comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So if a player is not playing he doesn’t get paid? Away you go ya dafty
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They are contracted to be available to play, unless you think all 40 plus players of a football club are contracted to play twice a week for the duration of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
nope. sorry m8. Two of the sme's my company advises have been stiffed by a very very large company that has a turnover over a billion. They were insured and the insurance companies said nope force majeur. Do you think the sponsors are going to pay the clubs for no logos on TV or TV companies going to pay clubs for no football? nope. The fact is the players are not available to play. Let the clubs arrange games behind closed doors. Lets see what the pfa say then.
comment by (U22371)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So if a player is not playing he doesn’t get paid? Away you go ya dafty
----------------------------------------------------------------------
let me guess. you know nothing abt. contract law/
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They are contracted to be available to play, unless you think all 40 plus players of a football club are contracted to play twice a week for the duration of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
nope. sorry m8. Two of the sme's my company advises have been stiffed by a very very large company that has a turnover over a billion. They were insured and the insurance companies said nope force majeur. Do you think the sponsors are going to pay the clubs for no logos on TV or TV companies going to pay clubs for no football? nope. The fact is the players are not available to play. Let the clubs arrange games behind closed doors. Lets see what the pfa say then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And what has that to do with football?
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So if a player is not playing he doesn’t get paid? Away you go ya dafty
----------------------------------------------------------------------
let me guess. you know nothing abt. contract law/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I actually specialise it it, and arbitration. What about you?
comment by (U22371)
posted 51 seconds ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They are contracted to be available to play, unless you think all 40 plus players of a football club are contracted to play twice a week for the duration of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
nope. sorry m8. Two of the sme's my company advises have been stiffed by a very very large company that has a turnover over a billion. They were insured and the insurance companies said nope force majeur. Do you think the sponsors are going to pay the clubs for no logos on TV or TV companies going to pay clubs for no football? nope. The fact is the players are not available to play. Let the clubs arrange games behind closed doors. Lets see what the pfa say then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And what has that to do with football?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
contract law. the players have no right to the money. I just gave you examples of the fact no one is honouring contracts. the clubs don't have to play the players at all if they don't want to.
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 53 minutes ago
As it stands the players still have to complete the season, and they still get paid in the off season. If you take 30% off them and then expect them to complete the season you will run into trouble.
The only players you could really force into a pay cut are those whose contract ends in June if they are leaving then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats always the case. The 30% deduction was only in case they couldn't complete the season which would also mean no Tv money for at least the portion of the season not completed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope, the OP was talking about a 30% cut regardless of what happens to the season.
comment by (U22371)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So if a player is not playing he doesn’t get paid? Away you go ya dafty
----------------------------------------------------------------------
let me guess. you know nothing abt. contract law/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I actually specialise it it, and arbitration. What about you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am a managing consultant with a team of them at the moment. Force majeure.
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 53 minutes ago
As it stands the players still have to complete the season, and they still get paid in the off season. If you take 30% off them and then expect them to complete the season you will run into trouble.
The only players you could really force into a pay cut are those whose contract ends in June if they are leaving then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats always the case. The 30% deduction was only in case they couldn't complete the season which would also mean no Tv money for at least the portion of the season not completed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope, the OP was talking about a 30% cut regardless of what happens to the season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't replying to op.
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 51 seconds ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They are contracted to be available to play, unless you think all 40 plus players of a football club are contracted to play twice a week for the duration of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
nope. sorry m8. Two of the sme's my company advises have been stiffed by a very very large company that has a turnover over a billion. They were insured and the insurance companies said nope force majeur. Do you think the sponsors are going to pay the clubs for no logos on TV or TV companies going to pay clubs for no football? nope. The fact is the players are not available to play. Let the clubs arrange games behind closed doors. Lets see what the pfa say then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And what has that to do with football?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
contract law. the players have no right to the money. I just gave you examples of the fact no one is honouring contracts. the clubs don't have to play the players at all if they don't want to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Away and throw $hite at the moon, that’s the biggest load of nonsense I have ever read on here! So all these football clubs are paying players millions of pounds every month and they dont have to! You do not have a clue what you are talking about and have no idea how a contract works!
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So if a player is not playing he doesn’t get paid? Away you go ya dafty
----------------------------------------------------------------------
let me guess. you know nothing abt. contract law/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I actually specialise it it, and arbitration. What about you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am a managing consultant with a team of them at the moment. Force majeure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are a typical consultant then who knows nothing
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 second ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 51 seconds ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They are contracted to be available to play, unless you think all 40 plus players of a football club are contracted to play twice a week for the duration of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
nope. sorry m8. Two of the sme's my company advises have been stiffed by a very very large company that has a turnover over a billion. They were insured and the insurance companies said nope force majeur. Do you think the sponsors are going to pay the clubs for no logos on TV or TV companies going to pay clubs for no football? nope. The fact is the players are not available to play. Let the clubs arrange games behind closed doors. Lets see what the pfa say then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And what has that to do with football?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
contract law. the players have no right to the money. I just gave you examples of the fact no one is honouring contracts. the clubs don't have to play the players at all if they don't want to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Away and throw $hite at the moon, that’s the biggest load of nonsense I have ever read on here! So all these football clubs are paying players millions of pounds every month and they dont have to! You do not have a clue what you are talking about and have no idea how a contract works!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I do. the only reason they are not threatening them as they have in Liga is cause they are terrified their asset values wil go up in smoke with unhappy players wanting to leave. ffp be damned. the truth is gov is going to line up the sort of taxes that will make your eyes water. but you'll just have to wait till all this is over.
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So if a player is not playing he doesn’t get paid? Away you go ya dafty
----------------------------------------------------------------------
let me guess. you know nothing abt. contract law/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I actually specialise it it, and arbitration. What about you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am a managing consultant with a team of them at the moment. Force majeure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are a typical consultant then who knows nothing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
not what my qualifications say or my bank balance.
So what’s your qualifications then?
Oxford, ucl (law), MBA (imperial/london business school.
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
Oxford, ucl (law), MBA (imperial/london business school.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye, no bother, and after all that you come to the conclusion that clubs do not need to pay players due to force majeur 😂😂
comment by (U22371)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
Oxford, ucl (law), MBA (imperial/london business school.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye, no bother, and after all that you come to the conclusion that clubs do not need to pay players due to force majeur 😂😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CAUSE THEY DON'T.
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 53 minutes ago
As it stands the players still have to complete the season, and they still get paid in the off season. If you take 30% off them and then expect them to complete the season you will run into trouble.
The only players you could really force into a pay cut are those whose contract ends in June if they are leaving then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats always the case. The 30% deduction was only in case they couldn't complete the season which would also mean no Tv money for at least the portion of the season not completed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope, the OP was talking about a 30% cut regardless of what happens to the season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't replying to op.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you replying too then?
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
Oxford, ucl (law), MBA (imperial/london business school.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye, no bother, and after all that you come to the conclusion that clubs do not need to pay players due to force majeur 😂😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CAUSE THEY DON'T.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you have consulted with all the clubs, perused all the contracts and fame to this conclusion? In your professional opinion how common is it to have a Force Majeur clause in an employment contract?
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 53 minutes ago
As it stands the players still have to complete the season, and they still get paid in the off season. If you take 30% off them and then expect them to complete the season you will run into trouble.
The only players you could really force into a pay cut are those whose contract ends in June if they are leaving then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats always the case. The 30% deduction was only in case they couldn't complete the season which would also mean no Tv money for at least the portion of the season not completed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope, the OP was talking about a 30% cut regardless of what happens to the season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't replying to op.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you replying too then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The idea that somehow the players are sacred cows and shouldn't be touched when the rest of society is going through REAL hardship.
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 53 minutes ago
As it stands the players still have to complete the season, and they still get paid in the off season. If you take 30% off them and then expect them to complete the season you will run into trouble.
The only players you could really force into a pay cut are those whose contract ends in June if they are leaving then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats always the case. The 30% deduction was only in case they couldn't complete the season which would also mean no Tv money for at least the portion of the season not completed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope, the OP was talking about a 30% cut regardless of what happens to the season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't replying to op.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you replying too then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The idea that somehow the players are sacred cows and shouldn't be touched when the rest of society is going through REAL hardship.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I honestly don’t get why people fall over themselves to defend them. It’s mental.
comment by Ole-Dirty-Baztard (U19119)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 53 minutes ago
As it stands the players still have to complete the season, and they still get paid in the off season. If you take 30% off them and then expect them to complete the season you will run into trouble.
The only players you could really force into a pay cut are those whose contract ends in June if they are leaving then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats always the case. The 30% deduction was only in case they couldn't complete the season which would also mean no Tv money for at least the portion of the season not completed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope, the OP was talking about a 30% cut regardless of what happens to the season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't replying to op.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you replying too then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The idea that somehow the players are sacred cows and shouldn't be touched when the rest of society is going through REAL hardship.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I honestly don’t get why people fall over themselves to defend them. It’s mental.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not defending the players at all BTW, all I am saying is that clubs cannot unilaterally cut their wages, there has to be agreement
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
Oxford, ucl (law), MBA (imperial/london business school.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye, no bother, and after all that you come to the conclusion that clubs do not need to pay players due to force majeur 😂😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CAUSE THEY DON'T.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you have consulted with all the clubs, perused all the contracts and fame to this conclusion? In your professional opinion how common is it to have a Force Majeur clause in an employment contract?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
no judge in this country will give a penny to the players when the government as advised that playing is not possible. \its not the clubs fault that should be made to honour player contracts when they are not going to have their contracts honoured for the same reason. do you see the unemployment claims in the US or the EU? do you think companies are even giving employees notice? I am not sure what world you live in.
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
Oxford, ucl (law), MBA (imperial/london business school.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye, no bother, and after all that you come to the conclusion that clubs do not need to pay players due to force majeur 😂😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CAUSE THEY DON'T.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you have consulted with all the clubs, perused all the contracts and fame to this conclusion? In your professional opinion how common is it to have a Force Majeur clause in an employment contract?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
no judge in this country will give a penny to the players when the government as advised that playing is not possible. \its not the clubs fault that should be made to honour player contracts when they are not going to have their contracts honoured for the same reason. do you see the unemployment claims in the US or the EU? do you think companies are even giving employees notice? I am not sure what world you live in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s not the players fault either, and if you think the clubs can just stop paying then I am not sure what planet you are on.
Sign in if you want to comment
Greedy, self-centred & arrogant players
Page 5 of 6
6
posted on 10/4/20
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So if a player is not playing he doesn’t get paid? Away you go ya dafty
posted on 10/4/20
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They are contracted to be available to play, unless you think all 40 plus players of a football club are contracted to play twice a week for the duration of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
nope. sorry m8. Two of the sme's my company advises have been stiffed by a very very large company that has a turnover over a billion. They were insured and the insurance companies said nope force majeur. Do you think the sponsors are going to pay the clubs for no logos on TV or TV companies going to pay clubs for no football? nope. The fact is the players are not available to play. Let the clubs arrange games behind closed doors. Lets see what the pfa say then.
posted on 10/4/20
comment by (U22371)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So if a player is not playing he doesn’t get paid? Away you go ya dafty
----------------------------------------------------------------------
let me guess. you know nothing abt. contract law/
posted on 10/4/20
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They are contracted to be available to play, unless you think all 40 plus players of a football club are contracted to play twice a week for the duration of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
nope. sorry m8. Two of the sme's my company advises have been stiffed by a very very large company that has a turnover over a billion. They were insured and the insurance companies said nope force majeur. Do you think the sponsors are going to pay the clubs for no logos on TV or TV companies going to pay clubs for no football? nope. The fact is the players are not available to play. Let the clubs arrange games behind closed doors. Lets see what the pfa say then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And what has that to do with football?
posted on 10/4/20
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So if a player is not playing he doesn’t get paid? Away you go ya dafty
----------------------------------------------------------------------
let me guess. you know nothing abt. contract law/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I actually specialise it it, and arbitration. What about you?
posted on 10/4/20
comment by (U22371)
posted 51 seconds ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They are contracted to be available to play, unless you think all 40 plus players of a football club are contracted to play twice a week for the duration of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
nope. sorry m8. Two of the sme's my company advises have been stiffed by a very very large company that has a turnover over a billion. They were insured and the insurance companies said nope force majeur. Do you think the sponsors are going to pay the clubs for no logos on TV or TV companies going to pay clubs for no football? nope. The fact is the players are not available to play. Let the clubs arrange games behind closed doors. Lets see what the pfa say then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And what has that to do with football?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
contract law. the players have no right to the money. I just gave you examples of the fact no one is honouring contracts. the clubs don't have to play the players at all if they don't want to.
posted on 10/4/20
*pay
posted on 10/4/20
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 53 minutes ago
As it stands the players still have to complete the season, and they still get paid in the off season. If you take 30% off them and then expect them to complete the season you will run into trouble.
The only players you could really force into a pay cut are those whose contract ends in June if they are leaving then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats always the case. The 30% deduction was only in case they couldn't complete the season which would also mean no Tv money for at least the portion of the season not completed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope, the OP was talking about a 30% cut regardless of what happens to the season.
posted on 10/4/20
comment by (U22371)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So if a player is not playing he doesn’t get paid? Away you go ya dafty
----------------------------------------------------------------------
let me guess. you know nothing abt. contract law/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I actually specialise it it, and arbitration. What about you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am a managing consultant with a team of them at the moment. Force majeure.
posted on 10/4/20
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 53 minutes ago
As it stands the players still have to complete the season, and they still get paid in the off season. If you take 30% off them and then expect them to complete the season you will run into trouble.
The only players you could really force into a pay cut are those whose contract ends in June if they are leaving then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats always the case. The 30% deduction was only in case they couldn't complete the season which would also mean no Tv money for at least the portion of the season not completed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope, the OP was talking about a 30% cut regardless of what happens to the season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't replying to op.
posted on 10/4/20
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 51 seconds ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They are contracted to be available to play, unless you think all 40 plus players of a football club are contracted to play twice a week for the duration of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
nope. sorry m8. Two of the sme's my company advises have been stiffed by a very very large company that has a turnover over a billion. They were insured and the insurance companies said nope force majeur. Do you think the sponsors are going to pay the clubs for no logos on TV or TV companies going to pay clubs for no football? nope. The fact is the players are not available to play. Let the clubs arrange games behind closed doors. Lets see what the pfa say then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And what has that to do with football?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
contract law. the players have no right to the money. I just gave you examples of the fact no one is honouring contracts. the clubs don't have to play the players at all if they don't want to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Away and throw $hite at the moon, that’s the biggest load of nonsense I have ever read on here! So all these football clubs are paying players millions of pounds every month and they dont have to! You do not have a clue what you are talking about and have no idea how a contract works!
posted on 10/4/20
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So if a player is not playing he doesn’t get paid? Away you go ya dafty
----------------------------------------------------------------------
let me guess. you know nothing abt. contract law/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I actually specialise it it, and arbitration. What about you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am a managing consultant with a team of them at the moment. Force majeure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are a typical consultant then who knows nothing
posted on 10/4/20
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 second ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 51 seconds ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They are contracted to be available to play, unless you think all 40 plus players of a football club are contracted to play twice a week for the duration of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
nope. sorry m8. Two of the sme's my company advises have been stiffed by a very very large company that has a turnover over a billion. They were insured and the insurance companies said nope force majeur. Do you think the sponsors are going to pay the clubs for no logos on TV or TV companies going to pay clubs for no football? nope. The fact is the players are not available to play. Let the clubs arrange games behind closed doors. Lets see what the pfa say then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And what has that to do with football?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
contract law. the players have no right to the money. I just gave you examples of the fact no one is honouring contracts. the clubs don't have to play the players at all if they don't want to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Away and throw $hite at the moon, that’s the biggest load of nonsense I have ever read on here! So all these football clubs are paying players millions of pounds every month and they dont have to! You do not have a clue what you are talking about and have no idea how a contract works!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I do. the only reason they are not threatening them as they have in Liga is cause they are terrified their asset values wil go up in smoke with unhappy players wanting to leave. ffp be damned. the truth is gov is going to line up the sort of taxes that will make your eyes water. but you'll just have to wait till all this is over.
posted on 10/4/20
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
comment by Momo’s Goggles (U22339)
posted 24 minutes ago
As I understand it
Jordan Henderson is leading a campaign with 19 other PL captains to be paid in full and for players themselves to donate a portion up to 30% of their wages to the NHS.
It’s simple really.
A 30% pay cut would be a reduction in revenue to HMRC. That money is used to fund the NHS.
That 30% would also remain in the billionaire club owners pocket. Maybe they’d donate it, maybe they won’t.
Can you trust the owners to pass on the savings? Just look at Spurs, Newcastle and Liverpool until recently costing the treasury millions by furloughing their non playing staff.
How many here are taking a 30% pay cut?
How many here are donating 30% of their wage to the NHS?
The players I’m sure will do their best the help. It just won’t be resolved quickly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is absolutely the correct way to do it and not the hair brainer idea the OP puts forward
It may also make other high earners from other sectors do the same
You simply cannot take 30% off someone’s wages simply due to what they do for a living when other people earning more are untouched
----------------------------------------------------------------------
wtf.
If they are not doing the work for which they contracted of course you can!
And to put forward a defence of a smaller tax payment to HMRC?
Most of them are using every trick in the book not to pay tax at all! Greedy w@nkers, the lot of them!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you can’t. There are these small bits of paper called contracts and one party just cannot unilaterally decide to change the terms and conditions. It can only be done with the agreement of the other party to the contract. They have not broken the terms of their contract
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms and conditions means playing. You know your first condition for getting paid.What do you think they are contracted to do? make you tube fitness videos?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So if a player is not playing he doesn’t get paid? Away you go ya dafty
----------------------------------------------------------------------
let me guess. you know nothing abt. contract law/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I actually specialise it it, and arbitration. What about you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am a managing consultant with a team of them at the moment. Force majeure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are a typical consultant then who knows nothing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
not what my qualifications say or my bank balance.
posted on 10/4/20
So what’s your qualifications then?
posted on 10/4/20
Oxford, ucl (law), MBA (imperial/london business school.
posted on 10/4/20
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
Oxford, ucl (law), MBA (imperial/london business school.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye, no bother, and after all that you come to the conclusion that clubs do not need to pay players due to force majeur 😂😂
posted on 10/4/20
comment by (U22371)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
Oxford, ucl (law), MBA (imperial/london business school.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye, no bother, and after all that you come to the conclusion that clubs do not need to pay players due to force majeur 😂😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CAUSE THEY DON'T.
posted on 10/4/20
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 53 minutes ago
As it stands the players still have to complete the season, and they still get paid in the off season. If you take 30% off them and then expect them to complete the season you will run into trouble.
The only players you could really force into a pay cut are those whose contract ends in June if they are leaving then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats always the case. The 30% deduction was only in case they couldn't complete the season which would also mean no Tv money for at least the portion of the season not completed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope, the OP was talking about a 30% cut regardless of what happens to the season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't replying to op.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you replying too then?
posted on 10/4/20
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
Oxford, ucl (law), MBA (imperial/london business school.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye, no bother, and after all that you come to the conclusion that clubs do not need to pay players due to force majeur 😂😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CAUSE THEY DON'T.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you have consulted with all the clubs, perused all the contracts and fame to this conclusion? In your professional opinion how common is it to have a Force Majeur clause in an employment contract?
posted on 10/4/20
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 53 minutes ago
As it stands the players still have to complete the season, and they still get paid in the off season. If you take 30% off them and then expect them to complete the season you will run into trouble.
The only players you could really force into a pay cut are those whose contract ends in June if they are leaving then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats always the case. The 30% deduction was only in case they couldn't complete the season which would also mean no Tv money for at least the portion of the season not completed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope, the OP was talking about a 30% cut regardless of what happens to the season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't replying to op.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you replying too then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The idea that somehow the players are sacred cows and shouldn't be touched when the rest of society is going through REAL hardship.
posted on 10/4/20
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 53 minutes ago
As it stands the players still have to complete the season, and they still get paid in the off season. If you take 30% off them and then expect them to complete the season you will run into trouble.
The only players you could really force into a pay cut are those whose contract ends in June if they are leaving then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats always the case. The 30% deduction was only in case they couldn't complete the season which would also mean no Tv money for at least the portion of the season not completed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope, the OP was talking about a 30% cut regardless of what happens to the season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't replying to op.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you replying too then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The idea that somehow the players are sacred cows and shouldn't be touched when the rest of society is going through REAL hardship.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I honestly don’t get why people fall over themselves to defend them. It’s mental.
posted on 10/4/20
comment by Ole-Dirty-Baztard (U19119)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 53 minutes ago
As it stands the players still have to complete the season, and they still get paid in the off season. If you take 30% off them and then expect them to complete the season you will run into trouble.
The only players you could really force into a pay cut are those whose contract ends in June if they are leaving then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats always the case. The 30% deduction was only in case they couldn't complete the season which would also mean no Tv money for at least the portion of the season not completed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope, the OP was talking about a 30% cut regardless of what happens to the season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't replying to op.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you replying too then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The idea that somehow the players are sacred cows and shouldn't be touched when the rest of society is going through REAL hardship.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I honestly don’t get why people fall over themselves to defend them. It’s mental.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not defending the players at all BTW, all I am saying is that clubs cannot unilaterally cut their wages, there has to be agreement
posted on 10/4/20
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
Oxford, ucl (law), MBA (imperial/london business school.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye, no bother, and after all that you come to the conclusion that clubs do not need to pay players due to force majeur 😂😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CAUSE THEY DON'T.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you have consulted with all the clubs, perused all the contracts and fame to this conclusion? In your professional opinion how common is it to have a Force Majeur clause in an employment contract?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
no judge in this country will give a penny to the players when the government as advised that playing is not possible. \its not the clubs fault that should be made to honour player contracts when they are not going to have their contracts honoured for the same reason. do you see the unemployment claims in the US or the EU? do you think companies are even giving employees notice? I am not sure what world you live in.
posted on 10/4/20
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by (U22371)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 minute ago
Oxford, ucl (law), MBA (imperial/london business school.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye, no bother, and after all that you come to the conclusion that clubs do not need to pay players due to force majeur 😂😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CAUSE THEY DON'T.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you have consulted with all the clubs, perused all the contracts and fame to this conclusion? In your professional opinion how common is it to have a Force Majeur clause in an employment contract?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
no judge in this country will give a penny to the players when the government as advised that playing is not possible. \its not the clubs fault that should be made to honour player contracts when they are not going to have their contracts honoured for the same reason. do you see the unemployment claims in the US or the EU? do you think companies are even giving employees notice? I am not sure what world you live in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s not the players fault either, and if you think the clubs can just stop paying then I am not sure what planet you are on.
Page 5 of 6
6