Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership


OTIB Supporter
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Davefevs last won the day on March 17

Davefevs had the most liked content!

Community Reputation



About Davefevs

  • Birthday June 3

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location:

Recent Profile Visitors

15,051 profile views
  1. He means reduced Bristol City coverage from the team that is left. I messaged him earlier.
  2. Liverpool U-turn on furloughing and will now find alternative means of funding non-playing staff....apologising in the process.
  3. Without knowing the detail of their contracts we don’t know whether Player A is paid significantly different whether they play / play and win or not. Years ago at Liverpool, a player injured during a game received win bonuses for all the games they missed whilst injured. Some players could be on a fairly simplistic basic salary with very little incentive based bonuses.
  4. Yes, was mainly referring to top two tiers in football. Sorry, I wasn’t clear, meant with tv revenues they shouldn’t gamble it all. Non-football business is a totally different kettle of fish I accept. I wish the media wouldn’t band around the 20%....it is only an applicable percentage to those on less than £2500pm....which does cover a large proportion of employees, but not all.
  5. You both give both sides to the argument. I’m sure there are some clubs out there thinking that if they’re gonna pay increased taxes in the future, they might as well have some of the ‘benefits’ now. Without thinking it through, could there be two tier corporate taxation in the future based on recouping the benefit? I don’t know whether that’s a good idea or not. In summary, it’s complicated.
  6. A really good thread on Twitter re PL finances.
  7. That’s down to financial planning....easy for me to say, but should clubs run so close to the allowed levels of losses, or be more contingent? I know it’s all hindsight, but perhaps it will be a kick up the arse! I agree you can’t plan to such a level, but we were miles away from being prepared. The pandemic scenario played out in 2016, highlighted a serious lack of ventilators. It appears that was ignored totally. Even putting some in reserves would’ve better than none. More realistic would’ve been to get prepared in January, when Hancock told the house we were more than prepared. But did we start buying / increase manufacturing of ventilators and PPEs? Nope. But I’m drifting into a political debate now, so I’ll stop. Over the past days I’ve been trying to get to a point where I can see the best option, and I’m coming round to the point where I think a first step of players deferring (not cutting) their wages so that other club employees can be paid is the right thing to do. That initial step is only gonna buy time, because there comes a point when clubs are not gonna want to continue paying non playing staff for doing nothing. At that stage perhaps CJRS comes into effect to avoid redundancies. At the moment, some clubs are taking the piss. Leeds have set a good example here. And it buys time to see what the next stage is when. Yep, reading some stuff of the contractor forum i read, it is clear that trivial things may be classed as “work”, and I cannot imagine HMRC accepting furloughing of a professional sportsman keeping fit. They aren’t just keeping fit like you or I, they are professionally conditioning themselves.
  8. Personally, I think our key services should have been better invested in over a period of years with an appropriate taxation system that facilitates it....so that we don’t need to put pressure on any particular group to help out. Its left services like the NHS (plenty of other services too) being ravaged and therefore under-prepared in the event of a crisis.
  9. At the end of day if a club cannot go 3 months in contingent mode, it is a pretty sad indictment of their planning. It shows how close to the wire they are running, how much they are gambling. That applies to pretty much every club, big or small. The CJRS has been poorly introduced. The concept of retaining employees is good, but the rules are open to abuse. And businesses driven by money, will exploit it. They are exploiting it, and not just in football.
  10. Bears pretty much enforced by the way they are funded by the Premiership, and as I understand it a mutual decision across the top league. Contracts will be different too. In the Flyers case we don’t know whether Gentrey Thomas (who’s returned home to Canada) is still contracted off not. Flyers may have released him to go back home. The financials in Basketball are tiny in comparison. To furlough an employee they have to stop working. I know it might seem crazy but I suspect that would mean they can’t train. So for the sake of 40 pros at £612.50 per week via CJRS, you might as well continue paying them full whack to keep them in shape. You won’t be paying appearance / win bonuses at the mo. This is purely a financial rationale from me. Morally my view is something different! The CJRS was a good idea conceptually, but poor designed and implemented....when you finally can submit your request to use it!! A couple of points often forgotten: - using CJRS stops clubs making staff redundant....I wouldn’t want to be made redundant in this climate, where there’s little chance of getting another job or at least at a comparable wage. - it is still open for the club to continue to pay the employee their full wage, in effect using the CJRS as a subsidy. Some clubs are doing just that.
  11. Julian Dicks went to Brum to in early mid-80s. Best player I played against as a kid.
  12. I’m a Banker!! I’m stuck on the fence with this one. But please hear me out. Football is a business, so are entitled to apply for CJRS if they furlough workers (whether that be playing or non-playing staff). This scheme does allow the employer to continue to pay the employee their full salary, a fact often missed. So an employee on £35k, could have his salary reduced in the period he is furloughed to match the 80% of the £2.5k per month, meaning he would get £24k, a shortfall of £11k. The employer, not hamstrung with having to pay the full £35k, could voluntarily top-up that £11k if they choose to. Some businesses will be doing just that. In some cases the other options (to not using CJRS) are: ride it out and pay (possibly deferring some) the employee full-whack ride it out, but reduce the employees wages make some or all employees redundant That final one is pretty stark, when that now ex-employee ain’t gonna find any new employment (not at £35k anyway). So I think we need to be careful whilst criticising some businesses for taking the CJRS route. Some clubs will require serious financial help to get through this period. Of course much of the above is relevant to your everyday worker, not a professional footballer. If we take the youngsters out of the equation, I doubt there are many / any players in the top 3 leagues in this country on less than £30k per annum. However their football contract will be different to many ‘normal’ workers contracts, plus accounting wise they are also an asset in the club’s accounts. That requires a different approach. If we ignore the lifestyle they’ve got used to and the cost of that lifestyle for a moment, morally the vast sums they earn (Spurs average salary is £70k per week) could be sacrificed to help the club continue to pay the non-players. One month of an average Spurs player wage pays 104 employees earning £35k, their monthly amount. Some footballers have got on the front foot like Rashford, fair play. But football, the PFA, the PL, the EFL and the clubs have been on the back foot on this. They are now (very much like the government - not being political, just stating my view) having to react to public outcry and are on the back foot. What was to stop them holding an emergency meeting 2/3 weeks ago and the issuance of a holding statement similar to the one that came out yesterday? Instead they just met to postpone fixtures. These financial decisions aren’t easy, but just keep ahead of the public and you restrict / reduce criticism. We could all then sit here and be comfortable in the fact that they are on the a case, just awaiting communication. But over the past 2/3 weeks they’ve left us in the dark, allowed some clubs to do their own thing....and “football looks bad”....which is fact!! If there is a silver lining, it’s the hope that “football” finds its moral compass through this. The well-run clubs will gain an advantage, rather than the “big-clubs” (unless they are well-run too).
  13. I’m still behind the thought of finishing this season whatever, but there will need to be compromises all over the place. However the longer we go without football the less likely I see it.
  • Create New...