Can football clubs worldwide continue to afford to pay players wages in full.
- Thread starter Darylhull
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Let others judge.
Pathetic response, zero substance as usual.
You talking to me ?
I noticed that all the comments in this thread seemed to be from an ignored member so I thought I'd unmute you to see if you were offering anything of value.
I haven't been in audit for two years so it's disturbing you have memorised such old facts about me.
Apologies for not quoting your posts but when it's the post directly before mine it seems quite apparent who I'm talking to, no?
I thought my comment was well reasoned in response to yours and a couple of people liked it so I wasn't alone in thinking so. Nothing that should have provoked such an unhinged rant.
I haven't been in audit for two years so it's disturbing you have memorised such old facts about me.
Apologies for not quoting your posts but when it's the post directly before mine it seems quite apparent who I'm talking to, no?
I thought my comment was well reasoned in response to yours and a couple of people liked it so I wasn't alone in thinking so. Nothing that should have provoked such an unhinged rant.
This is by para:
1) 5 comments out of 80+ so far. 3 of them were responses to my assumed view that you were responding to my posts - no direct connection.
2) Why would I not recall your business connection give you had criticized me publicly on this forum, and even sent me an abusive critical personal message.
3) There can be posts made between the one you're reading (quite often) & responding to - so I'd suggest anyone should "reply" for clarity. Ever thought about that possibility ?
4) There was absolutely no reasoning, logic, explanation in your responses ( not directed personally - see above) to my posts. Just total dismissal. My so called rant ( my expression initially) came before your first response.
I'm not one for insulting people. In this case I'd say you're intellectually devoid of logical debate. Intelligent in a general sense, but insensitive to those with differing opinions. You didn't respond to my question(s) other than suggested I needed help .
Sorry lad, I think it's you who needs guidance.
I'm not clogging this thread up any further so this will be my last message to you on the subject.
1) The top threads on the page all had their last comment from you so I checked to see this thread.
2) I've never sent you a private message in my life, care to quote it for proof?
3) Sure, but in this case there weren't any so there was no need.
4) No reasoning in my response? I pointed out that the 120m of revenue minimum from the TV deal means clubs won't ever walk away from that and you'd have to be crazy to think they would. That's all I said.
I suggested you needed help because quite a mild post from me triggered a huge rant about me that seemed like it had been brewing for some time. To hold on to anger like that when I (at a guess) have maybe responded to posts on here from you maybe 2-3 times in the last year (I mean, I barely post on here at the best of times) is unhealthy.
I hold no grudges. I respond to personal insult. Despite my age, I remember previous discussions.
Denial of impact is unhealthy - sort it out.
Re 2)
You bloody well did, or maybe it was a public post, but I doubt it. The discussion was about financial aspects, and you were talking about "corporate veil". I posed a question. You used the same tactic "Don't want to bore the other posters, don't want to clutter up the thread" or words to that effect, so you sent me a p.m.
First line in your p.m accused me of being illiterate !
Remember, or are you gonna lie your way out of it again ?
Save me some time to find the evidence, or have you deleted the evidence ?
Looks like Liverpool are the latest to claim the cost of paying their matchday staff is too much for them. Ridiculous.
The season is null and void. It’s the only sensible action. we all go again next year.
Gives the scousers something to whine about too.
Gives the scousers something to whine about too.
It has been claimed that Kyle Walker, the England and Manchester City defender, invited two call girls over for a three-hour sex session before urging fans to follow Government rules.
I did find the comment from the call girl amusing.
Walker, it is claimed, invited escort Louise McNamara, 21, and a 24-year-old Brazilian call girl to his £8,000-a-month rented apartment in Hale, Cheshire and he was joined by a pal.
Ms McNamara, who along with the second escort was paid £2,200 in cash before the party moved on into the bedroom, has since slammed the footballer.
"Kyle really should know better. On the one hand he’s inviting strangers round to his house for sex, and the next day he’s lecturing everyone on the need to stay safe.
"He’s a hypocrite and putting people at risk."
Still, at last he's not sunbathing in the park eh.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/kyle-walker-hosts-sex-party-21815736
I did find the comment from the call girl amusing.
Walker, it is claimed, invited escort Louise McNamara, 21, and a 24-year-old Brazilian call girl to his £8,000-a-month rented apartment in Hale, Cheshire and he was joined by a pal.
Ms McNamara, who along with the second escort was paid £2,200 in cash before the party moved on into the bedroom, has since slammed the footballer.
"Kyle really should know better. On the one hand he’s inviting strangers round to his house for sex, and the next day he’s lecturing everyone on the need to stay safe.
"He’s a hypocrite and putting people at risk."
Still, at last he's not sunbathing in the park eh.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/kyle-walker-hosts-sex-party-21815736
What about them ? The point is asking non players to be furloughed so the clubs can keep paying players their crazy wages - ok they contribute a hell of a lot in taxes but somehow the social principle is being lost and ppl like Rooney n Lineker are claiming they are victims
The clubs could furlough 1 or 2 of their superstars, the government will give them 2,500 a month (sure they will have some savings) and the club will have enough money to pay all their other workers 100%
I heard that Tottenham have 550 non playing staff.
I completely agree that clubs should not be taking Government money to furlough lower paid non playing staff whilst still handing out huge sums to (at present non-playing) playing staff. However, I dont see why a deferment of wages isn't in order for players, especially the lower paid ones. Sorting out what happens to players out of contract at the end of June might help.
I dont think any reasonably well paid player would ever object to a deferment.
I don't mind the argument that they're contributing a lot in tax, at the end of the day it's the owners being greedy not wanting to have to pay ordinary staff's wages.
At the end of the day it's the owners paying astronomical contractual salaries to the ****ing players due to the money grabbing TV companies who essentially underwrite the game/business.
ST14 will not see this as he'll have put me on ignore. It was the very point I was attempting to articulate in an earlier post # 74. One he didn't understand & therefore insulted me.
I'm not bitter
