Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Coronavirus could prevent Liverpool from winning the Premier League title


Baltar
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, TK421 said:

Maybe he just doesn't like viruses?  Or does he have to predicate everything he says with an acknowledgement of what other people earn in order to justify his own view?  I don't get it. 

 

He acknowledges that footballers earn a lot of money - and shows that he's conscious of the public perception of footballers in that respect - in the extract I quoted from the podcast. 

It's the self-pitying cunt aspect of it that I find nauseating, for one thing. Hasn't had a word to say about the other people in society who are working, who are putting themselves at much greater risk than him (no matter what he or you say), and many of whom are at his service, yet comes out publicly to whinge about being a lab rat. Fuck off.

 

If he doesn't like viruses then great, that's puts him in the same bracket as 99.999% of the population. Unlike him, the rest of us don't have a national platform to air our grievances. This is where someone like him comes in on our behalf. Especially if he's on the topic anyway. Especially when we're fighting his corner on the topic. But nothing. Just Danny Fucking Rose's latest gripes. Again. It's also slightly disingenuous to ask if he should predicate everything he say, like this is any other thing.

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jack the Sipper said:

It's the self-pitying cunt aspect of it that I find nauseating, for one thing. Hasn't had a word to say about the other people in society who are working, who are putting themselves at much greater risk than him (no matter what he or you say), and many of whom are at his service, yet comes out publicly to whinge about being a lab rat. Fuck off.

 

If he doesn't like viruses then great, that's puts him in the same bracket as 99.999% of the population. Unlike him, the rest of us don't have a national platform to air our grievances. This is where someone like him comes in on our behalf. Especially if he's on the topic anyway. Especially when we're fighting his corner on the topic. But nothing. Just Danny Fucking Rose's latest gripes. Again. It's also slightly disingenuous to ask if he should predicate everything he say, like this is any other thing.

 

 

I disagree, I think this quote here demonstrates some empathy towards non-footballers.

 

people are going through this coronavirus pandemic a lot worse than me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Alex_K
35 minutes ago, TK421 said:

This is pure straw man stuff.  Danny Rose and Troy Deeney are not going to bring football down on their own, are they?  Deeney has refused to train, that's fine because it's his choice.  In the meantime everything else is proceeding as planned with a view to restarting football. 

Then you really are obtuse, because if you validate Danny Rose not training, then presumably you validate all footballers not training. And if you validate Danny Rose not training but validate all other footballers training then it is hypocrisy.

 

If Watford and Tottenham/Newcastle both came out now and stated they will not pay Deeney or Rose until they returned to work as they have been asked to, would you consider that a fair reaction?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TK421 said:

Interesting read here from a union perspective.  It's not unreasonable for Deeney to want basic assurances about his safety, especially in the context of his son's breathing difficulties.  

 

https://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/sport/18465097.fifpro-head-jonas-baer-hoffmann-warns-inhumane-punishing-players-like-watfords-troy-deeney/

 

My Mrs is back in today, one day only hopefully as she can and has been working from home. The office to my knowledge has taken appropriate precautions.

She has Mild COPD and Asthma, not happy but no real choice as they apparently need to go in today. And as people have worked right through this she is luckier than most. 
My cousins son has Leukemia and is undergoing a Bone Marrow Transplant today, his Dad has worked all through this and has had to stay away from his son.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alex_K said:

Then you really are obtuse, because if you validate Danny Rose not training, then presumably you validate all footballers not training. And if you validate Danny Rose not training but validate all other footballers training then it is hypocrisy.

 

If Watford and Tottenham/Newcastle both came out now and stated they will not pay Deeney or Rose until they returned to work as they have been asked to, would you consider that a fair reaction?

First paragraph - more straw man waffle. 

 

Second paragraph - I think Tottenham and Newcastle would be on shaky ground doing that, given the comments of the Fifpro guy from the article I linked. The clubs have a duty to make working conditions safe.  This duty is heightened for BAME players because they're more at risk.  Ultimately, it's a private contractual matter between employer/employee and not really my concern.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, VERBAL DIARRHEA said:

My Mrs is back in today, one day only hopefully as she can and has been working from home. The office to my knowledge has taken appropriate precautions.

She has Mild COPD and Asthma, not happy but no real choice as they apparently need to go in today. And as people have worked right through this she is luckier than most. 
My cousins son has Leukemia and is undergoing a Bone Marrow Transplant today, his Dad has worked all through this and has had to stay away from his son.

 

I genuinely wish you/them all the best.  In the end, everyone is entitled to assess the level of risk that is personal to them and must decide what to do accordingly.  Some of these decisions aren't easy, and that applies to footballers too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Alex_K
5 minutes ago, TK421 said:

First paragraph - more straw man waffle. 

 

Second paragraph - I think Tottenham and Newcastle would be on shaky ground doing that, given the comments of the Fifpro guy from the article I linked. The clubs have a duty to make working conditions safe.  This duty is heightened for BAME players because they're more at risk.  Ultimately, it's a private contractual matter between employer/employee and not really my concern.

Straw man waffle? Ok, so you are a hypocrite. It was a really, really simple question -- if you support Rose/Deeney not training, then you are against footballers as a profession training. Or you want one rule for some, another rule for others. Ergo, you are a hypocrite.

 

Second question was also really, really simple. This is pretty "yes/no" stuff. Would you support their clubs withholding salaries while they refuse to come to work as they have been asked to?

 

Health concerns for individuals in this age bracket are frankly farcical and extreme + incredibly expensive measures have been taken to support safety.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TK421 said:

I genuinely wish you/them all the best.  In the end, everyone is entitled to assess the level of risk that is personal to them and must decide what to do accordingly.  Some of these decisions aren't easy, and that applies to footballers too.

Thanks mate. The difference as you know is financial. They can do what they see fit as you say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, TK421 said:

I disagree, I think this quote here demonstrates some empathy towards non-footballers.

 

people are going through this coronavirus pandemic a lot worse than me

He's probably talking about Troy Deeney.

 

I've made my point. If you're happy to repeatedly defend someone who, to my mind, is an ill-informed, selfish, self-pitying cunt who, even when a golden opportunity to show otherwise presents itself, couldn't express a solitary fuck about me or you or any of the people working in much greater danger for much less reward (and I'm afraid that quote isn't convincing me otherwise) then crack on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Alex_K said:

Straw man waffle? Ok, so you are a hypocrite. It was a really, really simple question -- if you support Rose/Deeney not training, then you are against footballers as a profession training. Or you want one rule for some, another rule for others.

 

Second question was also really, really simple. This is pretty "yes/no" stuff. Would you support their clubs withholding salaries while they refuse to come to work as they have been asked to?

 

Health concerns for individuals in this age bracket are frankly farcical.

 

Ok first question, there's no right/wrong answer as it depends on individual circumstances.

 

Second question, no I wouldn't support the clubs doing this because I think Deeney and Rose have justifiable reasons for their actions/views.  And as far as I know Danny Rose hasn't refusesd to train, but if he did then I think he'd be perfectly entitled to do so on the basis that BAME players face a higher risk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jack the Sipper said:

He's probably talking about Troy Deeney.

 

I've made my point. If you're happy to repeatedly defend someone who, to my mind, is an ill-informed, selfish, self-pitying cunt who, even when a golden opportunity to show otherwise presents itself, couldn't express a solitary fuck about me or you or any of the people working in much greater danger for much less reward (and I'm afraid that quote isn't convincing me otherwise) then crack on. 

I've no issues with what he said, none at all.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clubs will still be promoted and relegated from the three divisions of the English Football League if seasons are ended amid the coronavirus crisis.

Play-offs will also be played, but with no more than four teams.

The EFL has confirmed that 51% of clubs in either the Championship, League One or League Two need to agree for a campaign to be curtailed.

This could pave the way for the League One season to be cancelled, with teams currently split over a resolution.

Talks last week stalled after at least six clubs in the third tier, including Sunderland, Portsmouth and Ipswich Town, said they wanted to continue the season.

With only 23 teams now in that division, following Bury's expulsion by the EFL, any vote is certain to be decisive either way.

If the season is brought to an early conclusion, using the unweighted points-per-game system proposed by the EFL eighth-placed Wycombe Wanderers would move into the play-offs at the expense of Peterborough United - another of the sides determined to carry on playing.

The new regulations still have to be voted on by all 71 EFL clubs before they can be implemented.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Alex_K
8 minutes ago, TK421 said:

Ok first question, there's no right/wrong answer as it depends on individual circumstances.

 

Second question, no I wouldn't support the club's doing this because I think Deeney and Rose have justifiable reasons for their actions/views.  And as far as I know Danny Rose hasn't refuses to train, but if he did then I think he'd be perfectly entitled to do so on the basis that BAME players face a higher risk. 

A higher risk? A higher risk compared to what? Can you explain to me the statistical risk for healthy males aged 20 - 30?

 

So you want it all. You want players to have the right not to go to work, but you want clubs to pay players, while clubs cannot take revenues from broadcasting/tickets. Or do you also want broadcasters to continue paying clubs + money already spent on season tickets by Joe Public to be retained despite spectators legally not being allowed to go to stadiums & broadcasters having no games to show ... in which case do you want broadcasters to deny spectators the right to cancel their television subscriptions so they can keep paying clubs who can keep paying players who refuse to come to a statistically safe workplace .. or do you want the UK government to fix the bill for everything, and for future generations of UK tax payers to pay for it? Or do you want a magical money tree?

 

What an incredibly shallow appreciation for consequences of individual action you demonstrate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dave D said:

The issue that presents itself, particularly in Deeneys case, is without a vaccine (which may never materialise) then when could he return?

 

Without the vaccine, then not at all?    

That decision could well be taken out of his hands.  The 20/21 season must be in doubt until clubs can guarantee the safety of players.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alex_K said:

A higher risk? A higher risk compared to what? Can you explain to me the statistical risk for healthy males aged 20 - 30?

 

So you want it all. You want players to have the right not to go to work, but you want clubs to pay players, while clubs cannot take revenues from broadcasting/tickets. Or do you also want broadcasters to continue paying clubs + money already spent on season tickets to be retained despite spectators legally not being allowed to go to stadiuns ... in which case do you want broadcasters to deny spectators the right to cancel their television subscriptions .. or do you want the UK government to fix the bill for everything, and for future generations of UK tax payers to pay for it? Or do you want a magical money tree?

 

What an incredibly shallow appreciation for consequences of individual action you demonstrate.

I answered your questions, if you want to know about the increased risks BAME people face find out for yourself. 

 

I won't bother responding to the rest of your stream of consciousness waffle. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Alex_K
Just now, TK421 said:

I answered your questions, if you want to know about the increased risks BAME people face find out for yourself. 

 

I won't bother responding to the rest of your stream of consciousness waffle. 

Then I could well have asked a drunk on the street. The risks to BAME individuals in their 20s to 30s working in a highly sterilised and controlled environment are virtually nil.

 

That "waffle" is what would unfold if your suggestions were enacted on a large scale. You are clearly too thick to understand the full consequences of the judgements you make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Alex_K said:

Then I could well have asked a drunk on the street. The risks to BAME individuals in their 20s to 30s working in a highly sterilised and controlled environment are virtually nil.

 

That "waffle" is what would unfold if your suggestions were enacted on a large scale. You are clearly too thick to understand the full consequences of the judgements you make.

The risk is virtually nil because... Alex K on the internet said so. Yeah, that's me convinced (insert crying laughing emoji here). 

 

Yes, I'm too thick to understand. Or maybe I just think you're an hysterical twat? Subtle clue, it's the latter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Jennings said:

Lockdown hairstyles!!!

 

 

 

Does anyone know if those are posture correctors they’re wearing over their training kit?

 

I bought one online from China during lockdown, while so stoned I was out in orbit somewhere, and it’s like a fucking girdle.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TK421 said:

 Maybe he just doesn't like racism and deadly viruses. 

Understandable, but I think those both exist in the real world too to be fair. Kudos to him for putting himself into a position where he can try to avoid them - certainly the lad has been well successful by any measure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, TK421 said:

That decision could well be taken out of his hands.  The 20/21 season must be in doubt until clubs can guarantee the safety of players.  

Think we are long long way from that.

 

Its also, again in Deeneys case, not actually his safety being the issue, more so his immediate family.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...