The English Football Thread

[NikkiCFC 8,081]

58 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

If there were 20 non-playing staff, earning average 30k a year. So approx 150k wages for 3 months. 120k will then have to be paid by the Government. That'sless than 1 week's pay for the average Sp*ds player. Shitcunt club.

 

[NikkiCFC 8,081]

 

[Fulham Broadway 16,977]

16 minutes ago, NikkiCFC said:

 

Yup been known for a long time yet the FA fail to act. Gooners particularly dislike him...

[Vesper 29,202]

Player contracts are biggest barrier to season finishing. It’s a legal minefield

https://theathletic.com/1716043/2020/04/02/coronavirus-premier-league-football-contracts-season-finish/

Several leading sports lawyers have raised serious doubts about the implications of extending the season beyond June 30, with one lawyer saying it is simply “not realistic”, while another said the situation would be an “absolute nightmare”.

The crisis caused by the coronavirus pandemic is, of course, bigger than football or any other sport, but that does not mean the professional game is not dealing with significant and unprecedented challenges.

One of the most complicated issues is how to finish the current season in Europe, where many players’ contracts expire on June 30, a hard deadline to end one season and start another that nobody expected would be forced to move.

But that is the predicament facing administrators, clubs, leagues and players as they try to work out how to preserve the integrity of their competitions, as well as satisfy their various broadcast and commercial contracts, assuming their respective governments let them do so.

“If the season is to be extended beyond June 30, clubs are going to want to extend some of their expiring contracts, but they are unlikely to want to hand out new three-year deals, so they are very likely to be short-term deals,” says Nick De Marco QC, a barrister with Blackstone Chambers.

“But this presents a perennial problem for players: if you get injured while playing on a short-term contract, you could find yourself without a job. Now, it makes sense for all parties to negotiate and find a way through this, but it is not required for players to agree to these short-term extensions under English law.”

Dan Lowen, a sports contract specialist at London-based law firm Level, agrees with De Marco.

“Some with expiring contracts may be delighted to be paid by their clubs for a few more weeks or months, but others will refuse to accept any extension as they won’t want to jeopardise a long-term or better contract with a new club,” says Lowen.

A working group set up by world football’s governing body FIFA to look at the regulatory issues posed by the pandemic has recently sent a report to the game’s stakeholders.

In this report, which The Athletic has seen, FIFA says the “three core matters” that must be addressed are expiring contracts, the “appropriate timing” for the next transfer window (currently scheduled to open on July 1) and “frustrated” agreements that can no longer be fulfilled because of the COVID-19 outbreak.

The concept of frustration exists in common law systems, like England’s, and civil law systems, such as Switzerland’s, where FIFA is based. In simple terms, it says contracts can be set aside if an unforeseen event makes it impossible for the contract to be fulfilled.

This is particularly significant now that clubs are unable to provide their coaches, players and non-playing staff with work, and may be struggling to pay them. As a result, clubs have been persuading their employees to take pay cuts or defer wages until life returns to normal, with players at Barcelona, Bayern Munich and Juventus among those who have accepted cuts.

So far, only a handful of teams in England and Scotland have agree to do likewise, although Newcastle United, Norwich City, Bournemouth and Tottenham Hotspur have become the first Premier League clubs to take advantage of a government-backed scheme to furlough their non-playing staff. This means these employees will be paid 80 per cent of their usual salaries, up to a maximum of £2,500 a month, out of the public purse — a controversial move for companies who employ millionaires.

FIFA can only provide general guidance on these matters and its proposal is that “clubs and employees (players and coaches) be encouraged to work together to agree on deferral and/or reduction of salary by a reasonable amount for any period of the stoppage”.

The English Football League, Premier League and Professional Footballers’ Association met on Wednesday in attempt to reach a united position and it is expected that English-based players will agree to defer a proportion of their wages.

That is certainly the hope of global players’ union FIFPro, whose secretary general Jonas Baer-Hoffmann told reporters on Tuesday he hoped the various contractual issues could be resolved “collectively, with the right will on both sides”.

But, presumably as an example of the wrong will, he also highlighted the example of seven-time Slovakian champions MSK Zilina, who became the first European club to start liquidation proceedings after the start of the coronavirus crisis on Monday when 17 of their first-team players refused to accept an 80 per cent pay cut.

This is clearly an extreme example, but it highlights how difficult it can be to find common ground or a way through the crisis.

As Lowen points out, the situation in the England, particularly at several of the Premier League’s top clubs, is further complicated by the fact many player contracts are now “heavily skewed towards incentives” or bonuses.

“In normal times, these contingent payments are seen as a win-win because the clubs recognise that they gain if a player meets these targets,” he says.

“If the season is cancelled, players will not receive these bonuses, some of which they could have reasonably expected to have received. In those circumstances, should they also agree to cut or defer their basic salaries?

“There is often a difficult tension between the regulatory and legal spheres in global sports and this crisis is shining a bright light on that. FIFA is in a tough spot because it has 211 member associations: each one of those may have a slightly different approach to the regulations around contracts and will have different legal frameworks in which those contracts exist.”

A good example of this is how an English court might interpret a contract expiring on June 30 versus a court elsewhere in Europe, and it is based on the concept of “contractual intention”.

“In England, it is based on what an objective bystander would reasonably consider the intention of the contract to be,” explains De Marco.

“In this case, the fact the contracts say June 30, it would be reasonable to assume that is what was intended. But under civil law, you look more at the subjective interpretation of intention. So, for example, if you had evidence to suggest the parties to the contract actually meant ‘until the end of the season’, you could more easily extend it.”

Some experts have suggested football needs to look again at its player contracts, as they do not contain “force majeure” clauses that guard against unforeseen circumstances.

“They are common in other sports contracts,” says Dan Chapman, head of the sports and employment teams at Leathes Prior, a law firm in East Anglia.

“For example, the last race of the season in Formula One is scheduled for Abu Dhabi but the sport has had to cancel and reschedule races before. This is reflected in the drivers’ contracts, which have more flexibility.

“Football contracts, on the other hand, really aren’t very sophisticated and I wonder if this is something we should look at after the crisis. If you’re (Birmingham City’s) Jude Bellingham, just to pick one example, are you really going to want to play a few more games in the Championship this summer if you already have a move to Borussia Dortmund or Manchester United lined up?

“I don’t think extending the season for months is realistic or possible from a legal point of view. I can’t see players agreeing to short-term extensions if they know they’re going to be cramming games in before facing a quick turnaround for another long season. The risk of injury will only be increased.”

De Marco, however, is not so convinced that football contracts can or will be changed as a result of the crisis.

“Football contracts are not like most employment contracts for good reason,” he says. “First, they are the product of years of collective bargaining between the clubs, players’ unions and the governing bodies, so they cannot be altered without consultation.

“Second, they are fixed-term contracts, so players cannot just be made redundant or dismissed on notice because there is no work for them. And there are no force majeure clauses in them because of the highly specific nature of the industry.

“A Liverpool player cannot just hand in his notice and join Arsenal in the same way most of us can move to new companies. This is because of the integrity and team stability issues this would pose for football competitions, but it is a fundamental restraint of trade. Therefore it is only fair that players get something in return.

“Force majeure clauses might seem reasonable to some but most players only get two or three good contracts in their lifetime: is it fair that those contracts could be ripped up for something that is completely beyond their control?”

Lowen believes one possible way out of the legal minefield is to relax FIFA’s ban on pre-contract agreements between clubs in the same country. Under the current rules, players can sign pre-contracts with clubs abroad, as Aaron Ramsey did when he left Arsenal for Juve.

“One way of potentially allaying players’ concerns would be for national associations to allow players to do this now for moves within national borders,” says Lowen.

“This could, however, lead to potential issues with the integrity of the competition, as players could face their future employers in the final matches of the season. But signing a pre-contract would in theory give players a degree of protection against the risks and impact of a bad injury.”

Daniel Geey, a sports lawyer at Sheridans, raises another potential headache for clubs and players. “What happens if a player is out of contract on July 1 but cannot be employed or registered by another club until the new season starts because the transfer window has moved? That’s a restraint of trade,” says Geey.

“And then there will be other players who will only sign extended contracts if they are rewarded for the added risk of injury. That is why I can imagine some clubs would simply decide to play on with a smaller squad.

“My gut feeling is the clubs will have enough players to finish the season without dishing out lots of short-term deals, although this will clearly lead to some questions about the integrity of the competition. Watford are a good potential example as Heurelho Gomes and Ben Foster are out of contract. That is a good prisoner’s dilemma for them as they wonder if they should re-sign or not.”

Another lawyer, who wished to remain anonymous, said all these issues amounted to the “absolute nightmare” mentioned above and it is why he believes the game will reach a “tipping point” in the coming weeks and realise the season cannot be completed.

He said he thought the leaders in each league would be awarded the respective titles, the current Premier League table would decide the European places, the top two in the Championship, League One and League Two would be promoted and there would be no relegation. The divisions would then be readjusted over the coming seasons.

“Somebody will try to sue the leagues but I think it will be a case of the path of least resistance and I’m sure a settlement can be reached with the broadcasters,” he said.

[Vesper 29,202]

Why Raheem Sterling will not return to Liverpool, even if he does leave Man City

https://theathletic.com/1711380/2020/04/01/james-pearce-liverpool-raheem-sterling-manchester-city/

It started with Raheem Sterling’s live Instagram Q&A with supporters last week.

Asked if he would ever go back to Liverpool, the Manchester City winger said: “To be honest with you, I love Liverpool. Don’t get it twisted, they are always in my heart. It’s a team that done a lot for me growing up so…”

French newspaper “L’Equipe” then ran a story on the prospect of Jurgen Klopp making a move to sign the England international, fuelled by comments attributed to one of Sterling’s representatives.

“Even if Raheem is attached to Manchester City, he hasn’t forgotten Liverpool because that’s where he became who he is, as a man and as a player. There was controversy surrounding his exit, of course, but time has run its course and everything is possible.”

Eyebrows have been raised on Merseyside. The reality is that there’s more chance of Lord Lucan riding into Anfield on Shergar than Sterling returning to Liverpool any time soon. It’s a non-starter on every possible level.

Forget the bad blood for a minute — the 25-year-old still has three years to run on a contract worth up to £300,000 per week. He’s a £150 million asset and it’s highly unlikely that City would contemplate selling him to their biggest domestic rival.

And even if City’s Champions League ban is upheld and that puts pressure on them to consider offers, Liverpool simply wouldn’t be interested at those kind of figures. You don’t break your transfer record or your wage structure to secure the services of a player who wouldn’t get into your first-choice XI.

Reports have suggested that Liverpool “fear” losing Sadio Mane to Real Madrid this summer and Sterling would be the ideal replacement on the left of Klopp’s front three. However, that’s news to the Anfield hierarchy, who are convinced that the Senegal international is happy and still sees his long-term future at the club.

Sterling does have the qualities that Klopp looks for in an attacker and would certainly fit the style, but he isn’t a more complete player than Mane, who has contributed 14 goals and nine assists in the Premier League this season compared to Sterling’s tally of 11 goals and two assists.

Even if there was a void to be filled and even if the finances made sense, selling the return of Sterling to Liverpool supporters would be a major challenge.

He has felt the wrath of Anfield on each visit since his acrimonious £49 million transfer to the Etihad in the summer of 2015. Every touch has been booed by the Kop and he’s been subjected to chants of “only one greedy bastard”.

The manner in which he repeatedly agitated for the move to City left a sour taste. He always maintained that it was a desire to play Champions League football and win trophies rather than the pursuit of greater riches that was his motivation.

But there’s no doubt that the saga was handled badly and he received some poor advice after rejecting Liverpool’s offer of a new contract.

An interview with his agent Aidy Ward was published saying “he didn’t care” about the club’s image and that Sterling wouldn’t sign an extension “even if he was offered £900,000 per week”. Ward claimed he thought the conversation with an Evening Standard journalist was off the record.

The result of Ward’s rant was more negativity in Sterling’s direction as he was booed at Liverpool’s end of season awards in 2015. It was all so unnecessary: after having two bids turned down, City ended up paying the £49 million fee which was Liverpool’s asking price from the start.

Since then Sterling has grown both as a player and as a man. He has won two league titles, the FA Cup and three League Cups at the Etihad, and has become one of the most influential sports people in Britain.

Yet the jeers from the stands at Anfield clearly still affect him. Last November tempers boiled over towards the end of Liverpool’s 3-1 win as Joe Gomez and Sterling squared up to each other.

Calm was restored but 24 hours later when the duo reported for England duty, Sterling lost his rag when Gomez went to shake his hand at St George’s Park and tried to put him in a headlock. The scar under the right eye of the Liverpool defender remains visible.

Sterling was fortunate that Gomez, a quiet and unassuming model professional, decided not to take the matter further. Instead he quickly accepted his apology and helped convince Gareth Southgate not to banish him from the squad. The incident upset Gomez and his Liverpool team-mates were angered by the treatment that followed, with the centre-back booed by a section of England fans.

The question is: what’s the motivation behind the comments of Sterling and those close to him?

Maybe Sterling regrets the way he handled his exit and is just trying to build bridges and show his appreciation for the club who launched his professional career. He has previously talked about how his young daughter Melody remains a Liverpool fan and sings Mohamed Salah’s “Egyptian king” chant around the house.

Maybe he’s been casting admiring glances towards Anfield, with his old club on the brink of taking the title off City’s hands. Speaking back in 2015, Ward suggested that Sterling would have stayed put if Klopp had replaced Brendan Rodgers earlier.

“The new Liverpool manager probably would have been a great fit for Raheem — passionate, disciplined in the right way, new ideas, not afraid of trying new things. Would Raheem under Klopp have been a good scenario? Yes, 100 per cent, definitely, mainly because of the person Klopp is — the passion, the drive, the emotion, wanting to achieve,” Ward said.

“Working with Klopp — that could have been great. He’s going to get the best out of those players. It could have been a dream come true.”

Both Liverpool and Sterling have flourished since then. They will remain on separate paths. If Sterling and those close to him are plotting a move, his next stop won’t be Anfield.

[NikkiCFC 8,081]

Gary Lineker blasts Matt Hancock demand for Premier League footballers to rush into coronavirus pay cuts as Gary Neville says Health Secretary has 'a f***ing cheek'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8183453/Gary-Lineker-blasts-Matt-Hancock-demand-footballers-rush-coronavirus-pay-cuts.html

Hancock is right here. Players need to take HUGE pay cut. 80%-85% if you ask me.

[Special Juan 27,541]

Premier League agrees to... - effectively suspend indefinitely ie 'until safe & appropriate to return' - ask players for 30% conditional pay cut/deferral - bring forward £125m of solidarity, parachute & academy payments to EFL & NL - donate £20m(!) to NHS, communities, families..

[Sir Mikel OBE 4,920]

2 hours ago, NikkiCFC said:

Gary Lineker blasts Matt Hancock demand for Premier League footballers to rush into coronavirus pay cuts as Gary Neville says Health Secretary has 'a f***ing cheek'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8183453/Gary-Lineker-blasts-Matt-Hancock-demand-footballers-rush-coronavirus-pay-cuts.html

Hancock is right here. Players need to take HUGE pay cut. 80%-85% if you ask me.

Would you take an 80-85% pay cut?

 

 

[NikkiCFC 8,081]

4 hours ago, Sir Mikel OBE said:

Would you take an 80-85% pay cut?

 

 

For normal job with normal salary I wouldn't. But footballers are not in this bracket. One fucking Drinkwater earns per month more than 300 nurses in UK in the same period. How sad is that? 

[Sir Mikel OBE 4,920]

5 hours ago, NikkiCFC said:

For normal job with normal salary I wouldn't. But footballers are not in this bracket. One fucking Drinkwater earns per month more than 300 nurses in UK in the same period. How sad is that? 

Danny Drinkwater has a high skill job that places him in the top echelon of a high paying field. Any person with enough money, and high enough test scores, could become a nurse.

 

Important job, certainly, but Footballers earn their pay by being the best at a job sought after by hundreds of millions. They shouldnt be expected, nor required, to take a pay cut after working hard to reach the level they have.

[Vesper 29,202]

Friday April 3 2020 Football Nerd

The Premier League season's most 'unfair' results By Daniel Zeqiri Many results are produced by variance and good fortune CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES Throughout football's coronavirus hiatus, we remain committed to providing a weekly newsletter of football facts, analysis and retrospectives. If there is a topic you are keen for us to cover please email [email protected]. Above all, stay safe. The thought of voiding the Premier League season repels football's authorities and most supporters for a variety of reasons. One is that football matches are a series of never-to-be-repeated discrete events, and their outcomes owe much to fortune and who enjoys the rub of the green on the day. Football's low-scoring nature means teams can dominate a significant portion of the 90 minutes but find themselves on the wrong side of the result. The tension and jeopardy created by this dynamic is what keeps us all interested. In the past decade, metrics such as 'expected goals' have gone mainstream and allowed even the casual fan to quantitatively value which team created the better chances. Despite its clunky name, expected goals is just a numerical expression of concepts that have been discussed in pubs and cafes for decades. How many times have you heard someone say "eight or nine times out of ten we win that"? Or recall Ron Atkinson's riposte to Sky Sports' Richard Keys, when the defeated Coventry City manager pointed out that Southampton goalkeeper Dave Beasant had won the man of the match award. Familiar sentiments all football fans understand - expected goals just puts flesh on the bone. Below are the 10 most 'unfair' results of this Premier League season, based on the discrepancy between the actual scoreline and the xG tally. They can be divided up into two categories: ever so slightly flattering thrashings, or an unlikely reverse of the outcome the balance of the game should have produced.   CREDIT: OPTA It is not surprising to see Leicester's 9-0 and 5-0 routs against Southampton and Newcastle or Manchester City's 6-1 win at Aston Villa feature on the list. Scoring five goals or more in 90 minutes is practically impossible without some xG over-performance - Bayern Munich scoring seven at Tottenham from an xG total of 1.45 the perfect example. This does not mean the result of these games was unjust however, as the xG indicates the victors were certainly the better side. More influential for league table are those games where the outcome of the game flips. Tottenham's 2-0 win over Manchester City was the best example of floodlight robbery, achieved with an xG match-up of 0.31 to 2.86. Burnley have also kept up their reputation for squeezing out wins against the odds, with home wins against Southampton and Crystal Palace achieved while creating fewer than 1.0 xG per game. This is not to suggest some teams have been lucky, but rather demonstrate the number of results determined by variance. That is why studying a bigger sample of matches offers a better idea of each team's level.

[Fulham Broadway 16,977]

They just have to finish the season now. The non leagues are done and some European leagues are following. The PL will have to pay back 750 million on TV rights if not, so thats the incentive to finish the season in some format. 

Give the mickey mousers the title and it will forever have an asterix next to it.. Then we will sing  "You never won the league.. You never wont the League. Etc etc

[Tomo 21,736]

6 hours ago, Fulham Broadway said:

They just have to finish the season now. The non leagues are done and some European leagues are following. The PL will have to pay back 750 million on TV rights if not, so thats the incentive to finish the season in some format. 

Give the mickey mousers the title and it will forever have an asterix next to it.. Then we will sing  "You never won the league.. You never wont the League. Etc etc

I don't think there's any chance we will void the season, far too many compliications. Forget Liverpool for a minute, out of everyone who will suffer they will the least, there's clubs who's long term future rely on this seasons finish, imagine if this was 2003? A void would have destroyed us financially.

Sheffield United is another example, they're on course for CL football, with it they have a money to truly establish themselves as a top PL side, with a voided season they're technically back to being a newly promoted team and will probably disappear into irrelevance again  (not a chance their current squad with a few journeyman signings minus Henderson keep up this years pace). It would be the biggest footballing injustice if Spurs and Arsenal get default entry into the CL at the expense of Leicester and Sheffield. Not to mention the free money Norwich and the likes will get.

I don't know when or how, but this season has to be finished somehow.

[Fulham Broadway 16,977]

15 minutes ago, Tomo said:

I don't think there's any chance we will void the season, far too many compliications. Forget Liverpool for a minute, out of everyone who will suffer they will the least, there's clubs who's long term future rely on this seasons finish, imagine if this was 2003? A void would have destroyed us financially.

Sheffield United is another example, they're on course for CL football, with it they have a money to truly establish themselves as a top PL side, with a voided season they're technically back to being a newly promoted team and will probably disappear into irrelevance again  (not a chance their current squad with a few journeyman signings minus Henderson keep up this years pace). It would be the biggest footballing injustice if Spurs and Arsenal get default entry into the CL at the expense of Leicester and Sheffield. Not to mention the free money Norwich and the likes will get.

I don't know when or how, but this season has to be finished somehow.

Agree Tomo - it has to be done and dusted - that TV revenue and players 30% wage pool needs to filter down, and quickly  -otherwise a conservative estimate suggests 40-50 clubs going bankrupt in the lower divisions.

[Tomo 21,736]

9 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

Agree Tomo - it has to be done and dusted - that TV revenue and players 30% wage pool needs to filter down, and quickly  -otherwise a conservative estimate suggests 40-50 clubs going bankrupt in the lower divisions.

My bad i misread your initial post.

[Fulham Broadway 16,977]

2 minutes ago, Tomo said:

My bad i misread your initial post.

haha sorry  just read my initial post and agree it is hard to gather what I am on about. Still a bit hung over. I think the PL will see sense, (and because of the TV revenue which pays their executives exorbitant dividends) and they will finish it behind closed doors.

[Laylabelle 9,406]

I dont see how they cant. Liverpool deserve their title and teams deserve the chance to get into the Champions League. If voided might not happen for them next year. It just needs to be done in the right way and safety. Some of the proposed plans are daft and probably from no one official...youd hope not anyway!

[Jase 43,479]

2 hours ago, Fulham Broadway said:

haha sorry  just read my initial post and agree it is hard to gather what I am on about. Still a bit hung over. I think the PL will see sense, (and because of the TV revenue which pays their executives exorbitant dividends) and they will finish it behind closed doors.

They should do what AVB suggested and change the seasons to a calendar year to tie in with the 2022 World Cup and then go back to August-May after that.