Vesper

‘I was thinking, f*** you. I have as much right to be here as you’ https://theathletic.com/2126791/2020/10/11/gender-discrimination-womens-football/ On August 13, Georgie Bingham posted a tweet announcing that earlier in the week, she had been informed by talkSPORT radio that her contract was not being renewed for the new season. “I would like to make it clear that this was not my decision,” she wrote. “I was told they’d like to take the weekend breakfast show in a different direction with more ‘football expertise’ and I was not offered any other on-air slot or any new shift agreement either.” She left talkSPORT with little fanfare. There was no public thank-you for her service or even an acknowledgement that she had been let go. The Athletic understands that her departure was a programming decision with the Weekend Sports Breakfast programme continuing with Natalie Sawyer taking Bingham’s place alongside Tony Cascarino. Bingham had worked at the station since 2011 and hosted its weekend breakfast show for six of those years, posting positive or increased listening figures in every quarter bar three. In the two weeks after revealing her departure on Twitter, she was inundated with over a thousand messages of support from listeners who couldn’t understand talkSPORT’s decision. It’s just one part of a broader scenario that has left a broadcaster with more than 25 years of experience questioning whether she wants to continue to work in sports media. “Why would I?” Bingham says. “Combine the social media issues surrounding outright hostility towards women with 10 years of ploughing a lone furrow at talkSPORT for an exit that didn’t even dignify a thank you for my service… At the moment, I don’t know if I have the appetite to work in this industry again. It would be like staying in an abusive relationship. After 25 years of putting up with bullshit, you just think, ‘Maybe I don’t need that anymore’.” Bingham is speaking in the same week the Women in Football (WiF) organisation announced the results of its biggest-ever survey, sent out to over 4,000 members to coincide with their relaunch. It found that two thirds (66 per cent) of women have experienced gender discrimination in the football workplace, with just 12 per cent of incidents getting reported. To try and build a better picture of what that discrimination looks like and why so much of it goes unreported, The Athletic has spoken to several women who work in the media sector of the industry about their experiences. Some chose to speak anonymously, fearful of putting their careers in jeopardy. Others, including one who said she’d been through “a couple of really horrendous things in the last three years”, chose not to speak at all, terrified that their anecdotes would be traced back to them and cause further problems in the workplace. The football media landscape is one that, from the outside, looks to be moving in a positive direction for women. There are more female football reporters, presenters and analysts than ever and while there remains a vast swathe of social media that will never accept a female view on the men’s game, there are many more who appreciate seeing, hearing and reading the views of female journalists. But for those on the inside, there are still issues that need addressing. More than one football journalist described themselves as the most experienced, capable and knowledgeable they have ever been — but with the least work. Is that simply the impact of coronavirus? Perhaps in part. But there are also instances where women have been let go with the explanation that their employer wanted to bring in younger talent, while simultaneously seeing older male colleagues handed multi-year contracts. “It’s a real issue which men don’t face,” says one source, “getting to mid-30s and suddenly being ditched for young women without any experience or even relevant qualifications.” Another says, “unfortunately, there are just too many decisions now that are made by middle-aged white men who decide who they like the look of when it comes to women. That is a lot of what happens in broadcast and it’s just so obvious.” Bingham says, in her experience, it’s largely a generational issue and that while attitudes of the male generation who are now in their late 20s/early 30s are “very different and refreshing”, they are not yet the ones in positions of power and influence. “There is a level of misogynist that is the kind who thinks women should be in the kitchen. Then, there is a level of misogyny that protects the white, middle-aged man, and that’s largely what our management in this industry is. “There’s a lot of men who don’t even realise they are misogynistic. They’re like, ‘I love women’, but they don’t respect women and don’t treat them as equals. That’s what we’re working against and it’s going to take a long time for the industry to flush out these people.” Another source who has worked as a sports broadcaster and producer across television and radio for 15 years says that sexism in football is something that has taken time to become recognised as such. “It’s a bit like ingrained racism in society — something we’re only really now starting to uncover, so it’s not about the things we know not to say: it’s the things that are ingrained within society.” A year or so ago, she was giving a talk at a business event when she found herself telling a story that she’d not spoken about publicly before. At the time she was working on a football tournament for a large broadcaster and had been working in football for a number of years, but in broadcasting as a whole for even longer. Even so, she was delighted to be given a slot hosting her own bulletins solo (most were double-headed, with one male and one female broadcaster), meaning she was responsible for producing, writing and presenting the broadcasts. It was a real coup. It was only when she arrived in the office one afternoon to find an invoice accidentally left on her desk that she realised her work was being undervalued. The numbers showed a male colleague, someone fresh out of university and with nowhere near the level of experience she had, was being paid £50 more per shift than she was. “It wasn’t even for doing the same job,” she says. “He was co-hosting, so only doing half the job I was.” It was the first time she’d experienced such inequality and she decided she couldn’t ignore it. “I asked for a private word with my boss and told him, ‘I’m grateful for the opportunity I’ve had but this hurts when I think of all the work I put in and the experience I’ve got’. He shut me down very quickly, told me it was none of my business what he paid anyone else and that I had five minutes to decide if I wanted to do the rest of the shifts or not.” She left his office and mulled it over for 10 minutes before sending her boss an email explaining that, as a woman of her word, she would fulfil her shifts on the terms agreed but that she was disappointed and hoped his three daughters would never have to face what she’d had to. His reply read: “I’ve backdated your pay to match his but I’ll never work with you again because you’re trouble.” “The door swung open on gender pay some years after that happened,” she says. “But he never reached out to me about it. I often wonder if it’s something that ever crossed his mind again? I’ve never forgotten it. But that day at the business event was probably the first time I mentioned it out loud and I got gasps from the audience. “I think, as women, we have these experiences and bottle them up. I’d normalised it so much in my own head that when I got that reaction, I was really surprised.” Alison Bender has been working in football broadcasting for 20 years and says it’s only now that she feels able to talk about some of the experiences she’s had in the industry. “Weirdly, I have less work now than I had many years ago but I feel I have earned my stripes and can talk more freely. In the early days, I was so afraid that if I reported any sexism, people would be like, ‘It’s a privilege for you to be in this job. If you don’t like it, then get out’.” As a mother of two, Bender has twice experienced returning to work from maternity leave. On neither occasion was it straightforward. After her first child was born, she made sure to be back at work as soon as possible, only six weeks after having her son, because she was “petrified” her job would be given away. She returned to find that her rush had been in vain. Her show was already being passed over to a younger female who had no experience of presenting. “I feel sad for my young self that I rushed back in that quickly, but I felt I had no choice. While I was gone, there was a change of management and, because I came back part-time, I don’t think the new boss saw me as part of the furniture like I had been. He took me into his office and said, ‘We’re making some changes and you’re one of the casualties’. It was a terrible end, really. I can’t ever say that it was because I had a baby but I do know that because I had a baby I wasn’t in the office as much as I would have been. “I don’t think there’s enough protection for women when they leave to have a baby. But at the time I didn’t have the courage to say anything.” A few years later, Bender was working for a different company when she had her second child. She says the employer had been “very good” to her when her first was still very young, allowing her family to fly out to visit her halfway through a six-week assignment abroad: “If they hadn’t allowed that I don’t think I could have done it,” she says. While she was off to have her second child, a replacement was hired but was not told that she was working as maternity cover. “There was a strange stand-off when I was due to come back,” says Bender. “I came back ready to do my job and was supposed to be flying to Monaco to interview Zlatan Ibrahimovic but they told me to take the day off because this other girl, with a much younger image than mine, was going to cover it: ‘We think it fits her style better’. “I had a contract there but they just decided they liked her style better than mine. It’s frustrating, but you can’t really do anything.” Reshmin Chowdhury, also a mum of two, has worked in sports broadcasting for 12 years, getting her first opportunity in Spain at Real Madrid TV in 2008. “There was nothing in England at that time,” she says. “It was such a closed shop, so there was no way to get into the industry unless you knew someone.” Her experience in Spain helped her to get a job at BBC Sport when she returned, and that’s where she first experienced something that will be painfully familiar to most women working in football. “I call it the litmus test, where male colleagues would ask me these questions just to make sure that you knew what you were talking about. “One asked, ‘Tell me about Lassana Diarra. What does he bring?’ I answered all his questions and he’s nodding his head as if to say, ‘You’ve passed the test’. I didn’t say anything but I was thinking, ‘Fuck you. I have as much right to be here as you’. I knew my work would prove it, so I just saw it all as part of the job — my role was to educate people and prove them wrong.” Chowdhury says there are far fewer barriers to entry for women now than when she was starting out and that many of the misconceptions are gone, or at least going. While she struggled through the early years of raising two children while trying to fulfil all the challenges her role presented, often including foreign trips that meant being away from home for days at a time, she says young women now feel far more comfortable being open about the struggle for balance. “I never talked about it, because no one else did. It was a given that you’d just get on with the job. It was about organising everything before I left; making sure all their laundry was done, the fridge was stocked and I’d prepared meals to make it easier for the people helping me out. Then, I’d prepare myself for the job. It’s like doing three jobs in one: being a nanny, a mum and a journalist all at the same time. It’s only now that I look back and think, ‘I don’t know how I did it’. “I love my job, but it’s been hard. I can’t even begin to tell you how hard it’s been to do everything and the constant guilt of not being there for certain things.” For all her experience and success, when Chowdhury surveys the landscape in sports broadcasting now, she isn’t sure how much further she can progress. “I’ve put in over a decade of hard graft and feel I’m on the cusp or should be the next person to have one of these top roles but I have this feeling that I’m going to be overtaken by people further down the continuum because broadcasters are looking for the ‘new face’. “I feel I’m at the top of my game and I have got really good work but there’s more I want to achieve — I just don’t know if I can. It’s either that faces don’t change or broadcasters go for whatever is relevant at that time, and I might not be that. It’s not a meritocracy, this industry. It’s not always the most qualified people getting the jobs. “I do feel there is a ceiling, which is why I don’t want to just be reliant on broadcasting. The landscape is still so based on who you know. If you have that one person who is your ‘backer’ and takes you everywhere they go, you’ll do really well. But if you don’t have that…” For Ebru Koksal, Women in Football’s chair, the results of its survey have shown exactly how much work still lies ahead. “The feedback we have received from women about the issues they have faced in the industry makes for heartbreaking reading,” she says. “One story of bias, outdated perceptions and outright bullying is one too many. “There is still a lot of work to do to ensure that women are encouraged to forge careers in the industry and this is where Women in Football will continue to play a big part.” Its next steps are the launch of a new corporate membership scheme to support employers in becoming more gender-inclusive while WiF is also doubling the number of places on the Vikki Orvice Memorial Directorship Scheme, which aims to help recipients secure board positions within football. The last two months have given Bingham time to pause and reflect on the industry she has been part of for a quarter of a century. During her time working there have been incidents where Bingham feels she was treated differently to her male counterparts, even recounting instances where guests on her shows would not address her directly, only her male co-host. But she makes it clear that the talkSPORT she joined a decade ago was very different from the company she left this summer, where more women have been welcomed on board (Reshmin Chowdhury fronts their GameDay coverage while Faye Carruthers has been appointed England correspondent alongside her roles hosting Saturday evenings and the Women’s Football Weekly show) and the “outright hostility” she experienced from “people who just expected that you’re stupid or token, or that you are invading their territory” has all but disappeared. It’s a different world to the one where a young Bingham, just starting in the industry, was told by her first boss to go and work in the US, “where they want opinion and humour”. “And that was right,” she says. “America was perfect for me. The UK really isn’t. Unless, of course, I was white and male, in which case, opinion and humour are positively encouraged.”

‘He was so young it seemed impossible’ – Chelsea unites after death of ‘Woody’ https://theathletic.com/2130367/2020/10/12/andrew-wood-why-a-celebration-chilwell-grealish-barkley/ On the Saturday before the October international break, Chelsea recorded a fairly comfortable 4-0 win over Crystal Palace in an empty Stamford Bridge, but the mood among many of the supporters who would ordinarily have been in the stadium was subdued. For those accustomed to cheering from the stands, these bubble matches have tended to be disorienting, disconnected viewing experiences. On this occasion, however, their hearts and minds were elsewhere long before kick-off. One of their number was no longer among them. Two days earlier Andrew Wood, known to his many friends as “Woody”, died of a sudden heart attack at his home in Mansfield aged just 33. His death was the kind of inexplicable tragedy for which life offers no preparation and yields the kind of grief for which there can be no real consolation. What happened in the days that followed was an example of what happens when a community recognises the nature of that pain and responds accordingly. Chelsea’s match-going support — particularly those who regularly trek all over England and Europe to follow their club — is a relatively tight-knit group. Those who didn’t know Wood personally at least knew of him. He had helped some secure last-minute tickets for games and sponsored others in their efforts to raise money for charity. Some simply became accustomed to seeing his broad smile and hearing his gloriously loud laugh in the Matthew Harding end of Stamford Bridge, or in pubs or trains heading to away matches. “One of the joys of being a regular away supporter is being able to walk into a pub in a far-flung northern town before an away game and know that you will know people in there,” former Chelsea Supporters’ Trust chair Tim Rolls tells The Athletic. “One larger-than-life character I have always enjoyed bumping into, who loved Chelsea, and loved the whole match-day experience, was Woody. “I first met him in a bar tent outside the Liberty Stadium and over the next seven or eight years, saw him in pubs and on away concourses all over England and in Europe. On a midnight train in Frankfurt and on Baku seafront. In a station hotel in Leicester and a cricket club in Burnley. Queuing to get into Old Trafford, Anfield and St James’ Park. “Always happy to chat with a fellow supporter, always with a huge smile on his face. Even when we lost, he never seemed down, always looking forward to the next game, the next trip. Going to football is massively enriched by the likes of Woody and he will be sadly missed by so many fellow Blues.” News of his death on the Thursday before the Crystal Palace game circulated via a series of stunned phone conversations. “I spent the next couple of hours ringing people who deserved to hear the news from someone personally rather than finding out on the socials,” Chelsea season ticket holder Walter Otton wrote in the latest edition of CFCUK fanzine. “I went to bed numb.” Among those hit hardest were Anthony and Andrew Hall, Chelsea-supporting brothers who came to know Wood better than most. “We saw him three weeks ago,” Andrew says. “We went on a staycation in the Midlands with him and had a great time up there. We played loads of golf, went out with him and his family, watched his sons play football. It was such a lovely weekend and we couldn’t imagine that we’d be in this position now. He was so young that it seemed impossible.” It didn’t take long for like-minded fans to mobilise online in search of a fitting tribute. “Ordinarily for someone like that, we’d try to organise a minute’s applause in the stadium and do a banner,” says Richard Weekes, founder of We Are The Shed, the fan movement aimed at improving the visual and vocal atmosphere at Stamford Bridge. “That’s what we did for Rob Huxley (the Chelsea fan tragically killed in the Croydon tram disaster in 2016). We tried to think about how we could do that in a virtual way. “His family were happy with us organising a minute’s applause on social media (in the 33rd minute of the Palace game) with a hashtag (#RIPWoody33), and Kenny Rice (a Chelsea season ticket holder and close friend of Wood) wrote the eulogy that we made into a graphic. We posted that as we normally would for a game in the hope it would pick up, and it did.” We Are The Shed’s post on Instagram about Wood prompted comments of condolence from Frank Lampard and John Terry. “The good thing about having Lampard as the manager is that he has an amazing connection with the fans,” Weekes adds. “He understands the importance even of a little comment like that, and how much it’s appreciated.” Their three tweets featuring Rice’s eulogy were seen almost one million times. Stamford Bridge announcer and Chelsea’s popular in-house presenter Lee Parker offered words of support to Wood’s family, and club captain Cesar Azpilicueta dedicated the victory over Palace to him. “To get those tributes made us all weep,” Andrew Hall adds. “Moments like this show you how close the club is. We didn’t expect anything like that.” On the pitch, Ben Chilwell celebrated his first Chelsea goal by making an “A” symbol with his hands. The following day Jack Grealish and Ross Barkley did the same during Aston Villa’s 7-2 demolition of Liverpool. None of the players spoke publicly about the meaning of the gesture; in the past it has been used to draw attention to A-Star Foundation, which aims to provide positive pathways to education, training and employment for young people. Regardless of their intentions, the perception that they had chosen to pay tribute to Wood had remarkable consequences. Stories about his death were published by The Sun and The Independent, leading to an even greater outpouring of public sympathy than ever could have been anticipated. The JustGiving page that Anthony Hall set up to raise money for Wood’s family has garnered more than £9,000 in donations, some from as far afield as Singapore. “We are overwhelmed by the love and support for Woody,” his wife Hayley tweeted. “Thank you everyone.” Wood’s sudden death ripped through two football clubs. In addition to following Chelsea home and away, he was secretary of Pinxton FC, the local team his eldest son Joe plays for as a goalkeeper. “His organisational skills were unbelievable,” development squad joint manager Craig England tells The Athletic. “He’d only been doing it for five or six weeks plus pre-season, so about two months in all, and he was already up for Secretary of the Year! “He was the life and soul of the club, and he’d help anyone. He was so organised and thorough that it put everyone else at ease.” The day after Wood’s passing, the Central Midlands Football League implemented a minute’s silence before all of the games across their five divisions that weekend in his honour. “Our game was cancelled,” England adds. “We were in no shape to play.” England spoke to Wood on the phone the day he died and counted him as a close friend. Despite being a Manchester City fan, he had been with him to watch Chelsea, as well as attending England games home and away. Their families went on holiday together several times, with one trip offering a particularly memorable reminder of his unrelenting passion for football. “We once went to Butlin’s on holiday,” England recalls. “They run a football tournament every year, and this year happened to be when Chelsea were in the Champions League final (in 2012). Pinxton were playing in the tournament. He drove to Skegness, had the night there and then left at 3am to drive to Stansted, because he had a plane to catch to Munich (to see the final). He left us with his wife and two kids!” As a Chelsea fan based in the Midlands, Wood was used to travelling for his passion. The train from Mansfield to London takes four hours, though he would sometimes drive to Newark station to shorten the journey. He would even be seen at Stamford Bridge for youth games, yet made sure that none of this came at the expense of his family life. He was every bit as devoted to Joe’s club Pinxton and Blidworth Bengals, the team his younger son Nicholas played for. When both teams needed funds for new kit, he assumed responsibility for raising it. In recent years, match-going Chelsea supporters often saw Wood at games with Joe or Nicholas, and sometimes both. His talent for organising meant he often assumed logistical responsibilities for the more ambitious away trips — most notably the Europa League final in Baku in May 2019. “The day after we won, he was the one on the phone to my brother saying, ‘Get the bloody hell up, we’ve got to catch this minibus back to Georgia’,” Andrew Hall says. Pinxton have renamed one of the terraces at their home ground, the Van Elle Arena, in Wood’s honour. Chelsea have been in touch with his family and will run a tribute to him in the official match-day programme when Southampton visit Stamford Bridge after the October international break. That programme will be in digital form, along with every other aspect of the football supporter’s experience during the COVID-19 pandemic. Chelsea fans cannot mark Wood’s untimely passing in the way they would like to at Stamford Bridge, but that has not stopped them showing his family just how much he was appreciated and will be missed within their small community. “It just shows you how many lives he touched at Chelsea,” Andrew Hall says. “His passion for football was second to none, and we’ve lost a great friend. It’s still hard to comprehend.”

Why it’s never wise to write off Olivier Giroud https://theathletic.com/2127505/2020/10/11/giroud-chelsea-ukraine-write-off-100-caps/ There isn’t much Vincent Duluc hasn’t seen in the game. He has been a reporter at L’Equipe for more than 30 years and covered nine World Cups, but this is a question which has left him truly nonplussed: why is Olivier Giroud a regular starter for France and not for the two clubs who bought him to play in the Premier League? “I don’t know what is missing in his game for him to be treated this way,” he admits with genuine bemusement. “But one thing is for sure, he will never quit.” The night of October 7, 2020, is one Giroud will never forget. He became just the eighth footballer to reach 100 caps for France and marked it with a brace against Ukraine to go above Michel Platini as the second-highest scorer for his country with 42 goals, which is only nine behind Thierry Henry’s landmark. With the European Championship next summer and a World Cup to come the following year, the target of reaching and even overtaking Henry is firmly in his sights. The ambition is a realistic one because unlike at Arsenal and Chelsea, Giroud knows he is going to be picked to play up front regularly no matter whether he finds the back of the net or not. After all, this is the centre-forward who played all seven games (started six of them) at the World Cup two years ago and didn’t score once as France lifted the trophy. It is a rare anomaly for a player to have so much more backing at international level than at his club. That’s not to say Arsenal and Chelsea haven’t played him over the years, but he has started just 144 Premier League games in more than eight years for the two London rivals — an average of 18 per campaign. Given there are 38 matches each season and he hasn’t suffered many long-term issues — the worst was a fractured foot, which kept him on the sidelines for three months in 2014 — it demonstrates how much he has been underemployed compared with his national side. It’s hard to determine what is more surprising. The fact he is picked so often for France despite being in and out of the reckoning at club level or that Arsenal and Chelsea haven’t made him a mainstay of their line-up when they see France do so at every opportunity. If he is good enough for the world champions… So what makes him so important for France? Duluc explains: “The three main reasons are, first, he’s very good. Second, Karim Benzema has not played for France since 2015 so there has been less competition. Third, he is the ideal player for Antoine Griezmann and Kylian Mbappe to play off, so that makes him ideal for France coach Didier Deschamps as well. “He played those seven games at the World Cup because he is very useful, is very important for the others. When he wasn’t scoring there was some grumbling that he wasn’t as good as Benzema, but not a big outcry. “It has not been so tough for Olivier because when he scores, everybody says Giroud is so strong, a very fine player. When he doesn’t score, people are still thinking it’s OK because the team needs him, the other players are better with him. He is in a win-win situation. “He is like Roberto Firmino at Liverpool — you have to put your ego in your pocket. It’s not like he is trying to score just for himself. When he does not score, he is still playing for the others. When Mbappe does not score for two-three games you can tell he is playing for himself, trying to score by overplaying. Giroud never does that.” The 34-year-old will always be respected by the majority of football lovers in his own country, but a section still finds him his selection over Benzema hard to accept. Benzema has spent 11 years leading the line at mighty Real Madrid, an achievement in itself. He has won 18 trophies there including four Champions Leagues and three Liga titles. In contrast, Giroud has never lifted the Premier League or European Cup — he has four FA Cups, a Europa League and three Community Shields to show for his efforts in England. But Benzema has more of a history of trouble off the pitch and was accused in 2015 of allegedly being involved in an attempt to blackmail France team-mate Mathieu Valbuena. Benzema has not played for France since. Despite many calls from his admirers for Benzema to be reinstated, Deschamps has remained resolute in his backing of Giroud. The former midfielder not only believes in being loyal, but is also described as being rather stubborn and single-minded. One attribute Deschamps found key during his playing career — and he lifted the World Cup himself with France in 1998 — is the harmony of the squad. With players having to spend weeks away together in a camp at major tournaments or flying off to testing foreign matches during qualification, Giroud is regarded as a far greater asset in keeping morale strong than the more maverick figure of Benzema. Then when you consider Deschamps’ tactic is to use Giroud as a focal point to bring the best out of world-class players such as Griezmann, Mbappe and Paul Pogba, you can see why he is such a valued member. Benzema may have more talent, but there is more of a risk of upsetting the equilibrium. Such is the animosity shown by Benzema fans towards him, Giroud revealed in his autobiography Always Believe It that he turned down a move to Lyon in January because that is where his fellow striker started his career. “There is a shadow over Giroud and it is always the Benzema shadow,” Duluc adds. “Even if Benzema is the better player, maybe the France team is better with Giroud.” The level of respect Deschamps has for Giroud was clear when speaking before the Ukraine fixture. Giroud was playing in the lower leagues in France during his early 20s and didn’t get a cap until he was 25. “He has an above-average strength of character and this is related to his background,” Deschamps said. “He reached the professional level quite late and like all the players in this case, he doesn’t see it as revenge but with strength in him. “He is never as strong as when he finds himself in a difficult situation and performing at a high level is about being strong in the head. He is always there.” Giroud has demonstrated that fortitude since his first move to an English club in 2012, when he joined Arsenal from Montpellier for around £13 million. It would be wrong to suggest fans didn’t appreciate his efforts there or that everyone was against him. You could argue it was almost an impossible task from the outset to overcome the obstacle of following in the line of great Arsenal forwards: Ian Wright, Dennis Bergkamp, Thierry Henry and Robin van Persie. He didn’t exactly arrive as a big name. Giroud came along just as Van Persie was in the process of defecting to Manchester United and question marks over the direction the club was heading in were being raised once more. Lukas Podolski joined in that window too but to much more acclaim. A sign of the relatively low-key nature of Giroud’s arrival came while he posed for photographs on Hackney Marshes as part of a media interview before the new season. One passer-by, who was out walking their dog, came up to ask a member of the entourage standing near Giroud, “Who is that getting all the pictures taken of them?” When they were told it was Arsenal’s latest acquisition to play up front, the individual shrugged their shoulders in an underwhelmed fashion and trudged off. As The Athletic documented in July, Arsenal were constantly on the lookout for other options from Luiz Suarez to Jamie Vardy. Arsene Wenger spoke in glowing terms about Giroud, but by chasing other targets, sent a pretty clear message to the supporters and the player that he wasn’t seen as the man to fire the club back to a Premier League title. Giroud’s second season, 2013-14, was his best for Premier League starts (36) in an Arsenal shirt and he scored 16 times in the league. In 2015-16, when Wenger’s men finished runners-up to Leicester City, he also found the net on 16 occasions having played in every match (26 starts, 12 as sub). In terms of numbers, that was as good as it got. He was very much a peripheral figure in the last 18 months, especially once Alexandre Lacazette joined in 2017. There was a feeling in the crowd that he was good but not quite good enough. There would be barren streaks during the campaign or matches when easy opportunities seemed to be spurned. For example, when Arsenal lost 3-1 at home to Monaco in the last 16 of the Champions League in 2015, Giroud took most of the blame. He had missed six chances from inside the area. The one touch that counterpart Dimitar Berbatov had in the box at the other end resulted in a goal for the visitors. Wenger always spoke supportively about Giroud, but his actions spoke louder than words by pursuing other talents in the same position. Giroud was still wanted but as a different option or someone to bring off the bench, not the main man. Alexis Sanchez, who joined from Barcelona in 2014, became more of the focal point and also suited the preferred style of play involving quick passing and movement. With the benefit of hindsight, you could argue comments Wenger made in April 2013 hinted at the role Giroud would find himself in. “He is a little bit less (like) the strikers we used to have until now, but he gives us another dimension with the physical challenges in the air.” It’s also worth bearing in mind that as Wenger’s popularity decreased dramatically over the final few years, he was under more pressure to consider making changes. Perhaps Giroud became guilty by association. At Chelsea, it has been a different story. From day one, Giroud was under no illusion that he was bought as a back-up striker but it is to his credit he hasn’t settled for that. It was his purchase in January 2018 that allowed Borussia Dortmund to sign Michy Batshuayi on loan and Arsenal to acquire Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang from the Bundesliga club. Initially, he was behind Alvaro Morata in the pecking order as Antonio Conte’s troubled second season in charge continued, but by the end, he was in the first XI as Chelsea beat Manchester United to win the FA Cup. The next season under Maurizio Sarri, he had spells playing second fiddle to Morata and then Gonzalo Higuain. But it was his 11 goals in the Europa League, including one in the final against Arsenal, that fired Chelsea to the trophy. Under Lampard in 2019-20, the Frenchman had a spell when he played just one Premier League fixture in three months. The Chelsea coach wanted faster players on the pitch to run in behind defenders and press opponents. He opted for Tammy Abraham, who had reached 13 Premier League goals by mid-January, most weeks. In that one game between November and February when Lampard gave Giroud a chance to impress, he struggled to make an impact and Chelsea lost at home to West Ham United. You could argue it was just rust from barely getting on the pitch, but for Lampard, it was a sign his suspicions were correct and he was simply too slow. Giroud came very close to leaving in January and probably only stayed because Chelsea couldn’t bring any of their targets in that month. Before the window shut, he met with Lampard and they have had a much closer bond ever since. The manager appreciated the determination and willingness to work hard. It brought results too as Lampard turned to Giroud, initially because Abraham was injured, and he scored eight Premier League goals from February to help Chelsea secure a top-four finish. But normal service has been resumed. Chelsea’s new signings Kai Havertz and Timo Werner are on the scene now and Abraham is back in favour. Four games into the Premier League season, Giroud has played just 17 minutes. Lampard is once again trying to inject more pace in the team’s play and looking towards the future. Giroud is out of contract at the end of the season. Still, just as Deschamps feels Giroud’s personality is an asset to have, so does Lampard. While other players are perhaps causing issues when they’re not selected, the same can’t be said for Giroud. Speaking last month, Lampard said: “When he’s not playing I keep hearing him behind me on the bench shouting for Tammy, encouraging, backing his team-mate, and those things are huge.” It wouldn’t be a surprise if Giroud forces his way back in the Chelsea side once again — you can certainly picture Werner enjoying running on to his flicks and headers. As Duluc concludes: “He is 34 but doesn’t accept his fate. Even if he just gets 10 minutes off the bench, he will fight to score. Olivier says he has a few years ahead of him, there is no limit for him. “After the last World Cup, we thought it was over for him, that Euro 2020 would come too late. But now he looks certain to play at the delayed Euros next summer and if he does that, why not play at the World Cup at 36? He always has this thing, the ability to bounce back.”

Chelsea sensation Billy Gilmour set for loan move in January transfer window Chelsea youth sensation Billy Gilmour showed supporters a glimpse of his talent last season under Frank Lampard - before a horror knee injury cut his impressive debut campaign short https://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/football/chelsea-transfer-news-billy-gilmour-22829736

MASON MOUNT HAS A NEW NICKNAME FOR DECLAN RICE AFTER LAST NIGHT https://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2020/10/12/mason-mount-has-a-new-nickname-for-declan-rice-after-last-night/ Chelsea midfielder Mason Mount has responded to Declan Rice’s post on Instagram following the West Ham United star’s message after the game for England. West Ham midfielder Rice and Chelsea ace Mount were in action for England in their UEFA Nations League Group A2 game against Belgium at Wembley Stadium in London on Sunday evening. Mount scored what proved to be the winning goal for the Three Lions in the 64th minute, while Rice played well for Gareth Southgate’s side in the middle of the park in their 2-1 victory. The 21-year-old midfielder played with Rice in the Chelsea youth teams, and he has a new nickname for his England international teammate – “DR7”. Mount responded: “DR7 ya know!” Stats According to WhoScored, for England against Belgium on Sunday evening, Mount took two shots, had a pass accuracy of 77.8%, won one header, took 30 touches, attempted one dribble, and made one tackle. Rice played one key pass, had a pass accuracy of 95.4%, took 74 touches, and made three interceptions, according to WhoScored. England are next in action on Wednesday evening when they take on Denmark in UEFA Nations League Group A2.

yes

“He can do it for us” – Jamie Redknapp claims this England midfielder can replicate Kevin De Bruyne https://www.caughtoffside.com/2020/10/12/mount-can-be-englands-de-bruyne-claims-redknapp/ Sky Sports pundit Jamie Redknapp claimed that Mason Mount can be England’s answer to Kevin De Bruyne after the Chelsea man’s man of the match performance against Belgium last night, report the Daily Mail. Mount’s tireless 88 minute display against Roberto Martinez’s ‘Red Devils’ showed exactly why Gareth Southgate opted to include him in his starting eleven. His work on and off the ball for both club and country is truly commendable.

Why would they scrap the Community Shield? LOL, it as just one game and every remotely major football nation does it its a trophy and just to get in it is a bitch what's next, doing away with the Super Cup? what they need to scrap are all these extra nation team stupid extra international games the World Cup, the the European Championship and the Olympics are enough fuck all the rest all these extra games are causing injuries to explode (do not care nor worry about the CS, it is one game, a club game, and in a top 5 stadium on the planet) in fact, I would like to see clauses inserted into the Big Five leagues player's contracts that blocks players from going down to backwater shitholes in AFCON (and now also the 2nd tournament, the African Nations Championship) where so many injuries take place due to thug play and horrid faculties/medical staffs Confédération Africaine de Football (CAF) is even worse than UEFA World Cup qualification games down there are bad enough already

Premier League: Radical reform plans could have 'damaging impact' https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/54499998 Radical proposals for the reform of English football could have a "damaging impact" on the game, says the Premier League. Under the proposals, led by Liverpool and Manchester United, the English top flight would be cut to 18 teams. The plans would see the Premier League hand over the £250m bailout required by the Football League to stave off a financial disaster among its 72 clubs. The Premier League would also hand over 25% of its annual income to the EFL. The proposals, dubbed Project Big Picture, would see: The Premier League cut from 20 to 18 clubs, with the Championship, League One and League Two each retaining 24 teams. The bottom two teams in the Premier League relegated automatically with the 16th-placed team joining the Championship play-offs. The League Cup and Community Shield abolished. Parachute payments scrapped. A £250m rescue fund made immediately available to the EFL £100m paid to the FA to make up for lost revenue. Nine clubs given 'special voting rights' on certain issues, based on their extended runs in the Premier League. But the plans have been criticised by the Premier League, the government and supporters' groups. "English football is the world's most watched, and has a vibrant, dynamic and competitive league structure that drives interest around the globe," a Premier League statement said. "To maintain this position, it is important that we all work together. Both the Premier League and the FA support a wide-ranging discussion on the future of the game, including its competition structures, calendar and overall financing particularly in light of the effects of Covid-19. "Football has many stakeholders, therefore this work should be carried out through the proper channels enabling all clubs and stakeholders the opportunity to contribute." Under the proposals, the EFL Cup in its present form would be abolished and the Community Shield scrapped. In addition, the top flight's 14-club majority voting system would change. The Premier League statement added: "In the Premier League's view, a number of the individual proposals in the plan published today could have a damaging impact on the whole game and we are disappointed to see that Rick Parry, chair of the EFL, has given his on-the-record support. "The Premier League has been working in good faith with its clubs and the EFL to seek a resolution to the requirement for Covid-19 rescue funding. This work will continue." The Department for Culture, Media and Sport condemned what it called a "backroom deal". "We are surprised and disappointed that at a time of crisis when we have urged the top tiers of professional football to come together and finalise a deal to help lower league clubs, there appear to be backroom deals being cooked up that would create a closed shop at the very top of the game," a DCMS spokesperson said. "Sustainability, integrity and fair competition are absolutely paramount and anything that may undermine them is deeply troubling. Fans must be front of all our minds, and this shows why our fan led review of football governance will be so critical." Analysis - 'hugely divisive and potentially seismic' BBC sports editor Dan Roan This is a hugely divisive and potentially seismic proposal, threatening the biggest shake-up of the English game in a generation. Angered by the way the story broke without their blessing, the Premier League has already given it short shrift, viewing this as a regrettable power-grab. In fact one well-placed Premier League source has described it as a "takeover attempt, rather than a rescue package". Many will see this as an anti-competitive plot to concentrate power in the hands of the biggest clubs, opening the door to them controlling broadcast contracts, financial rules and even takeovers bids in a way top-flight bosses have always been desperate to avoid - a step towards a European Super League, and a means of freeing up space in the calendar to play more lucrative pre-season friendlies. For years the bigger clubs have wanted more money and more sway. This is the most dramatic manifestation of that to date. But will it get off the ground? There will be huge doubts given 14 clubs would need to approve a plan that would mean fewer Premier League places. But the involvement of the two biggest clubs in the country means this surprising development has to be taken seriously. At a time when the EFL is facing an unprecedented financial crisis however, it is easy to see why they would support a plan that would hand them the £250m they need to cover the loss of match-day revenue this season. And many in football will welcome the idea of a more redistributive financial model, with 25% of Premier League income shared at a time when the gulf between the divisions has been identified as a major problem. Indeed, if the threat of this plan helps break the impasse between the Premier League and the government over a rescue package for the EFL, and a more redistributive financial 'reset', perhaps it can emerge as a positive development. 'Gap to Premier League is unbridgeable' The English Football League confirmed it had been in talks over 'Project Big Picture' and that its chairman Rick Parry was in favour of the plans, first reported in the Daily Telegraph. "The need for a complete rethinking regarding the funding of English professional football predates the Covid-19 crisis," he said in a statement. "Discussion and planning around 'Project Big Picture' has been ongoing for quite some time, unrelated to the current pandemic but now has an urgency that simply cannot be denied. "The revenues flowing from the investment and work of our top clubs has been largely limited to the top division creating a sort of lottery, while Championship clubs struggle to behave prudently and Leagues One and Two are financially stretched despite enormous revenues English football generates. "This plan devised by our top clubs and the English Football League puts an end to all of that." Parry says, in 2018-19, Championship clubs received £146m in EFL distributions and Premier League solidarity payments, compared with £1.56bn received by the bottom 14 Premier League clubs. He added parachute payments made to eight recently relegated clubs totalled £246m and represented one-third of the total Championship turnover. Parry said it created "a major distortion that impacts the league annually". "The gap between the Premier League and the English Football League has become a chasm which has become unbridgeable for clubs transitioning between the EFL and Premier League," he said. It is understood Liverpool's owners, the Fenway Sports Group, came forward with the initial plan, which has been worked on by United co-chairman Joel Glazer. It is anticipated it will receive the backing of Arsenal, Chelsea, Manchester City and Tottenham Hotspur - the other members of England's 'big six'. The idea is to address longstanding EFL concerns about the huge gap in funding between its divisions and the Premier League by handing over 25% of the annual income, although the current parachute payment system would be scrapped. There would be a £250m up-front payment to address the existing crisis created by the coronavirus pandemic, seen by some as a bid to garner support for the proposals. In addition, the Football Association would receive what is being described as a £100m "gift". The Football Supporters' Association said it noted "with grave concern" the proposals, adding they had "far-reaching consequences for the whole of domestic football". "Once again it appears that big decisions in football are apparently being stitched up behind our backs by billionaire club owners who continue to treat football as their personal fiefdom," it said in a statement. "Football is far more than a business to be carved up; it is part of our communities and our heritage, and football fans are its lifeblood. As football's most important stakeholders, it is crucial that fans are consulted and involved in the game's decision-making. "We have welcomed the government's commitment to a 'fan-led review of the governance of football'; we would argue that today's revelations have made that process even more relevant and urgent." The organisation said it remained "open-minded to any suggestions for the improvement of the governance and organisation of the game". It added: "We would however emphasise that in our discussions so far, very few of our members have ever expressed the view that what football really needs is a greater concentration of power in the hands of the big six billionaire-owned clubs." No date has been set for the proposed new-style league to be in operation but sources have suggested 2022-23 is not out of the question. In order to get down from 20 to 18, it is anticipated four clubs would be relegated directly, with two promoted from the Championship. In addition, there would be play-offs involving the team to finish 16th in the Premier League and those in third, fourth and fifth in the second tier. It is also planned that, as well as the 'big six', ever-present league member Everton, West Ham United and Southampton - ninth and 11th respectively in the list of clubs who have featured in the most Premier League seasons - would be granted special status. If six of those nine clubs vote in favour of a proposal, it would be enough to get it passed. There is no mention of Aston Villa and Newcastle United, both of whom have featured in more Premier League campaigns than Manchester City.

lol, Sky is cranking up the Bale hype train like crazy

Håland with a hat trick for Norway

2 1 FT Mount with the winner Chels and ex Chels all over the pitch shame no Eden

Reece on

wow, should be 2 2 what a pass by De Bruyne

2 1 England Mount

Lukaku is such a beast now

pretty weak pen call but 1 1

pen to England

lol you have Frankenstien a shit DMF and a RB for the starting English CB's against the number one ranked club in the world

ex Chels running riot

shit CB's burnt again pen

so lucky that was onside no VAR England shredded should be bil 1 Belgium

2020-21 UEFA Nations League, Group Stage England Belgium http://www.sportnews.to/sports/2020/nations-league-england-vs-belgium-s1/ https://www.totalsportek.com/england/

of course, but Rudiger has had nothing remotely close to that level of repetitive and severe injury pattern that Essien had and those dotards on Twitter were not even using injuries as a point of focus

Explained: The Premier League’s controversial new pay-per-view service https://theathletic.com/2127623/2020/10/10/premier-league-pay-per-view-fixtures/ For the first time since 2007, when Sky Sports’ PremPlus channel was disbanded, football fans in the UK will have to use a pay-per-view service to be able to watch certain Premier League games on TV from next weekend. On Friday, the Premier League announced that matches in October which have not already been selected for live coverage will be available to watch via the BT Sport Box Office or Sky Sports Box Office platforms. The price? £14.95 per game. A solution for screening the matches had to be found after the planned return of fans from October 1 was scrapped by the British government due to a rise in COVID-19 cases across the country. However, what the Premier League said were “interim” arrangements were roundly criticised by supporters. And while the Football Supporters’ Association (FSA) welcomed the decision to broadcast the matches, it also urged BT Sport and Sky Sports to “reconsider their pricing”. The decision to make matches available on PPV was not a unanimous one, with Leicester City voting against the proposal. The Athletic understands that other clubs also voiced their objections, only to vote in support of the plan anyway. But why were so many Premier League clubs in favour of turning to PPV? How much additional revenue can clubs expect to make, and how do they plan to spend it? And are hard-up supporters being ripped off? The Athletic answers the key questions… Who approved the plan? The result was an emphatic 19-1 when votes were cast by the 20 Premier League clubs, with Susan Whelan, the Leicester City chief executive said to have spoken “passionately” against the proposals. Manchester United chief executive Ed Woodward also argued against the plan and others declared their own reservations, particularly around the logistics of how to deal with season-ticket holders, but ultimately only Leicester formally objected in the vote. The absence of supporters, due to COVID-19 restrictions, continues to leave clubs with a shortfall in revenue and there is a collective desire to start clawing some of that money back as the uncertainty spreads in the closing months of 2020. Although the Premier League and its 20 clubs were willing to make some fixtures free-to-air as a bargaining chip in Project Restart, with the BBC among the beneficiaries, it was done so with the hope supporters would be allowed back into grounds from October. The government’s change in policy for public events has forced professional games to stay behind closed doors for the foreseeable future and Premier League clubs were unwilling to keep on giving away additional games “for free” via Sky Sports and BT Sport. Rob Webster, Sky Sports’ managing director, said: “The Premier League has come to this decision with its clubs to provide a service for supporters who are no longer able to attend and to generate match-day revenue. We are happy to support them with this interim solution — and we share their desire to get fans back into grounds as soon as it is safe to do so.” Why did 19 clubs vote for it if more than one had concerns? Clubs across the Premier League are known to have been “taken aback” by the ferocity of the reaction to the announcement. “It is a plague on all our houses except Leicester,” said one club source. Leicester, though, were not the only club to raise issues at the meeting. There were concerns that it would constitute a PR own goal on the back of a transfer window in which the 20 clubs committed to spending more than £1 billion in transfer fees and there was also disagreement over the money to be charged. One senior executive at a Premier League club said they would rather watch Match of the Day than pay £15 for a match. Another source told The Athletic after the meeting: “If you ask 20 millionaires to go into room and decide what £15 means, this is what happens. It has failed the Netflix test, one game is more than a monthly Netflix subscription.” Woodward was said to have been a strong questioning voice, though rival club sources dispute the intensity of his opposition to the final proposal. Ultimately all bar Leicester voted in favour of the proposals in the spirit of collective responsibility. A source said that it is not unusual for clubs to speak passionately against proposals in meetings between the 20 clubs, but then — once they know the numbers — vote with it, both so that the Premier League appears united and also because they know they might need the support of clubs leading the charge on the issue later on down the line. A source said: “Premier League votes are like being in the Prime Minister’s cabinet. It is seen as an act of betrayal and often futile to vote against the majority when you know you don’t have the numbers to win.” For example, The Athletic understands that Manchester United were not the only club to speak against the plan only to vote for it in the end. One other theory that has been floated is that the leading clubs are unlikely to object to an arrangement that would also test the appetite for a Premier League streaming service that could work in their favour. Smaller clubs have always been against the separate sale of rights as they would likely generate less money for them and more for big clubs. This PPV run could prove that. How was the price decided upon and why make this announcement now? Fans of EFL clubs have been paying £10 per game throughout this season, including ties in the Carabao Cup and EFL Trophy. That figure is set by the EFL and charged universally by all 72 clubs. The £14.95 fee for Premier League games is almost 50 per cent up on that but they will argue the production’s quality of service, such as multiple camera angles and analysis, makes it a superior package to that offered in the EFL. The PPV price is also less than major boxing bouts, which typically cost between £20 and £25. The timing of the announcement is nevertheless lousy. No sooner have clubs finished their spending in the transfer market, they are asking supporters to dig deep once more to continue watching their team. The Football Supporters’ Association are among those asking for the pricing to be reconsidered. “Many Premier League clubs have already taken money from fans, particularly season ticket holders, for matches they can’t attend so we urge them to get refunds out to those supporters as soon as possible,” a spokesperson said. “We’ve also already heard from many supporters and FSA members who are concerned about the £15 per game being charged and we’d urge BT Sport and Sky Sports to reconsider their pricing for these games.” The Tottenham Hotspur Supporters’ Trust went further, saying the high pricing could be damaging to society not just fans’ finances. “The price of £14.95 per game is too high. And because it is too high, it could have damaging effects – not just on an individual’s finances at a time when many are stretched,” it said. “It will encourage use of illegal streams, therefore diverting money from the game. And it will encourage people to gather in households and pubs to watch games together.” What matches are likely to be selected for PPV? Broadcasters have already picked their games up to the start of November, with five of the 10 games in each round going to either Sky Sports or BT Sport. That leaves five other games to be broadcast every weekend on PPV. The first three games to be played on Sky Sports Box Office will be Newcastle United vs Manchester United on Saturday October 17 (8pm), with Leicester City vs Aston Villa on Sunday October 18 (7.15pm) and then the ugly duckling of West Brom vs Burnley on Monday October 19 (5.30pm). Sky Sports and BT Sport are willing to facilitate these broadcasts but they also have their own product to protect. They will continue to keep picking the most attractive fixtures to satisfy their own customers in these financially challenging times, meaning the divisions less popular clubs are more likely to have to shell out more regularly to watch their team on TV. How will the revenue be distributed among clubs? Under the EFL model, Championship clubs sell streaming passes through their own websites and are entitled to keep the money they earn. That makes it a more profitable exercise for the division’s bigger clubs, such as Nottingham Forest and Derby County, who can bring in more money than their lesser counterparts. The Premier League has made the decision to hand over the broadcast of PPV games to Sky Sports and BT Sport and while that could mean the money raised will be placed in a central pot and distributed among the 20 clubs, a decision has not yet been reached. Sky Sports and BT Sport, who plan to use their own pool of commentators and pundits, will only cover their broadcast costs and not make any profit from the PPV games. Will non-subscribers be able to watch matches shown on PPV? They will. You do not need to be a subscriber to either Sky Sports or BT Sport to access PPV games. But you will need to register with the provider ahead of the fixture. Sky Sports Box Office is already a designated PPV channel predominantly used for boxing events, while BT Sport Box Office was also set up in 2018 to broadcast boxing, UFC and WWE events. Those are the channels lined up to host the Premier League’s PPV games. Do clubs plan to refund existing season-ticket holders? Not as things stand. Each club has taken a different approach to selling season tickets for 2020-21 and will have their own decisions to make. It is understood that the issue of how this would affect season-ticket holders was discussed and that the idea of giving passes to season-ticket holders was explored but the differing circumstances at every club made this too complex. Liverpool and Aston Villa, for example, have shelved season-ticket sales for this campaign so have nothing to refund supporters. Leicester are another to have held back on the collection of season-ticket money until it becomes clear when supporters are allowed to attend games again. Southampton and Crystal Palace are issuing refunds to season-ticket holders on a pro-rata basis for every game played behind closed doors, but the absence of a blanket approach across the division has only muddied the waters. The EFL, which announced every game could be streamed after lockdown, gave every season-ticket holder free access codes as a means of compensation, but the Premier League are not expected to follow that lead. How long is this “interim solution” likely to last? The hope — albeit faint — is that this can be a measure for October only. The Premier League joined voices with the EFL, The FA, Women’s Super League and Women’s Championship this week to call on supporters to be safely allowed back into grounds “as soon as possible”. Richard Masters, chief executive of the Premier League, was among those to add his signature to a letter to supporters, with the return of testing programmes top of the agenda. The decision over when fans will be allowed back into grounds ultimately rests with the government but the rising COVID-19 infection rate is not helping the cause. That would point to this becoming a long-term solution. Why does the Premier League not use this opportunity to set up its own streaming service? That would be a logistical headache the Premier League is not ready for. As things stand it has domestic broadcast deals worth £4.5 billion with Sky Sports and BT Sport and the appetite to set up a streaming service is not currently there. The EFL’s platform, iFollow, has encountered regular problems when streaming live games and the Premier League would need to be sure its product was not diminished during its live coverage. Amazon Prime, the American giant and newcomers to the Premier League scene, was broadcasting with a delay last season and picture quality on platforms such as Netflix also suffered during lockdown. That is not to say the Premier League will not go down that road in the future once technological advances are made. Will international broadcasters replicate this model? This is a very British problem that needed to be addressed. Broadcast packages sold overseas are not limited to the same restrictions, with all games made available to supporters based outside of the UK, so the lucrative agreements struck with overseas broadcasters will be unaffected. Will the additional income be put towards an EFL rescue package? That’s an impossible question to answer at present but let’s be clear: this is a step designed to fill the financial void of Premier League clubs. They are out of pocket as the wait goes on to bring fans back into stadiums and this will help claw back some of that shortfall. They are looking after No 1. How much money is raised from these PPV broadcasts will be fascinating. A club like Leeds United, who won promotion out of the Championship in July, were selling as many as 25,000 streaming passes to their supporters, albeit at home and overseas. If the average Premier League PPV fixture, say, shifts 40,000 passes at £14.95 then it will be a return of £600,000 minus the broadcast fees. Although all income will be gratefully received, these are hardly life-changing sums for a Premier League club. Does that change the financial landscape when it comes to an EFL bail-out? Given the reluctance to help out clubs in the Championship to this point, it would seem unlikely. In a recent Premier League meeting Woodward suggested that the Premier League borrow £1 billion and give £300 million to the EFL. This did not receive backing.