Dave
TFF member
Posts: 13,081
|
Post by Dave on Jul 24, 2008 16:39:27 GMT
I do not know, if I really believe in birth signs or not, so maybe it’s just a coincidence that I am so much like my sign .Fairness, justice, equalilty, all so important to me and Libra, the sign of the scales is my birth sign. I know I do not believe in horoscopes, simply because, how could everyone born in the same month of me, but all different ages, read the Sun paper, to learn we will all have a dark stranger, come into our lives today.
So with those values in mind I have to ask a question, but first, do you know someone who does the same job as you, but maybe for a different company. The chances are, he may be getting more money, or less money than you do, this may be down to many factors, like his company is larger, or they just reward their staff better.
So you could always hope you could move to a company who would pay you more for doing the same job, it would be nice wouldn’t it.
What about where you work, surly every person there doing the same job as you should be being paid the same. You are not going to be very happy, if the bloke working next to you, is getting more money than you, would you?
So if you were a model professional football player, who had just given his all in training, how would you feel, if the player next to you, had not put any effort in to his training, but was getting paid 5, 10. 20, thousand a week more than you.
Why is that clubs have players on such different wages, Its not like there is a rate for defenders, one for midfield players and a different rate for forwards. No that would never work would it, just imagine a defender plays at the back for one hour. Then as the team needs to score, he gets moved up front for the last thirty mins. On his time sheet, he would put down, one hours defender rate, plus half an hour, forward rate.
Why is there not one rate for all the players in a team? I mean the manager and the fans will expect every single player to give everything to the team and the games they play in. So why should some get paid more than others?, even at our club, some players may be earning hundreds more than some other players.
Ok first year professionals should get paid less, but every player is a part of the team and every player should be treated the same. It is no wonder clubs have problems in the dressing room and money is often one of them. Seeing old blue eyes swanking around and knowing he is earning twice what you are, when you just died out on the pitch for your club, would sure make me unhappy.
Different clubs would have different rates, as they may be much better off, they would still get the pick of the crop anyway, but if they had to pay everyone the same, I believe, players would move because of the club, not the massive wage they were offered.
|
|
|
|
Post by graygull on Jul 25, 2008 2:48:16 GMT
This gave me a chuckle Dave, its a novel idea but could you ever see a collective wage in any sport, mind it has its merits as agents would never get their slice of the pie which is never a bad thing, they are the biggest reason the pay has spiralled out of control these days.
the other thing that sprang to mind when i read your posting, didn't that fella Lenin have simular thoughts back a few years ago about the workers, tounge in check responce there.
|
|
merse
TFF member
Posts: 2,684
|
Post by merse on Jul 25, 2008 2:55:33 GMT
 Totally agree with that view Gray.................... I used to be a socialist...............then I "grew up" and became a realist! Unfortunately, the bottom line as far as I'm concerned is that equality of wage does away with the competitive edge and thus mediocrity creeps in.
|
|
Dave
TFF member
Posts: 13,081
|
Post by Dave on Jul 25, 2008 6:00:59 GMT
The whole point of my post Merse, was to question what i see as the unfairness, in players wages. You failed to miss the point, that players are all members of the club, each asked to give 100% to the club, yet some get paid and therefore treated better than others.
This may not be due to that players commitment, or loyally to the club, but because he is seen as a superstar. There is nothing wrong with the idea, that clubs should treat all its players in a equal way, I fail to understand you remarks about being a realist, It is only this way, because it has been allowed, to get out of control.
My views are that it would be a good thing, there is no reason why it could not happen and as greygull says, it would put an end to all this nonsense with agents and clubs would be able to sign players in a much easier fashion, with out so many problems.
If people dismiss ideas to try and encourage fair play and equality
even in football, then our would we live in will only continue to get worse. Its the very idea of this thread and finding ways to get such values back into life and sport would be a good place to start, that may start to make a difference.
|
|
|
|
Post by scottbrehaut on Jul 25, 2008 13:01:42 GMT
I think it all depends on how you would implement it - would it be every player at that particular club, or would you be looking at every player in the Premiership gets one amount, Championship another, etc etc.
The first way wouldnt work for the following reason - how could you justify paying the likes of Christiano Ronaldo (for example) the same amount as, say Michael Carrick - both midfielders, both at the same club, but both providing very differing types of form for their club - few would argue that C Ronaldo helped Man Ure to where they ended up, so why shouldnt he be rewarded for that with a huge pay packet (although footballers get paid far too much in my opinion, but thats another thread entirely!!)
The second option I offered still provides problems - using Ronaldo again as my example, should he be paid the same amount as any other midfielder in the Premiership?
At the end of the day wage equility in football is nigh on impossible - the rules are different for this sport than in other walks of life - for example I know that I have to work until 65 before I retire - where I go and what I do is up to me - but most footballers have a relatively short life span in which to ply their trade before they have to either go into management, coaching, or totally change career.
If I want to leave my job I look for another place of work before handing in my notice - my employer has no option but to accept - footballers are tied to their place of work until the club ALLOW them to talk to another club.
So many different rules and regulations restrict footballers in lots of ways - I am not saying I agree with them, but it makes wage equility and the like very difficult to implement.
|
|
Dave
TFF member
Posts: 13,081
|
Post by Dave on Jul 25, 2008 15:17:11 GMT
Scott. I agree to try an implement a system of equal pay, would be very difficult. My view was that it should be the same for every player in the same club, as each club, would have different budgets etc.
You see you make the point why you think Christiano Ronaldo, should not be paid the same as Michael Carrick, pointing to his form and his contribution to the success Man u have had. Yes Ronaldo has scored a huge amount of goals for a midfield player and Carrick has not, I could not dispute those facts.
I talked to someone today, who's argument for paying the likes of Ronaldo, much bigger wages, was because his name would sell more shirts etc.
Ronaldo, is just one player in a team, yes at his best he is able to contribute more skill, flair and maybe goals, than players like Carrick, but without a team around him, he could do all the tricks he wanted too, but it would all be wasted.
I simply believe as it is a team game and all the players are in it together and as each one has a part to play to make the whole team have success, then they should all be treated and paid the same. No one player makes a team and Carrick, while never able to produce what Ronaldo could, still plays his part when he plays in games.
|
|
|
|
Post by scottbrehaut on Jul 25, 2008 16:05:27 GMT
I dont know if I agree with you point about no one player making a team - take away Ronaldos contribution last season and you see a very different Man Utd side.
Replace Poke with Rice and you get a weakened side.
The point is, there are players that are outstanding at what they do, and whilst I agree there are players who would die for the club (Kevin Hill beign a prime example) does that mean that they deserve to be paid shedloads of money for it? Look back to the promotion winning team a few years back - not many people would argue that Russell was a key player in that team - yes the team as a whole was good, and gelled together, but I believe without one or two outstanding players teams would just end up mediocre.
Those that excel at what they do - in all walks of life - should, in my opinion, be rewarded for it.
|
|
Dave
TFF member
Posts: 13,081
|
Post by Dave on Jul 25, 2008 16:25:18 GMT
Scott, how could I disagree about Ronaldos contribution last season for Man U, I couldn't it was there for all to see. I have to stand by my point, that one player does not make a team, no player plays every game anyway and others will come in and still do a job for the team.
Maybe we could find out if Man U won or lost the games that he did not play in and if he leaves what sort of season Man U will have without him.
You say "but I believe without one or two outstanding players teams would just end up mediocre". But why would that happen? these players will still want to play football, they will still earn big wages, more than anything else they might do, so they will still be in the game.
It has been said that Kevin Hill, was not on very good money compared to some at the club, but I will put it around the other way, this guy gave everything to the club he had and was loyal to it, should he not deserve to be paid the same as everyone else.
Or should only those with the highest skill get paid more, because without the likes of Kevin Hill, battling away and winning balls, to feed some forward, who was on higher pay, just because he scored goals, how would such players ever get the ball to score.
This brings me back to the point, that it is a team game, every player has a part to play and should all get treated the same.
|
|
merse
TFF member
Posts: 2,684
|
Post by merse on Jul 25, 2008 16:52:13 GMT
The whole point of my post Merse, was to question what i see as the unfairness, in players wages. There is nothing wrong with the idea, that clubs should treat all its players in a equal way, I fail to understand you remarks about being a realist, It is only this way, because it has been allowed, to get out of control. Being a realist is recognising that whatever the Utopian ideal the FACT is that there is a differential in wages, and that for some the goal of attaining the highest level of remuneration is the driving force to improve. Also a FACT is that appearance money, win and league position bonus is also a huge incentive. Loyalty money too is an incentive to see out one's contract rather than seek a move part way through it. I'm sorry but I don't want to see MY club "disincentified" by evening up wages so that the lower paid received a pay boost at the expense of even being able to sign the higher paid ones..............they simply wouldn't come! That is being a realist rather than a socialist. |
|
Dave
TFF member
Posts: 13,081
|
Post by Dave on Jul 25, 2008 17:03:36 GMT
I get it now Merse "realist is recognising that whatever the Utopian ideal"
so that could apply to anything really, couldn't it? One could have a Utopian ideal idea to build a stadium come hotel on some holiday resorts seafront, but the realist would see through such pie in the sky idea's
It would be the same for all clubs, so players would still need to sign and play for a club, if there were really that good, they would not be playing at this level anyway, so why would we end up with a weaker team,.
|
|
jerry
TFF member
Posts: 165
|
Post by jerry on Jul 25, 2008 18:42:12 GMT
These days football is an entertainment industry whether we like it or not. As Scott says, the players who put "bums on seats" or sell shirts are always going to be paid more. If someone is exceptionally good at something then surely they deserve to be paid more than someone who "tries hard"? This goes for any walk of life not just football, would you be happy to be paid the same as someone who did the same job but was obviously much worse at it than you?
|
|
Dave
TFF member
Posts: 13,081
|
Post by Dave on Jul 25, 2008 19:27:23 GMT
To conclude this debate Jerry I think ever job I have done for any employer, my rates of pay where the same for me as my work mates, I often felt I worked harder, or was better at my job, than they were, but the pay was still the same. So the reason I asked the question, was because I wanted to see if any of you felt wages in football should be just be equal, for the whole team. Someone like Merse doing the job he did before, I'm sure would have been on the same rates as his fellow workers. The view seems to be if you are far better at what you do, in this case play football, then you should expect to be paid more than other team mates. I except that this is the way it properly will always be, still I know I would not be happy in my work mates got paid more than me for the same job, but then I'm not a super skilled football player and If I was, I might just change my mind  |
|
jerry
TFF member
Posts: 165
|
Post by jerry on Jul 25, 2008 20:14:01 GMT
You may think you were all paid the same but this isn't necessarily true!
It certainly isn't the case where I work! I know for a fact that I earn more than anyone else in my department, this is because I have been doing it longer and therefore have more relevant experience to bring to the job. Without wishing to blow my own trumpet, I am also quicker and more efficient then my colleagues (the statistics back this up). Therefore, I am more valuable to my employer so I earn more!
|
|
Dave
TFF member
Posts: 13,081
|
Post by Dave on Jul 25, 2008 20:20:04 GMT
I do concede that this does happen, but in many jobs were workers are employed by a national company, this would not happen.
In my job, I'm the only one who does it, so I have no one to compare with. Lets blow are own trumpets Jerry, I get paid far more that the person who did my job before me, much for the same reasons as you ;D ;D so please don't ask why I wanted equal pay for footballers ;D ;D
|
|
merse
TFF member
Posts: 2,684
|
Post by merse on Jul 26, 2008 10:59:25 GMT
I get it now Merse "realist is recognising that whatever the Utopian ideal" so that could apply to anything really, couldn't it? One could have a Utopian ideal idea to build a stadium come hotel on some holiday resorts seafront, but the realist would see through such pie in the sky idea's I think you've thrown that in because you know you are losing the argument on wage equality Dave, so I'll ignore the "bait" and concentrate on the subject in hand. Wage equality is fine where all employees are on an equal platform and are productive rather than "market attractive" so football has as much in common with driving a truck, bus or car as having sex has with going for a poo. Now if you attach selling something with your driving, then the very fact that sales attract more revenue entitles the vendor to a commission or bonus for making that sale. In my job there are bonuses to be had for productivity and I always aim to benefit to the tune of at least a third on top of my earnings and given a bit of luck they more often than not "snowball" in on Thursdays and Fridays when the working week nears it's end - so if you want to catch me in a good mood, the end of the week is the time to try it! To put it more simply............to get this old donkey to move faster, just dangle the carrot of cash in front of me! In the case of football, the built in "bonus" for enabling the team to be that much better or attracting extra spectators usually lays in the enhanced salary. In the case of results orientated remuneration it comes in the form of win bonuses etc. I think that sums up the argument for me, except for the fact that I did "dig around" a contact or two to seek out an example of a modern day club that had engaged on an equal basic salary policy and stumbled on no less than Plymouth Argyle when Paul Sturrock was managing them for the first time.............when he was replaced by Ian Holloway this modus operandi was deemed to hold no incentive to those who should have been pushing those in the first team ahead of them and was thus too much of a comfort zone and subsequently moved away from. It would be interesting to know if now that he's back, Sturrock tries to re-implement it.................seeing as they are hell bent on selling anything that moves at present, no doubt the board would like to implement it from the bottom up (ie with the minimum earners used as the common denominator) whilst the players would naturally want it to be linked to the very top earners. Having spent a brief moment chatting to a Championship chairman yesterday before taking him and his travelling companions to Heathrow (I told you Add Lee were "Blue Chip" Dave!) I wouldn't want to be working in football in this day and age with all the chicanery, double standards and hypocrisy that abounds. There's certainly no room for the naive and the honourable and those of integrity certainly have it all to do just to keep on top of the sharks, the duplicitous and the con men! |
|
Totally agree with that view Gray....................