0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Any progress is good progress but as David Conn has said, there is nothing firm on more equal sharing of money.Am sure it will result in maybe some stronger regulation but the heart of the problem is the colossal disparity in wealth. Neither she or the Government is going to agree to any material and substantive change in that.
Are there any plans to keep this in the public domain, press, media etc., to show football fans and all its not been forgotten?
Quote from: Chris Black come back on July 22, 2021, 01:26:36 pmAny progress is good progress but as David Conn has said, there is nothing firm on more equal sharing of money.Am sure it will result in maybe some stronger regulation but the heart of the problem is the colossal disparity in wealth. Neither she or the Government is going to agree to any material and substantive change in that. Interesting.He called it a landmark proposal.But it is short on detail, but that was intended. The real work will be done this summer and our proposals will be evident in the final report.
Quote from: silent majority on July 22, 2021, 01:44:14 pmQuote from: Chris Black come back on July 22, 2021, 01:26:36 pmAny progress is good progress but as David Conn has said, there is nothing firm on more equal sharing of money.Am sure it will result in maybe some stronger regulation but the heart of the problem is the colossal disparity in wealth. Neither she or the Government is going to agree to any material and substantive change in that. Interesting.He called it a landmark proposal.But it is short on detail, but that was intended. The real work will be done this summer and our proposals will be evident in the final report.I don't think that is a unique view. Fair Game focused right in on this as well. There is some good stuff in there but very little on the huge elephant in the room. We are dealing largely with the symptoms if we look at her package, rather than the cause. Neither she or the Tory Government is going to want to start interfering with the wealth of the elite clubs.
Yep, good initial report - although shocked we have let a woman get involved in our game......................................... jokeTo add (seriously) I would have also liked to see something more about a review of pay structures and agent involvement and payments therein.
Is the input from Germany available for information ?
At last, we appear to have someone who 'understands' the game moreover, the importance of us the fans.Thanks for sharing Martin. I look forward to seeing if all the bodies in the game get their 'act together' for the betterment of football.Well done Tracey Crouch.
Quote from: Chris Black come back on July 22, 2021, 01:55:22 pmQuote from: silent majority on July 22, 2021, 01:44:14 pmQuote from: Chris Black come back on July 22, 2021, 01:26:36 pmAny progress is good progress but as David Conn has said, there is nothing firm on more equal sharing of money.Am sure it will result in maybe some stronger regulation but the heart of the problem is the colossal disparity in wealth. Neither she or the Government is going to agree to any material and substantive change in that. Interesting.He called it a landmark proposal.But it is short on detail, but that was intended. The real work will be done this summer and our proposals will be evident in the final report.I don't think that is a unique view. Fair Game focused right in on this as well. There is some good stuff in there but very little on the huge elephant in the room. We are dealing largely with the symptoms if we look at her package, rather than the cause. Neither she or the Tory Government is going to want to start interfering with the wealth of the elite clubs. I wouldn't be putting any faith in Fair Game, I've spent quite a bit of time with them, and they haven't been involved in the process at all. We've administered the FLR right from the beginning.
Reports mean nothing until the core reason why clubs are going under is addressed.Players wages. Last year rovers paid Josh Sims 10 grand a WEEK!Matt Smith 9k a week. Ellery Balcombe 8300 a week.The list goes on.Sunderland paying 19k a week to one of their players.It’s been going on for far far too many years.Football continues to eat itself from within and the players are at the very centre of all of this. How can we live in a world where a footballer gets paid more than a brain surgeon?Utter , utter madness.More clubs will fold.Players wages will continue to rise.More reports will be written.Nothing will change. If you asked Bury FC fans if they would have been happy to keep their club alive but with a bunch of kids from the local town playing for £50 a week each at the bottom of the pyramid, I think I know what they would choose.
Reports mean nothing until the core reason why clubs are going under is addressed.Players wages. Last year rovers paid Josh Sims 10 grand a WEEK!Matt Smith 9k a week. Ellery Balcombe 8300 a week. The list goes on.Sunderland paying 19k a week to one of their players.It’s been going on for far far too many years.Football continues to eat itself from within and the players are at the very centre of all of this. How can we live in a world where a footballer gets paid more than a brain surgeon?Utter , utter madness.More clubs will fold.Players wages will continue to rise.More reports will be written.Nothing will change. If you asked Bury FC fans if they would have been happy to keep their club alive but with a bunch of kids from the local town playing for £50 a week each at the bottom of the pyramid, I think I know what they would choose.
Quote from: silent majority on July 22, 2021, 04:49:01 pmQuote from: Chris Black come back on July 22, 2021, 01:55:22 pmQuote from: silent majority on July 22, 2021, 01:44:14 pmQuote from: Chris Black come back on July 22, 2021, 01:26:36 pmAny progress is good progress but as David Conn has said, there is nothing firm on more equal sharing of money.Am sure it will result in maybe some stronger regulation but the heart of the problem is the colossal disparity in wealth. Neither she or the Government is going to agree to any material and substantive change in that. Interesting.He called it a landmark proposal.But it is short on detail, but that was intended. The real work will be done this summer and our proposals will be evident in the final report.I don't think that is a unique view. Fair Game focused right in on this as well. There is some good stuff in there but very little on the huge elephant in the room. We are dealing largely with the symptoms if we look at her package, rather than the cause. Neither she or the Tory Government is going to want to start interfering with the wealth of the elite clubs. I wouldn't be putting any faith in Fair Game, I've spent quite a bit of time with them, and they haven't been involved in the process at all. We've administered the FLR right from the beginning.Sorry, what I meant was that in their press release in response to the news today, Fair Game focused in on the absence of anything meaningful regarding wanting to deliver a fairer financial settlement for the game. Which is right, there was nothing. If this is actively being discussed within the task force that she is leading, then that’s fine. But Fair Game were right to highlight the absence in the statement of anything on that - which understandably would lead people to believe that no change is going to be sought in what is at the very heart of the problem, and that a review led by a Tory MP reporting to a Tory Government is highly unlikely to be seeking any fairer redistribution of wealth.