Coronavirus in Football

[Live in the Now]

That they have enough money to pay workers instead of depleting government funds. Liverpool is 100% in the wrong.

 

[Cassano]

Sorry what's the issue?

Furloughed their staff despite having record profits.

 

[YNWA14]

Doesn't it say they're paying 100% of their salaries?

Liverpool FC has placed some staff who are impacted by the Premier League suspension on furlough. The club has confirmed those staff will be paid 100 per cent of their salaries to ensure no member of staff is financially disadvantaged. Last month the club also confirmed that it would pay its matchday and non-matchday staff while the Premier League is suspended.

I probably just don't know how this works.

 

[Epictetus]

They are using the government assistance program to pay 80% of their staff's wages and then covering the remaining 20% themselves.

Yes, the staff is getting 100% of their salary, but how they are getting it absolutely matters. They are billionaire owners turning record profits, who are taking advantage of a program designed to help small businesses.

What Carragher is pointing out is that the club's own players led by Henderson are trying to cut create a fund to donate a percentage of their wages to help out healthcare workers and the NHS because they obviously can afford to, but meanwhile their owners want the government to help them.

 

[YNWA14]

They are using the government assistance program to pay 80% of their staff's wages and then covering the remaining 20% themselves.

Yes, the staff is getting 100% of their salary, but how they are getting it absolutely matters. They are billionaire owners turning record profits, who are taking advantage of a program designed to help small businesses.

What Carragher is pointing out is that the club's own players led by Henderson are trying to cut create a fund to donate a percentage of their wages to help out healthcare workers and the NHS because they obviously can afford to, but meanwhile their owners want the government to help them.

Got it, I didn't realize that the government would be paying 80% of the wages. That's pretty bad, though not surprising from billionaires to be honest.

 

[Ceremony]

tbf Liverpool aren't quite as bad as the PFA:

The Professional Footballers' Association says proposals for a 30% pay cut for Premier League players would be "detrimental to our NHS".
The PFA also called on the league to increase its own £20m charity pledge.
The league wants players to take a 30% salary cut in order to protect jobs, amid the coronavirus pandemic.
But the union says that equates to more than £500m in wage reductions, and a loss in tax contributions of more than £200m to the UK government.
The union also questioned Health Secretary Matt Hancock's public criticism of footballers' salaries during a news conference on Thursday.
"What effect does this loss of earning to the government mean for the NHS?" the statement read. "Was this considered in the Premier League proposal and did the Health Secretary factor this in when asking players to take a salary cut?"

About as tone-deaf as it's possible to be.

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

WELP you do walk alone sometimes I guess

 

[Epictetus]

Liverpool changed its tune after it saw the public criticism from raising ticket prices. Here's to hoping they see how wrong their approach is and do the right thing.

 

[Stray Wasp]

tbf Liverpool aren't quite as bad as the PFA:



About as tone-deaf as it's possible to be.

Tone deaf, perhaps, but to whose tune?

After all, the PFA's point is no lie - if the players aren't paid, the treasury does miss out. And that £200 million of income tax is better used by going to the NHS, or libraries, or schools than simply filling a vacuum in the budget of clubs that are owned by all sorts of people who either have huge fortunes, or connections to people who'll lend them huge sums in order to profiteer or asset strip.

Enough very rich people find ways of not paying tax and aren't helping anyone at all that I don't blame footballers for pointing out the contribution they make to society.

Yes, footballers are paid money out of all proportion to what they do, but you might lump them in with George Orwell's observations about a successful writer, "...however large his earnings may happen to be, is not of the possessing class...He is a lucky outsider who has fluked into a fortune...if we really want to punish the people who weakened national morale at critical moments, there are other culprits...better worth chasing."

Maybe pressure should be exerted on those owners, financial institutions and asset strippers to show a bit of heart and not allow football clubs to suffer as a result of these outlandish circumstances?

Of course, it's a laughable proposition, but then does that tell us anything important about our society that needs to be remedied far more urgently than demanding footballers make sacrifices those with far greater wealth don't?

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

One day ill read my last @Stray Wasp post and that makes me sad.

 

[JeffreyLFC]

That they have enough money to pay workers instead of depleting government funds. Liverpool is 100% in the wrong.

I don't understand the problem? They are a business not a worker care center. If the government is covering 80% of their paycheck why in hell would they pay it themselves?

I mean we talk about "profit" but this will impact them financiay for next year financial results, not the past.
If the government did not cover I would agree that it is a dirty move but under these circumstances, I fully understand why they did that. Heck many clubs might not survive this crisis and I also believe that even the most financially robust team will be affected. Including Liverpool. I actually think the transfer market will collapse this summer.

Many clubs will announce future major loses because of this crisis and that include Liverpool. Many clubs might not even survive and goes bankrupt. Football is a business and there is a fine line between profit and significant loses.

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

For a team that supposedly has morals and is different corporate brands like Manu, this should be unacceptable. All that YNWA and “peoples team” was for what clout? When it came to put their money where there mouth is they failed miserably.

 

[Halladay]

These are the owners that just traded their best baseball player in 60 years over peanuts. im not surprised by this.

 

[YNWA14]

WELP you do walk alone sometimes I guess

I mean, they're still not walking alone. The employees are still getting paid and Liverpool are covering the extra 20% the government doesn't. Not really applicable there.

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

I mean, they're still not walking alone. The employees are still getting paid and Liverpool are covering the extra 20% the government doesn't. Not really applicable there.

Its not extra 20% ... its 20%. Taking from the government funds that could be used better in the pandemic. Its not hard to follow.

 

[YNWA14]

Its not extra 20% ... its 20%. Taking from the government funds that could be used better in the pandemic. Its not hard to follow.

Right, the 20% they wouldn't be getting from most other employers (including billionaire companies).

Again, I think it's dumb and I think all the billionaires/millionaires whatever should be looking to give back to society in these times (rather than looking for handouts themselves) but they're still taking care of their employees, just in a system-abusive way which is gross.

 

[phisherman]

TBF it's not just Liverpool doing this.

 

[phisherman]

 

[BKIslandersFan]

Sorry what's the issue?

The club that's worth billions and the wage bill is hundreds of millions of pounds are forcing their employees to go on furlough, and hence have the government cover their wages.

 

[Burner Account]

Very, very disappointing. I can’t believe the damage is worth whatever they’re saving on these wages.

 

[Ceremony]

Tone deaf, perhaps, but to whose tune?

After all, the PFA's point is no lie - if the players aren't paid, the treasury does miss out. And that £200 million of income tax is better used by going to the NHS, or libraries, or schools than simply filling a vacuum in the budget of clubs that are owned by all sorts of people who either have huge fortunes, or connections to people who'll lend them huge sums in order to profiteer or asset strip.

Enough very rich people find ways of not paying tax and aren't helping anyone at all that I don't blame footballers for pointing out the contribution they make to society.

Yes, footballers are paid money out of all proportion to what they do, but you might lump them in with George Orwell's observations about a successful writer, "...however large his earnings may happen to be, is not of the possessing class...He is a lucky outsider who has fluked into a fortune...if we really want to punish the people who weakened national morale at critical moments, there are other culprits...better worth chasing."

Maybe pressure should be exerted on those owners, financial institutions and asset strippers to show a bit of heart and not allow football clubs to suffer as a result of these outlandish circumstances?

Of course, it's a laughable proposition, but then does that tell us anything important about our society that needs to be remedied far more urgently than demanding footballers make sacrifices those with far greater wealth don't?

All of this is true, but when there are millions of people out of work who don't have any saving to support themselves or their families, when they don't know how long this is going to last or what the world will be like after it and when there are still lots of people going to work now because they have to, it rings a bit hollow when people paid six figure sums weekly are trying to justify not taking pay cuts as some sort of moral service towards the rest of us.

 

[Stray Wasp]

All of this is true, but when there are millions of people out of work who don't have any saving to support themselves or their families, when they don't know how long this is going to last or what the world will be like after it and when there are still lots of people going to work now because they have to, it rings a bit hollow when people paid six figure sums weekly are trying to justify not taking pay cuts as some sort of moral service towards the rest of us.

Sure, but that raises questions about our economic model - in which both government debt and individual debt are at record levels (and have been for some time), and paying for accommodation takes up so much of people's incomes, and anyone outside the very highest earners who can save struggles to find reward for saving because of nigh-on punitively low interest rates for savers.

It also raises questions about the planning that went into the introduction of the lockdown. The government ruled it out altogether at first, then turned to it amidst a sense of panic that 'herd immunity' was failing. It would be interesting to know a timeline of government thinking about the implementation of financial support measures for those who will inevitably suffer as a result of the lockdown in advance of the announcement being made. Then there are questions to be asked about the criteria for compensation under the scheme, the timeliness of the scheme's execution, and whether support will go to the neediest cases, or end up being used as an accounting wheeze by the worst kind of opportunists.

The scale of the financial deficit involved here is such that the government could take from footballers every single penny of that £500 million figure quoted, and it still wouldn't come close to evening the balance of the loss to the economy. Gesture politics is an abject thing. Why footballers specifically should be expected to engage in gesture politics escapes me.

Far more important, I think, to ask what the government's exit strategy is regarding the lockdown. And whether it's possible to distinguish between 'deaths from' coronavirus, and 'deaths with' coronavirus - gaining an accurate measure of those statistics may give us the best indication of the effectiveness of the entire premise upon which lockdown is justified, as well as informing timescales for any proposed extension or deepening of it.

As a population, we need to be honest with ourselves. We bellowed, 'Lives must be saved at all costs. People must be put before money'. These are noble principles. They are also sentiments far easier to spout as rhetoric than practically to implement in a world where, like it or not, everything has its price and huge power has been pressed into the hands of people and institutions who exult in the commodification of everything.

This is a world we uphold, either actively or passively. We shouldn't demand footballers bear our crosses for us.

 

[East Coast Bias]

There is nothing more American than this.

privatize profits
Socialize liabilities

call the workers socialist scum when they want anything. Throw the cost at the govt when they get anything.

 

[Vasilevskiy]

TBF it's not just Liverpool doing this.

Yeah, still sucks

 

[Cassano]