2020/21 General Match Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

That Fat Centre Half

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
2,439
Reaction score
533
Points
113
Location
Bournemouth
Supports
Luton Town
Salary Caps brought in - £2.5m for L1 and £1.5m for L2.

Interesting when NL Club's get promoted with a budget bigger than the L2 cap, which will, and has, happened!

The Championship needs to follow suit because otherwise it creates a bigger gap from L1 to Championship than there already is.
It’s not just the championship and premiership that “needs” to do this. It’s Scotland and all the other leagues in Europe as well. A short term measure to get over COVID I can see benefits but long term this is a terrible move for lower league football in this country.

The fact it’s been voted through with no great scrutiny really or any deeper work being done on the impact of the mid and long term reflects poorly on the owners and there business acumen as well for me. Just voted to fundamentally change the core cost of there business with 0 understanding of the long term impact. Ludicrous frankly.
 

Luke Imp

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
9,414
Reaction score
2,218
Points
113
Location
Lincoln
Supports
Lincoln City
It’s not just the championship and premiership that “needs” to do this. It’s Scotland and all the other leagues in Europe as well. A short term measure to get over COVID I can see benefits but long term this is a terrible move for lower league football in this country.
True. As I've said previously, the implementation and monitoring of the SCMP wasn't robust enough, not necessarily the idea around it.
 

Guernica

Active Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
407
Reaction score
111
Points
43
Supports
Lincoln City
Am I right in thinking that as this has been passed it opens up a 'rescue package'? I seem to think this was alluded to by Clive. Will wait for more intelligent people to look through what has been agreed.
 

That Fat Centre Half

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
2,439
Reaction score
533
Points
113
Location
Bournemouth
Supports
Luton Town
True. As I've said previously, the implementation and monitoring of the SCMP wasn't robust enough, not necessarily the idea around it.
Completely agree here should have strengthened the existing rules rather than bring this in. This is knee jerk to the extreme and I fully expect many will come to regret it.
 

Luke Imp

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
9,414
Reaction score
2,218
Points
113
Location
Lincoln
Supports
Lincoln City
Completely agree here should have strengthened the existing rules rather than bring this in. This is knee jerk to the extreme and I fully expect many will come to regret it.
One of the main issues for me was the accountability, or lack of, of Chair people who were happy to rack up huge numbers on contracts and could walk away scot-free if the going got tough. It needed something in place whereby there was a comeback on those who handed them out should they have tried to walk away.
 

That Fat Centre Half

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
2,439
Reaction score
533
Points
113
Location
Bournemouth
Supports
Luton Town
One of the main issues for me was the accountability, or lack of, of Chair people who were happy to rack up huge numbers on contracts and could walk away scot-free if the going got tough. It needed something in place whereby there was a comeback on those who handed them out should they have tried to walk away.
Yep and so much more. If the owners wanted to promote sustainability there would be genuine reform of what is expected from football club owners rather than this.
 

Kenneth E End

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
4,518
Reaction score
539
Points
113
Supports
Luton Town
Complete idiocy and totally ill-thought out. I can see some sort of response coming from the PFA too.

The lunatics are running the asylum. It is essentially a big wave to Championship clubs to haul in the best players for very little money.
 

PuB

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
1,734
Reaction score
1,111
Points
113
Supports
Gillingham
I quite like the idea personally
 

Crewelad87

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2015
Messages
2,269
Reaction score
354
Points
83
Location
Crewe
Supports
Crewe Alexandra
Fantastic news for us I think. We spend no where near the league 2 budget, and now having a well run academy with a steady stream of talented players on low wages has never been so valuable.
 

Luke Imp

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
9,414
Reaction score
2,218
Points
113
Location
Lincoln
Supports
Lincoln City
Fantastic news for us I think. We spend no where near the league 2 budget, and now having a well run academy with a steady stream of talented players on low wages has never been so valuable.
Are you trying to convince us that you don't spend anywhere near £1.5m a year on players?!
 

Fedora Dale

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
1,179
Reaction score
340
Points
83
Supports
Rochdale
Fantastic news for us I think. We spend no where near the league 2 budget, and now having a well run academy with a steady stream of talented players on low wages has never been so valuable.
Ditto.
 

DearneValleyRover

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2015
Messages
2,227
Reaction score
529
Points
113
Location
Dearne Valley
Supports
Doncaster Rovers, Sporting Leyland
Talking to someone from the club it looks like they are considering moving the food and drink physically away from the concourses and putting them outside the ground where there is more space and it outdoors. Clearly, they are looking at addressing all the bottle necks so they can maximise the number of spectators.
it’s definitely something that a lot of clubs are looking at but means you can’t serve drinks etc in the ground
 

Crewelad87

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2015
Messages
2,269
Reaction score
354
Points
83
Location
Crewe
Supports
Crewe Alexandra
Are you trying to convince us that you don't spend anywhere near £1.5m a year on players?!
Yes almost definitely, last year I believe we had the 4th lowest budget in league 2
 

dannyc5

Active Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2015
Messages
249
Reaction score
71
Points
28
Supports
Crewe
Are you trying to convince us that you don't spend anywhere near £1.5m a year on players?!
Until around 6 months ago we had a majority shareholder who used us as his own personal bank account (for example taking loans from the club and essentially not paying them back). If it had gone on for much longer, we would have struggled to stay afloat. The other directors begged, borrowed and stole (slight exaggeration) and the fans also chipped in with 250k. The fact that we managed to get it through before coronavirus is just sheer luck.
 

Boletus Edulis

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2016
Messages
1,637
Reaction score
305
Points
83
Location
Plymouth
Supports
Argyle (and West Ham)
Fantastic news for us I think. We spend no where near the league 2 budget, and now having a well run academy with a steady stream of talented players on low wages has never been so valuable.
This is fine if the summit of your ambition is League 1. But as Mr End points out it will significantly widen the gap with the Championship.
 

That Fat Centre Half

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
2,439
Reaction score
533
Points
113
Location
Bournemouth
Supports
Luton Town
Putting aside my clubs chequered history (!) im primarily against it from the players perspective.

I don’t think it’s at all fair from there point of view to essentially carry the burden for poor governance and ownership, and being honest I’m pretty diametrically opposed to anyone’s wages being suppressed unilaterally and in collusion with the other employers in there industry, footballer or otherwise.
 

THE LAST WALTZ

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
1,376
Reaction score
850
Points
113
Supports
GILLINGHAM
Putting aside my clubs chequered history (!) im primarily against it from the players perspective.

I don’t think it’s at all fair from there point of view to essentially carry the burden for poor governance and ownership, and being honest I’m pretty diametrically opposed to anyone’s wages being suppressed unilaterally and in collusion with the other employers in there industry, footballer or otherwise.
A good point, well made
 

dannyc5

Active Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2015
Messages
249
Reaction score
71
Points
28
Supports
Crewe
Football cannot really be compared to any other industry though, can it. The FA/EFL/PL etc run the game. They set the boundaries upon which each member club has to stay within. For example they have the power to fine players for picking up a yellow card. They also have the power to impose bans on players. Other than sport, in what industry does a board have the power to fine/ban/discipline an employee of a limited company? Unless you believe the FA etc should wield zero power over footballers, and all bans/fines etc should be wielded by each member club? Because if the bodies can not impose wage restrictions then really they should not be able to impose any restrictions on the individual employee, period.
 

That Fat Centre Half

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
2,439
Reaction score
533
Points
113
Location
Bournemouth
Supports
Luton Town
Football cannot really be compared to any other industry though, can it. The FA/EFL/PL etc run the game. They set the boundaries upon which each member club has to stay within. For example they have the power to fine players for picking up a yellow card. They also have the power to impose bans on players. Other than sport, in what industry does a board have the power to fine/ban/discipline an employee of a limited company? Unless you believe the FA etc should wield zero power over footballers, and all bans/fines etc should be wielded by each member club? Because if the bodies can not impose wage restrictions then really they should not be able to impose any restrictions on the individual employee, period.
Not sure I agree that it’s a unique industry, I can think of others with some parallels at least especially in heavily regulated environments such as aviation, but even putting that aside and accepting its unique in some way, it doesn’t overide the point that it’s a collective group of owners coming together for the goal of suppressing the wages of some of their employees. That, in my view of things in any case, is something that does not sit at all right with me.
 

dannyc5

Active Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2015
Messages
249
Reaction score
71
Points
28
Supports
Crewe
But even in that industry and also on the railways, it’s up to the employer to impose sanctions below anything criminal (although I assume airline pilots can have their licence revoked for example?). I cannot think of any industry outside of sport where the individual employees are so heavily regulated by anything other than their employer.
 

dannyc5

Active Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2015
Messages
249
Reaction score
71
Points
28
Supports
Crewe
Basically I understand what you are saying, but if the powers that be cannot impose wage restrictions then surely there are so many other things they should not be able to impose.
 

Luke Imp

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
9,414
Reaction score
2,218
Points
113
Location
Lincoln
Supports
Lincoln City
Season dates confirmed.

3 competitions in a week to start. 12th September for the league, but 5th and 8th/9th for Carabao and EFL Trophy.

 

Boletus Edulis

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2016
Messages
1,637
Reaction score
305
Points
83
Location
Plymouth
Supports
Argyle (and West Ham)
In his press conference today Lowe said he thinks the EFL cup will be on Saturday 5th September, and the Leesing cup on 7th September.
 

That Fat Centre Half

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
2,439
Reaction score
533
Points
113
Location
Bournemouth
Supports
Luton Town
How are clubs at this level squaring the fact that they voted to end the season because they couldn’t survive without crowds, but now want to start a new one probably also without crowds. Is the much talked about relief package from the PL going to fill the gap and enable this to happen

Is there a possibility the season gets delayed if crowds of some kind aren’t allowed back in?

Apologies if I’ve missed something that’s already been discussed.
 

Luke Imp

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 17, 2015
Messages
9,414
Reaction score
2,218
Points
113
Location
Lincoln
Supports
Lincoln City
How are clubs at this level squaring the fact that they voted to end the season because they couldn’t survive without crowds, but now want to start a new one probably also without crowds. Is the much talked about relief package from the PL going to fill the gap and enable this to happen

Is there a possibility the season gets delayed if crowds of some kind aren’t allowed back in?

Apologies if I’ve missed something that’s already been discussed.
The furlough scheme would have obviously been the big thing. It meant that, along with deferred business rates and VAT payments, Club's could effectively mothball and stand still from a financial point of view. There was no appearance bonuses, goal bonuses, win bonuses etc to pay out, no testing costs to finish the season (£150k per Club), no additional travel costs (having to travel over more than one bus, for example), no-one in training grounds, lower bills etc and 9(?) games with no fans albeit still season ticket money, some of which may or may not have to be repaid via rebates. Some of the above costs will still be applicable now. For example, testing is happening (I'm not sure it's required on the level that it would have been to complete the season), away game travel but at least at this point there's income, albeit not at a required level.

As it stands(!), they'll be some fans back in October (famous last words), which roughly coincides with the furlough scheme ending, so Club's will at least be getting *some* income, certainly more than April-August/September. Also don't forget, in theory, Club's can still currently claim furlough money for the time that players aren't training so it can still help, and that applies for staff, too.

All the above said, I don't think any of us are naive to think there wasn't a huge amount of self interest at both ends of the table, but for those of us who had little or nothing to play for - Lincoln, Shrewsbury, Gillingham, Bristol Rovers, Blackpool, Burton and Ipswich (even though they voted to play-on) - it was certainly a better option to curtail it. Bolton and Southend were down, so they were happy to curtail it as well. Naturally, given the stage of the season, there were few Club's who needed to play on.
 

THE LAST WALTZ

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
1,376
Reaction score
850
Points
113
Supports
GILLINGHAM
We still had an outside chance of the play offs so we wanted to play on. We voted against it purely because the cost of taking all staff off of Furlough, staging matches, policing, medical care, testing etc. meant that with no income there was a very real risk to the club’s future.
We are a pretty well run club (which our fans often moan about) but it still couldn’t be done without some sort of financial assistance from EPL, EFL or FA, which as we know was never forthcoming.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
15,107
Messages
945,799
Members
5,336
Latest member
AdultWhosy
Top