Club watch

[remembercolinlee]

The point is that Bournemouth are off the hook for outright lying - which I called four hours before they did it

The thing is, all the club needs to do to save face is pay the 20% (as, for those unaware - such as anyone bellowing "paY yEr sTuHfF" on Twitter for an obvious example - the 80% is covered by the government furlough scheme) and go to the Winchester, have a nice cold pint, and wait for this all to blow over. The thing is, we made a bit of a bollocks of that...

If you look over the statement once again, one section stands out above all others

We hope the current discussions between the Premier League, PFA and LMA will result in players and coaches doing their bit for the football ecosystem.

The fact that is included in the statement is important, Norwich did not mention the PFA et al in their statement while Newcastle have not even released a statement, with their staff reportedly learning about their wages being furloughed by email on Monday morning

And this is, I believe, how we've made a bollocks out of it: the way the statement is worded makes it look like we were trying to make the PFA blink so that we could be the heroes and say that, as the PFA budged and reduced player wages, the club could pay the extra 20%...yet instead what happened was what's happened in the last ten years worth of transfer windows where we try and make somebody blink and instead they dig their heels in, and to the surprise of...actually, quite a lot of people judging by the response, the plan backfired so we're eating **** while the PFA et al continue to drag out negotiations about wage cuts and somehow don;t get so much as a skidmark thrown at them for it

We screwed up cos we have chosen to stress out 550 of the lowest paid employees the club has during the most stressful time in modern history.

Personally, I could not give a **** about the players getting a pay cut or not as that has no bearing on the club's decision.

As I showed previously ... this decision has saved the club (at most) £275,000 pcm...it simply is an unacceptable and immoral decision which is not lessened by the foul behaviour of other clubs.

 

[PowerSpurs]

This is not a good decision by the club. However the PFA are taking a completely unreasonable position and I hope both the club and the PFA do something different.

I don't see any issue with the club taking advantage of the Government furlough scheme though provided it is voluntary. People who want to work from home getting a 100% of their salary from the club while people who choose to do nothing get 80% of their salary from the Government sounds ok.

 

[remembercolinlee]

This is not a good decision by the club. However the PFA are taking a completely unreasonable position and I hope both the club and the PFA do something different.

I don't see any issue with the club taking advantage of the Government furlough scheme though provided it is voluntary. People who want to work from home getting a 100% of their salary from the club while people who choose to do nothing get 80% of their salary from the Government sounds ok.

If it is a genuine choice then it would be ridiculous of me (or anyone else) to criticise. I have no issue with the club using the scheme ... my issue is that they are not msking up the remaining 20%.

Edit...think this looks like I am taking issue with your post when I actuslly agree with you...think I have turned into Mr Ranty McRanty Face...

 

[humanbeingincroydon]

We screwed up cos we have chosen to stress out 550 of the lowest paid employees the club has during the most stressful time in modern history.

Personally, I could not give a **** about the players getting a pay cut or not as that has no bearing on the club's decision.

As I showed previously ... this decision has saved the club (at most) £275,000 pcm...it simply is an unacceptable and immoral decision which is not lessened by the foul behaviour of other clubs.

What the club has done is a plain example of Hanlon's razor: never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity, in our case gambling that we could make the PFA budge on their "Don't take pay cuts" stance (and remember, the initial response, which was amply demonstrated on here, was people asking why players aren't taking pay cuts to cover the difference)

The real problem was that one of the higher-ups, and we can probably toss a coin about whether it was Levy or Lewis, decided that we'd show we were making a stand while also pressuring the PFA so that we'd get the good PR as the club that stood up to the PFA and won - and that was a dumb thing to do, because unless we had signed and dated confirmation from at least five other Premier League clubs that they would follow suit, we were running the risk of hanging ourselves out to dry in the court of public opinion while also exposing a fatal flaw in our plan, namely not volunteering to cover the 20% right off the bat

...bloody hell, we're back to pass maps again aren't we?

 

[humanbeingincroydon]

You must log in or register to see images

You must log in or register to see media

 

[BobbyD]

If it is a genuine choice then it would be ridiculous of me (or anyone else) to criticise. I have no issue with the club using the scheme ... my issue is that they are not msking up the remaining 20%.

Edit...think this looks like I am taking issue with your post when I actuslly agree with you...think I have turned into Mr Ranty McRanty Face...

unbelievable really. It's not have that much money for a club, let alone the fact that levy couldn't even be arsed to make up the 20% considering he can take 80% from the government.

sums him up really

 

[PowerSpurs]

unbelievable really. It's not have that much money for a club, let alone the fact that levy couldn't even be arsed to make up the 20% considering he can take 80% from the government.

sums him up really

That isn't what I take issue with. The Govt help is only available to people in furlough ie those who are doing no work at all. People who volunteer for that are presumably happy with the 80%.....paying them 100% would make them better off than they were given they avoid travel costs. But surely people who continue to work from home deserve their full salary unless they volunteer for a reduction.

 

[remembercolinlee]

That isn't what I take issue with. The Govt help is only available to people in furlough ie those who are doing no work at all. People who volunteer for that are presumably happy with the 80%.....paying them 100% would make them better off than they were given they avoid travel costs. But surely people who continue to work from home deserve their full salary unless they volunteer for a reduction.

My school has now been closed...I am doing online courses and sending through info and ideas about what we can do to support our kids and families.
I can do this cos I have access to a work iPad and they have paid for online training courses for us to access.

In my previous school this would not have happened so I would have been unable to work from home. To cut my wages to 80% would have caused us massive hardship. Due to my child care responsibilities I have worked in walking distances of all my jobs in the past 23 years do have no travel costs. I am not unusual in this way.

Many lower paid people work close to work and have little or no travel costs.
Many of those who work as cleaners, shop staff, cooks etc at Spurs would not be spending 20% of their salary to travel to and from work so this situation is really financially harmful.

The lowest paid in society should not be losing out.

 

[PowerSpurs]

My school has now been closed...I am doing online courses and sending through info and ideas about what we can do to support our kids and families.
I can do this cos I have access to a work iPad and they have paid for online training courses for us to access.

In my previous school this would not have happened so I would have been unable to work from home. To cut my wages to 80% would have caused us massive hardship. Due to my child care responsibilities I have worked in walking distances of all my jobs in the past 23 years do have no travel costs. I am not unusual in this way.

Many lower paid people work close to work and have little or no travel costs.
Many of those who work as cleaners, shop staff, cooks etc at Spurs would not be spending 20% of their salary to travel to and from work so this situation is really financially harmful.

The lowest paid in society should not be losing out.

I completely agree which is why the furlough arrangements should be voluntary so that the people who can't afford the 20% reduction can work from home wherever possible.
Football clubs like Spurs have no need to impose any reduction on staff not on furlough. Players should be taking the pain.

 

[Citizen Kane.]

So the club has gambled with the wellbeing of its 500 lowest earners in an attempt to make the PFA blink? And we did this without first attempting to secure a joint effort from other clubs? And without actually wording our statement in a manner that suggests we'd like them to blink?

I don't buy it. Lewis is sitting on a yacht somewhere, champagne in hand, smirking to himself as he reflects on the irony that the very government he avoids paying taxes to are now bailing out swathes of his employees.

**** off Levy.
**** off football.

I'm more or less done. Beyond Jan, Kane, Lo Celso and Son I can't stand the sight of most of the players. Can't stand seeing that odious man in our dug out. Can't stand the sight of that bald twat with his £3million bonus awarded for persistent failure.

One more straw and this camel's back will probably break.

 

[PowerSpurs]

So the club has gambled with the wellbeing of its 500 lowest earners in an attempt to make the PFA blink? And we did this without first attempting to secure a joint effort from other clubs? And without actually wording our statement in a manner that suggests we'd like them to blink?

I don't buy it. Lewis is sitting on a yacht somewhere, champagne in hand, smirking to himself as he reflects on the irony that the very government he avoids paying taxes to are now bailing out swathes of his employees.

**** off Levy.
**** off football.

I'm more or less done. Beyond Jan, Kane, Lo Celso and Son I can't stand the sight of most of the players. Can't stand seeing that odious man in our dug out. Can't stand the sight of that bald twat with his £3million bonus awarded for persistent failure.

One more straw and this camel's back will probably break.

Persistent failure?
The 'bald twat' inherited a nearly bankrupt club that had been mid table for 40 years. He has delivered the club's best ever run of league finishes over a ten year period. We have qualified to play in Europe 13 times since he took over. That's the same as in the entire period of 45 years before he took over. We have the best training facility and the best stadium in the world. That's a proper legacy.
I agree about Mourinho and the wage cuts....both mistakes. But all Chairmen make mistakes.
None of us know what is in the covenants for the stadium loans by the way. There might well be actions that can't be avoided.

 

[humanbeingincroydon]

So the club has gambled with the wellbeing of its 500 lowest earners in an attempt to make the PFA blink? And we did this without first attempting to secure a joint effort from other clubs? And without actually wording our statement in a manner that suggests we'd like them to blink?

I don't buy it. Lewis is sitting on a yacht somewhere, champagne in hand, smirking to himself as he reflects on the irony that the very government he avoids paying taxes to are now bailing out swathes of his employees.

**** off Levy.
**** off football.

I'm more or less done. Beyond Jan, Kane, Lo Celso and Son I can't stand the sight of most of the players. Can't stand seeing that odious man in our dug out. Can't stand the sight of that bald twat with his £3million bonus awarded for persistent failure.

One more straw and this camel's back will probably break.

We quite clearly worded our statement in a manner suggesting that we would like them to blink, as previously highlighted

We hope the current discussions between the Premier League, PFA and LMA will result in players and coaches doing their bit for the football ecosystem.

Can we go back to people kvetching that the players should pay everyone else's wages please?

 

[remembercolinlee]

Persistent failure?
The 'bald twat' inherited a nearly bankrupt club that had been mid table for 40 years. He has delivered the club's best ever run of league finishes over a ten year period. We have qualified to play in Europe 13 times since he took over. That's the same as in the entire period of 45 years before he took over. We have the best training facility and the best stadium in the world. That's a proper legacy.
I agree about Mourinho and the wage cuts....both mistakes. But all Chairmen make mistakes.
None of us know what is in the covenants for the stadium loans by the way. There might well be actions that can't be avoided.

Sorry mate but the last statement makes no sense in terms of taking/stealing/denying 20% of the wages of the lowest paid staff.
My previous posts shows that Levy's £3 MILION bonus... not wages ... could pay this money for a year for all 550 staff.
IF we are in such a bad state that we need to "save" £275,000 per month by stealing it from the lowest psid employees then:

1. Why is Levy still employed, let alone getting a £3m bonus? To have us in such a state would be seriously incompetent.

2. Why sack a manager and all his staff (with all that financial costs it entails), to bring in another manager on an astronomical wage?

3. Why give Toby such a huge pay rise.

All these 3 things have happened in the past 4 months...there is no way the club would be in such a state and not know last November.

The club's behaviour is as disgusting as Gordon Ramsey's and the weatherspoons twat.. there is simply no more to it than that imho.

 

[PowerSpurs]

Sorry mate but the last statement makes no sense in terms of taking/stealing/denying 20% of the wages of the lowest paid staff.
My previous posts shows that Levy's £3 MILION bonus... not wages ... could pay this money for a year for all 550 staff.
IF we are in such a bad state that we need to "save" £275,000 per month by stealing it from the lowest psid employees then:

1. Why is Levy still employed, let alone getting a £3m bonus? To have us in such a state would be seriously incompetent.

2. Why sack a manager and all his staff (with all that financial costs it entails), to bring in another manager on an astronomical wage?

3. Why give Toby such a huge pay rise.

All these 3 things have happened in the past 4 months...there is no way the club would be in such a state and not know last November.

The club's behaviour is as disgusting as Gordon Ramsey's and the weatherspoons twat.. there is simply no more to it than that imho.

You might well be right but what was allowed by the covenants before the stadium was closed doesn't affect what might be forbidden now. It's perfectly possible that Levy giving back his bonus would have no effect. If I was a lender to the club then I would want clauses to reduce expenditure that kicked in as soon as revenue from the stadium fell unexpectedly. If those clauses exist then paying staff for jobs they are not able to do could be very risky for the club's directors.
I actually agree with you that it's most likely a **** decision but I don't like criticising anyone based on incomplete knowledge.

 

[remembercolinlee]

You might well be right but what was allowed by the covenants before the stadium was closed doesn't affect what might be forbidden now. It's perfectly possible that Levy giving back his bonus would have no effect. If I was a lender to the club then I would want clauses to reduce expenditure that kicked in as soon as revenue from the stadium fell unexpectedly. If those clauses exist then paying staff for jobs they are not able to do could be very risky for the club's directors.
I actually agree with you that it's most likely a **** decision but I don't like criticising anyone based on incomplete knowledge.

The multi millionaire chairman could personally make up the difference as could the multi billionaire owner... no financer could do a thing if either of the men did this.

I repeat again...if the EIGHTH RICHEST CLUB IN THE WORLD is in such a pisspoor financial shape why has Levy not been kicked out on his arse?
We are simply not in a position where we either save that money or go under!

If this situation lasts until September that would be less that would be £1.6m saving...are we seriously suggesting thst this is necessary?

Greed is behind this...it is a needless and cruel act that is going to financially and mentally harm the poorest employees.

Ramsey, the weatherspoons twat and Tottenham deserve contempt.

I have never been Levy out but until he shows respect to these staff and stops stealing their wages the bloke can **** off out of our club.

 

[PowerSpurs]

The multi millionaire chairman could personally make up the difference as could the multi billionaire owner... no financer could do a thing if either of the men did this.

I repeat again...if the EIGHTH RICHEST CLUB IN THE WORLD is in such a pisspoor financial shape why has Levy not been kicked out on his arse?
We are simply not in a position where we either save that money or go under!

If this situation lasts until September that would be less that would be £1.6m saving...are we seriously suggesting thst this is necessary?

Greed is behind this...it is a needless and cruel act that is going to financially and mentally harm the poorest employees.

Ramsey, the weatherspoons twat and Tottenham deserve contempt.

I have never been Levy out but until he shows respect to these staff and stops stealing their wages the bloke can **** off out of our club.

As I say I generally agree with you. But it really isn't as simple as you say. If Levy or Lewis paid part of the salaries they would quite likely commit a criminal offence. There are all sorts of tax laws that prevent this for very good reasons. They would have to be able to prove it was a gift unrelated to work. In some cases that would have a bad effect as it could increase poor people's assets above the level where they got benefits.
I still think the Club should be paying the staff for exactly the reasons you state. Something has gone badly wrong.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

Harry Redknapp has decided to chime in about the club's decision and is heavily critical of the owner and players.
He gave this as an exclusive to The Sun and appears to have forgotten that he fiddled his taxes and blamed his dog.

 

[humanbeingincroydon]

Harry Redknapp has decided to chime in about the club's decision and is heavily critical of the owner and players.
He gave this as an exclusive to The Sun and appears to have forgotten that he fiddled his taxes and blamed his dog.

Or that he was trying to strongarm the club for a bigger contract, having missed out on the England job, while Levy was busy attending the funeral of his mother

 

[remembercolinlee]

Or that he was trying to strongarm the club for a bigger contract, having missed out on the England job, while Levy was busy attending the funeral of his mother

That's when I lost all respect for him.
When he was after the England job he spent 4 months claiming it did not matter to the players if he signed the contract offer or not but once the England job went elsewhere (and the contract offer had been withdrawn cos he had refused to sign it) he claimed that the uncertainty of his contract position was affecting the players ... he did this on live tv while he was being a pundit during the 2012 Euros...

 

[bigsmithy9]

Do you remember the days when football was football and pre "soccer?" and we sat down in the evening to watch "Match of the Day?" When we only had one or two pundits we didn't take seriously? Very few "Prima Donnas"? No millionaires putting themselves before the game? Players loving the game not themselves?
……….and now...…..!