Footballer’s and their pay

[Guyonhere1]

Recently heard Matt Hancock’s comments about how footballers should give their wages away. AIBU to disagree with his comments - it’s their money and he shouldn’t be highlighting one industry when there are so many other people that can also help?

Yeah, kinda agree, you could apply the "you make load of money" to lots of people (including lots of MPs)

Whether you agree with the amount or not its their money.

You would like to think they make some personal financial sacrifice but its a personal matter and definitely not for public discussion/ media pressure

YANBU however, furloghing COOs etc on multi millions for the government to pay the wage bill it taking the piss.

I find it hard to think of a more pointless occupation paid as heavily as football is.

I think it's interesting that they have picked on the one industry where mostly working class men make huge amounts of money. It's almost like they think that's not done. Or they don't really deserve it. Their Etonian rich friends don't have to give their money away.

@SarahInAccounts The only reason footballers are payed so much money is because of the level of demand and interest in the game. They provide a service that billions of people are interested in, so they deserve their pay imo

Because they aren't playing and the clubs aren't earning. Many CEOs and senior executives are all still working. Many are taking huge pay cuts (50% at DHs company) despite this.

Makes sense to me.

As I understand it the issue is an ethical one. Should Football Clubs place numerous backroom staff on redundancy for their furlough payments to be picked up by the tax payer, whilst continuing to pay their pampered prima Donna's their millions.
I think not.
If the prima Donna's had their salaries cut by 20% then the clubs could continue to pay all their other staff.
Thereby saving the tax payers money for more important things.

Furlough is a fantastic way for any company etc to keep their wealth at the expense of the taxpayer, be it footie clubs or Virgin Atlantic, there is no application criteria.

The anger at Football is the amount of wealth involved in the game, yet despite being in zero danger of folding in the medium term, have gone straight to the taxpayer for a handout.
Considering how quickly some clubs have backtracked, it would seem they didn't really need the extra savings after all.

I hate football but agree calling out Only footballers when there are plenty of other overpaid twats out there is a bit off.

Footballers actually do more charity stuff already than people realise - hospital visits, childhood literacy etc. And that’s leaving out any personal charity donations people make.

I try and see stuff like this as - I don’t give every penny I can to charity. I do donate and volunteer my time; but I still keep money for treats and spend way too much on random tat. So who am I to moan at millionaires that they have “only” donated £1Million that year rather than £1.5M?

I’m reminded of back when Band Aid did that shitty Single and Adele was massively panned for not taking part, called a selfish cow etc. Then it came out that she’d actually made a substantial and private donation directly to Oxfam.

Clubs are losing a ton of cash on the back of the shutdown. That money will either come from the owners as a low interest loan. A bank as a higher interest loan. Or from reducing g expenditure - of which the biggest is player salaries.

So if players take a wage cut they are putting their club in the best position after the shutdown as their club will have more money to spend on new players and future wages. Otherwise the debt taken on to pay their wages will be paid back in future years, limiting future success.

From a national point of view, however, it's better they don't take pay cuts, because that would reduce tax income, and so it's better they put their clubs into debt and keep taking their salary.

The top clubs won't go bust, though some smaller clubs (Bournemouth has been mentioned, as well as many in lower divisions) will, unless players accept massive wage reductions.

Rich clubs shouldn't be putting other staff into furlough when that's a tiny percentage of total wages - players should do the right thing to help their less well paid colleagues.

@jasjas1973 despite being in zero danger of folding in the medium term
All football league clubs are in danger of going bust

It’s tricky as well because what do you count as a footballer “working”? If you place them on furlough, do they then stop training, exercising, physio, special diet etc? Actually kicking the ball about once a week is a small part of their job.

Don’t see why the moral argument is footballer exempt. Many threads have appeared in the last month on here about paying childminders and nurseries when are kids aren’t attending, the general consensus being if you are being paid you have a moral obligation to help. For players earning hundreds of thousands of pounds a month, I think they should help at least prop up the lower teams in their industry and help save jobs.

TheLastSaola but by that logic by asking footballers to take the hit you’re then doing it for the benefit of the vastly wealthy club owners? Pretty sure Roman Abramovich could sell one single lampshade from one of his many Superyachts and it would pay for the salaries of all admin staff...

I think the context here is that several Premier League clubs were furloughing non-playing staff, i.e. groundsman, cleaners, food and benerage sellers etc. that are on peanuts compared to the salaries of footballers. The argument here is that the lowest paid are taking a hit, whilst the clubs take advantage of scheme designed to help struggling buisnesses retain staff, but similtaniously paying mega-rich playing staff in full. The point being that clubs look to be using an extremely generous scheme to effectively sub the payment of pretty obscene salaries, whilst shitting on the lowest paid.

Yes, though OP, footballers are unfairly singled out. What about racing drivers, boxers, golfers etc? I fear the sentiment is class driven to a degree.

Everanewbie oh yes, don’t get me wrong, it’s a shitty thing to do; but I think it’s equally shitty to call directly on the employees (I.e. footballers) to take action rather than focusing the shame and attention on the employer (I.e the clubs) doing the shitty thing.

Instead of taking a pay cut, footballers et al should pay a groundsperson or cleaner or whatever's salary for the duration they're unable to work. Adopt a worker. That way we keep their tax revenue, the clubs etc aren't seen as taking the p@ss and the players are seen as being understanding, kind hearted individuals. Or stick £10,000 each into the pot and pay the workers out of that. Then do it again when the money runs out.

Footballers earn more in a week than most people earn in a year. When clubs have furloughed or laid off their other staff, then it is only right that the players see a reduced income as well. They are the ones who can afford it the most, and at present, have the least to contribute.

Yes, though OP, footballers are unfairly singled out. What about racing drivers, boxers, golfers etc? I fear the sentiment is class driven to a degree.

Quite a lot of F1 drivers have taken a voluntary pay cut already.

Some teams are doing useful health engineering work.

Footballers in the rest of the world have taken pay cuts.

Wtf should us tax payers pay for the lower paid staff to be furloughed, when the top players are still earning more in a week than most people earn in a year?

YANBU. Whether or not you agree with how much they’re paid is irrelevant, the fact is they do a job that pays X amount and they should be entitled to keep it and not be pressured into giving it up.

Other people having less doesn’t mean they should have less too; they have actually worked for that money whether you think their wage is proportional or not.

As other have pointed out the context here is that extraordinarily wealthy football clubs were furloughing minimum wage staff - at the expense of the taxpayer - whilst continuing to pay players who earn in a week several times more than what those furloughed staff earn in a year.

It’s dishonest.

The issue is the same clubs who are paying their player 10s of thousands £££ a week are furloughing their non playing staff and having US, taxpayers through the scheme.
As if professional football wasn’t already a moral vacuum.
I don’t give a stuff if they sit in their McMansions counting their money, but I do care if those same clubs are hypocritical enough watch their ‘ordinary’ staff suffer it charge us to ‘bail’ them out.
They want to save money and their clubs?? Stop paying the players millions when they aren’t kicking a ball around.

People talk about taxpayers as if Premier League footballers don't pay more tax in a month than you will in your whole life.

And I would say the same if ANY sport or company that behaved in the same way.
We need to remember how some people/sports/companies behaved during this time and vote with our feet/wallets when this is all over. I won’t be going to watch any more PL games.