The SPFL recommendation?

[lorenzo71]

1 minute ago, microdave said:

^^^Carrie Symonds imo

No mate she 's been there done it and got the T-SHIRT.

[haufdaft]

So called culture of opera and classical music has been subsidised with millions year in, year out but working class culture has to pay is own way though a once in a century event?

[Ivo den Bieman]

6 minutes ago, haufdaft said:

So called culture of opera and classical music has been subsidised with millions year in, year out but working class culture has to pay is own way though a once in a century event?

I very much doubt opera and classical music will be subsidised much in future. The creative arts, theatre especially, will be shredded by the crisis and don't have multi-million broadcasting deals or sympathetic governments to fall back on. The big names (RNO, Tate, National Galleries) may survive but local galleries and art-st-run organisations will see their funding evaporate.

I'm not really sure football can really be described as "working class culture" anymore either, given ticket prices in the top two tiers (even before heading down south and being asked for the best part of £30 for a league two match and goodness knows how much for a top Premier league ticket). Many of the core working class crowds were priced out a while ago and either pick and choose games, go to what was the juniors, or have jacked it in altogether.

Edited May 6, 2020 by Ivo den Bieman

[SouthLanarkshireWhite]

This debate is heading toward another lets blame everyone outside football for the financial problem we now face.

Scotland, and England in particular, has plenty of money. However it allows far, far too much to be paid to a relatively small proportion of the people employed in the industry and does not do what many other businesses do every year - keep something back in reserves. Have a fall back source of funds.

Every penny they get the splash in bigger contracts. Look at the wages paid to some very ordinary footballers in the top league. We could have a more thoughtful structured allocation of funds to lower league clubs, however they would then spend it on wages too. 

The SFA/PFA should be taking a slice and putting it into a 'reserve fund' for exactly this kind of event or a disaster like Bradford 30 years ago. If transfers had a tax on them e.g. 1% then those funds could be put away for a rainy day and the big clubs who spend would in essence be 'subsidising' the others in this type of event.

The PFA have been very quiet - where is their response to this? What plans are they drawing up for their members?

None of them do. It's all about spend what you have when you have it. 

Chickens and roost. 

 

[Paco]

100% right. The level of entitlement is extraordinary.
Millions of people will lose their jobs across the UK, our lives have been changed fundamentally in the last few weeks, and there will be no going back to the old normal. That life has gone. Many of those furloughed won't have jobs to go back to and there will be an enormous mental health payload to deal with in the years ahead. These out of a long list are far ahead in the queue for government support, during and after the crisis, than football.
It will be *extremely* sad if clubs disappear as a result of this but utterly inconsequential in the bigger scheme of things. I say this as someone who has chucked money in a bucket for Morton and Raith in the past, and contributed to other clubs' fundraisers during this crisis, as well as my own.
Like all other businesses, beyond the short-term relief being offered by governments in Westminster and Edinburgh, football will have to learn to stand on its own. If that means players earning much less and social distancing within much reduced crowds for the foreseeable future, with fans chipping in as they can to ongoing crowdfunding, then so be it. Clubs can't say they haven't had time to try and work things out.
If football's answer to this is to stand by a bucket, hand out, whilst emitting a whining noise then it's not fit for purpose.

This is a well thought out and reasoned post, I just happen to disagree with it entirely.

If a factory opens up at the end of lockdown and there’s just not the same demand for their product anymore, they’ll fold. That’s not nice but it’s the harsh reality of the free market that we all live in. As you rightly point out, this will be happening all over the country and there’s very little anyone can do to prevent it.

However the hospitality and leisure sectors, which football comes under, will not be opening up at the end of lockdown. There’s not even any guarantee they’ll be able to open properly this year. Pubs might be allowed to open eventually with social distancing and table service only, restaurants might be allowed to open with social distancing applied which massively reduces their capacity, and yes, football teams might be allowed to play their games - only without any customers.

These industries are unquestionably going to need further state aid. They will be the very last industries to go back to normality, it might not even happen at all until we have a vaccine. It isn’t as simple as being the same as the factory that closes because people won’t buy their product, or the airline that folds because people won’t or can’t afford to fly. These industries are prevented from opening themselves back up to their customer base by state restrictions, it simply isn’t feasible for the majority to survive under such scenarios. That isn’t just a case of 30 football teams starting the next Scottish season so there’s bigger things to worry about, it’s derelict High Streets devoid of pubs, restaurants and cinemas, gyms gone, theatres finished, music venues closed, hairdressers and beauty salons closed. Millions upon millions of (additional) unemployed, out of the working population and a drain on the state.

This isn’t to say these businesses shouldn’t at least try to adapt and I’m sure football clubs will. There’s all sorts of talk of streaming games and buying ‘virtual food’, a Danish team are planning to show matches in a drive through cinema, etc etc etc. They’ll also benefit from crowdfunding in a way that your local Pure Gym or Odeon won’t. But fundamentally they’re being asked to survive without the overwhelming majority of their income. There simply has to be some support there or the country will lose a lot more than Stenhousemuir or Elgin City.

[haufdaft]

I very much doubt opera and classical music will be subsidised much in future. The creative arts, theatre especially, will be shredded by the crisis and don't have multi-million broadcasting deals or sympathetic governments to fall back on. The big names (RNO, Tate, National Galleries) may survive but local galleries and art-st-run organisations will see their funding evaporate.
I'm not really sure football can really be described as "working class culture" anymore either, given ticket prices in the top two tiers (even before heading down south and being asked for the best part of £30 for a league two match and goodness knows how much for a top Premier league ticket). Many of the core working class crowds were priced out a while ago and either pick and choose games, go to what was the juniors, or have jacked it in altogether.

"Opera is lavished with public cash. ... Opera North was given £108 for each of the 96,000 tickets it sold for performances, according to Arts Council England figures. English National Opera was subsidised with £97 for each ticket it sold, while Welsh National Opera received £60."

To subsidise Scottish clubs for one season is small fry in comparison

[Ivo den Bieman]

Really, you're not comparing like with like. Those figures also date from pre-COVID times so aren't worth very much in our present time of crisis.

Big names in the arts will be protected. The rest will be blown away like chaff.

[Ivo den Bieman]

15 minutes ago, Paco said:

 

This is a well thought out and reasoned post, I just happen to disagree with it entirely.

If a factory opens up at the end of lockdown and there’s just not the same demand for their product anymore, they’ll fold. That’s not nice but it’s the harsh reality of the free market that we all live in. As you rightly point out, this will be happening all over the country and there’s very little anyone can do to prevent it.

However the hospitality and leisure sectors, which football comes under, will not be opening up at the end of lockdown. There’s not even any guarantee they’ll be able to open properly this year. Pubs might be allowed to open eventually with social distancing and table service only, restaurants might be allowed to open with social distancing applied which massively reduces their capacity, and yes, football teams might be allowed to play their games - only without any customers.

These industries are unquestionably going to need further state aid. They will be the very last industries to go back to normality, it might not even happen at all until we have a vaccine. It isn’t as simple as being the same as the factory that closes because people won’t buy their product, or the airline that folds because people won’t or can’t afford to fly. These industries are prevented from opening themselves back up to their customer base by state restrictions, it simply isn’t feasible for the majority to survive under such scenarios. That isn’t just a case of 30 football teams starting the next Scottish season so there’s bigger things to worry about, it’s derelict High Streets devoid of pubs, restaurants and cinemas, gyms gone, theatres finished, music venues closed, hairdressers and beauty salons closed. Millions upon millions of (additional) unemployed, out of the working population and a drain on the state.

This isn’t to say these businesses shouldn’t at least try to adapt and I’m sure football clubs will. There’s all sorts of talk of streaming games and buying ‘virtual food’, a Danish team are planning to show matches in a drive through cinema, etc etc etc. They’ll also benefit from crowdfunding in a way that your local Pure Gym or Odeon won’t. But fundamentally they’re being asked to survive without the overwhelming majority of their income. There simply has to be some support there or the country will lose a lot more than Stenhousemuir or Elgin City.

I agree that football faces an existential battle to survive in its current form and at present it really isn't looking good. I don't disagree with your analysis, either.

Where we disagree is who should pay to try and keep it going. We are entering a time where state coffers will face unprecedented demands and the claims of football clubs to a handout from government don't even register, compared to the claims of much of the health and social infrastructure and the crises of mental health that are coming in the post.

In my view it's better for football and its wealthier investors to try and fix this by themselves, through some sort of pooled loan scheme, independently administered, as I very much doubt anything other than token monies will be made available by the Scottish government- nor should they. We are also awaiting some money from UEFA later in the month and this should be targeted towards clubs that are in particular distress.

All of us want the clubs to survive and after the crisis for players to earn as decent a wage as they can. Just we disagree on how we actually get there.

 

[Shadwell Dog]

49 minutes ago, AL-FFC said:

What i imagine with him asking for the bailout is for the Premiership clubs as this whole voting farce has exposed how little they give a shite about anything out the top flight.  Again i agree with you on that as it will be those clubs living outwith their means again having not learnt any lessons from the last time they were in administration.

And if it's not the top flight clubs the govt should be asking why 80 odd percent of the cash going into football ends up going to just 12 clubs out of 42.  Spread out your own cash better before coming to us for money.

[Sergeant Wilson]

1 hour ago, lorenzo71 said:

Fishing is not a national spectator sport or even close to the popularity football gets/has.Football clubs are also important contributors to the community through many means.For lower league clubs especially it might mean waiving rates etc and the amount of money needed would not be huge.Local businesses are getting 10k grants not loans to help them thru this period.Surely our national games clubs would deserve something not forgetting the jobs they create etc.

But my point was a bigger one...if banks can get bailed out for fucking robbery why shouldnt football clubs?I hope you kicked up a storm back in 2010 when austerity was introduced.Those that tend to agree with bank bailouts are  those that  go on all fours and say 'im ready for m shag now Mr Johnson'.

Football's community involvement usually means laying on coaching which kids parents pay for. The clubs are already entitled to all the help any other business will get. Why should they get more, because they delivered some shopping in the club minibus?

As much as I hated the bank bail out, the prospective collapse would have affected millions of customers, the situation is not comparable. As a public employee, austerity has meant either no, or below inflation wage increases, so I don't need any lectures about the impact.

[Sergeant Wilson]

1 hour ago, roman_bairn said:

I’ve been to a few Leeds and Widnes games and it’s actually a lot more fun than you describe. 

Its also really important in the eyes of the supporters in those communities and there is a great synergy with that and the lower divisions of Scotland.

Not that that’s the point really.....

 

It's shite!

[lorenzo71]

2 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

Football's community involvement usually means laying on coaching which kids parents pay for. The clubs are already entitled to all the help any other business will get. Why should they get more, because they delivered some shopping in the club minibus?

As much as I hated the bank bail out, the prospective collapse would have affected millions of customers, the situation is not comparable. As a public employee, austerity has meant either no, or below inflation wage increases, so I don't need any lectures about the impact.

So if we take that attitude we should just let clubs like yours die because their fans do not have enough money to help the clubs out?Plus clubs do a lot more in the community than you might think and are certainly of value to those communities.Simply put our voices should be heard rather than going out with a whimper.Of course if you believe they should all go to the wall then that is your prerogative.

[Shadwell Dog]

6 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

It's shite!

Got to say I'm not a big rugby fan but I prefer league to union these days.

[Shadwell Dog]

4 minutes ago, lorenzo71 said:

So if we take that attitude we should just let clubs like yours die because their fans do not have enough money to help the clubs out?Plus clubs do a lot more in the community than you might think and are certainly of value to those communities.Simply put our voices should be heard rather than going out with a whimper.Of course if you believe they should all go to the wall then that is your prerogative.

The new tv deal is supposed to be worth 20 percent more cash a season so surely the spfl just needs to ensure a fairer distribution of wealth between all 42 teams this season to ensure that all clubs are cared for instead of the need for govt bailouts. Ok top flight clubs may lose out but it's an unprecedented situation so needs must. 

[Ivo den Bieman]

4 minutes ago, Shadwell Dog said:

Got to say I'm not a big rugby fan but I prefer league to union these days.

Nationalise rugby union, sell off all the assets and repurpose the funds to football. Legally ban rugby union.

If gammon faced, jug-eared posh oafs want to stick their heads up one others arses whilst chasing an oversized egg being cheered on by a braying crowd of barbour-jacketed Tory voters they can do it own their own dollar.

Circle squared, money raised, football saved, problems solved.

 

[lorenzo71]

1 minute ago, Shadwell Dog said:

The new tv deal is supposed to be worth 20 percent more cash a season so surely the spfl just needs to ensure a fairer distribution of wealth between all 42 teams this season to ensure that all clubs are cared for instead of the need for govt bailouts. Ok top flight clubs may lose out but it's an unprecedented situation so needs must. 

Of course all avenues should be exhausted but my point is if all else fails why shouldn't smaller clubs get a govt handout to ensure their survival, esp. with our clubs being some of the oldest in the world.Just my POV thats all.

[roman_bairn]

It's shite!

You’ve obviously never been to Headingley on a Friday night. Both the game itself and the pubs after, are as good as it gets....

[roman_bairn]

The new tv deal is supposed to be worth 20 percent more cash a season so surely the spfl just needs to ensure a fairer distribution of wealth between all 42 teams this season to ensure that all clubs are cared for instead of the need for govt bailouts. Ok top flight clubs may lose out but it's an unprecedented situation so needs must. 

Ehm, Premier League clubs are complaining about reduced allocation of cash to them on a 14-14-16 basis, as two new clubs would join the lower leagues bringing us from 42 clubs to 44 clubs.

So how do you get the Premier clubs to vote 11 out of 12 for your proposal?…

 

[CALDERON]

4 minutes ago, roman_bairn said:

Ehm, Premier League clubs are complaining about reduced allocation of cash to them on a 14-14-16 basis, as two new clubs would join the lower leagues bringing us from 42 clubs to 44 clubs.

So how do you get the Premier clubs to vote 11 out of 12 for your proposal?…

 

Thats the issue.  Any increase of clubs needs the Premiership clubs to vote 11-1 in favour, that just wont happen. 

[Shadwell Dog]

29 minutes ago, roman_bairn said:

Ehm, Premier League clubs are complaining about reduced allocation of cash to them on a 14-14-16 basis, as two new clubs would join the lower leagues bringing us from 42 clubs to 44 clubs.

So how do you get the Premier clubs to vote 11 out of 12 for your proposal?…

 

That's up to the spfl to sort that one out but if I'm the government I'm telling the spfl you need to share your cash out far fairer due to the current situation before you come with the begging bowls to us. This is to save clubs going to the wall supposedly . I mean 26 million quid of tv money should be enough to keep 42 clubs going for a season if used correctly whilst the covid situation is in place.

Edited May 6, 2020 by Shadwell Dog