leadership in certain areas in the country has a huge mental affect on young lads upbringings. Many seem to think there is no repercussions for anything these days, because why would they? There's no local bobby on the beat in small villages and on estates anymore.

A footballer from a particular background in a particular area could be more blasé about the lockdown rules just plainly due to learned behaviour and the friends they surround themselves with. A lot of these footballers are still very young. 18. 19, 20 years old. Still stuck in patterns and ideologies that they grew up around. Footballers generally seem from a distance to be very easily influenced, and the younger lads who don't yet have wives and families to consider are much more likely to give in to the peer pressure.

 

Nobody can actually say for sure whether there is any correlation, but I agree that a mature discussion should be had about the matter. Premier League footballers can't sit on high horses whilst going out bloody riding them all night!