Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
Millions of pounds a year time to strike 20:31 - Sep 18 with 1530 viewsSouthamptonfan

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5775042/2024/09/18/premier-league-footballer-st

Too many games, not enough money and far too tiring.

Poll: Who are you voting for?

0
Millions of pounds a year time to strike on 08:51 - Sep 19 with 1203 viewssaint901

I think the issue is that the top clubs - and therefore players - think that playing as many games as they do is damaging their physical and mental health and also reducing the standard of play in the top leagues.

There is absolutely no mention in any report I've read about this issue being about the money.

These people are athletes. If they pick up an injury, they risk being unable to work for a few days or perhaps forever. If they are playing too often, the risk of injury increases.

SO if the choice is to play for say 12 to 15 seasons at the top level at a median salary or 2 to 3 seasons at the top level for a high salary, which would you choose?

Workers in any industry have the right to strike for better conditions. That is not always more money and in this case is just fewer matches.

Far more worrying is a strike by highly trained surgeons who usually do have long careers at very high salaries. THere the issue is about pensions.
0
Millions of pounds a year time to strike on 19:00 - Sep 19 with 1001 viewsSouthamptonfan

Millions of pounds a year time to strike on 08:51 - Sep 19 by saint901

I think the issue is that the top clubs - and therefore players - think that playing as many games as they do is damaging their physical and mental health and also reducing the standard of play in the top leagues.

There is absolutely no mention in any report I've read about this issue being about the money.

These people are athletes. If they pick up an injury, they risk being unable to work for a few days or perhaps forever. If they are playing too often, the risk of injury increases.

SO if the choice is to play for say 12 to 15 seasons at the top level at a median salary or 2 to 3 seasons at the top level for a high salary, which would you choose?

Workers in any industry have the right to strike for better conditions. That is not always more money and in this case is just fewer matches.

Far more worrying is a strike by highly trained surgeons who usually do have long careers at very high salaries. THere the issue is about pensions.


Well these players could always play for clubs like Southampton, yes earn less (because it's not about the money) not win so many games, go out in all the cups, and never play in the extra champions league games that is obviously too.much for them. That would sort their issue of having too many games.

If they play for the top.clubs on huge salaries because they want to win trophies, then expect to have lots of games. I have no sympathy whatsoever. Don't win so many games then and give the other clubs a chance. Or better still, play for another club lower down and make the league much more competitive. But no they want the glory, they want the money, but don't want the extra games. Tough.
[Post edited 19 Sep 19:05]

Poll: Who are you voting for?

1
Millions of pounds a year time to strike on 09:58 - Sep 20 with 803 viewssaint901

In my humble opinion, there is no direct causal link between "the money" and the physical/mental wellbeing of the player.

The clubs who want success need to attract the best players. The market for those players sets the appropriate salary/reward level.

But if being the best player you can be comes with a physical load that shortens your career (perhaps ends it) is that fair?
0
Millions of pounds a year time to strike on 15:46 - Sep 20 with 675 viewssledger

they will strike,no they wont its laughable,top 6 clubs have super strong squads so use them.Cant see top six players picketing all over the country,call there bluff i say.
0
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© FansNetwork 2024