£10,400,000 per year. That's not bad, is it?

[PaulB]

The ones who get left behind are the traditional football fans who would go and see their team every week. It's now too expensive because the teams have found another type of supporter who will pay the higher prices. It's hard to criticise the football clubs for this. If you had a product you sold for £20 but then found you could sell it to someone else for £30 would you keep selling it to your original customer for £20?

Yes, I'd keep selling to the original customer for £20 and I'll tell you why. If you found the customer prepared to pay this £30 and found him objectionable and boorish and not really understanding the product he was buying, then I'd suspect he'd ruin the basic principle of what I was selling. And you see that's what's happening every week. Fans who don't know the song and applaud while it's half way through; 'fans' who applaud the other team giving the ball away; applaud the other team making a mistake; arrive at their seats ten minutes late laden down with plastic bags and hot dogs, spend the game with their faces buried in PDAs and leave with ten minutes to go when your team's 1-0 down or level with all to play for; 'fans' who wear half and half scarves! I don't care what term the 'marketeers' ascribe to them, to me, they are parasites ruining the heritage of the game and undermining the bedrock it depends on.

 

[Electric_Andy]

I think I would understand this more if all professional sportspeople earned a similar wage. A top snooker player for example; Mark Selby earned just over £1M from tournaments in the last 2 years, so half a million a year. They would have been practicing 6-8 hours a day since they were young, have no other team mates to back them up if they have on "off day" or injury, yet are earning 20 times less than a top footballer.

I understand about popularity, supply and demand and the fact that there's more money in Football. But why should it all be weighted so heavily towards the players wages? Surely the "game" should be getting more money, so reduced ticket prices, better club facilities etc so that youngsters can play football for free? All football has done is elevate players' worth, a but like the inflated property prices in this country.

 

[Haitch]

My son's best friend was in the same class at school as Bart Ramselaar. You've probably never heard of him but he now plays for the current Dutch champions and is in the Dutch national squad. He's a multimillionaire. I used to tell my son to put the football away and go and do his homework.

 

[swee'pea99]

My son's best friend was in the same class at school as Bart Ramselaar. You've probably never heard of him but he now plays for the current Dutch champions and is in the Dutch national squad. He's a multimillionaire. I used to tell my son to put the football away and go and do his homework.

You did right. As MarkyMark says, the number of people who making a living at it, let alone become a squillionaire, is vanishingly small.

 

[Haitch]

'fans' who wear half and half scarves!

Pure class. I don't agree with the rest of your post but you get a like for this.

ETA:
The guy who sits in front of me at Utrecht wears a Liverpool bob hat and a pair of Arsenal trackie bottoms. Still a nice chap though.

 

[AndyRM]

Pure class. I don't agree with the rest of your post but you get a like for this.

My dad went to a Schalke v Chelsea Champions League game a few years ago when he was away with work and I asked if he'd bring me back a scarf. I still don't think I managed to convince him I was happy with the half and half monstrosity he brought back.

 

[Jody]

They wouldn't be getting paid that much if poeple weren't as willing to part with their cash. No turnstile or PPV/SKY reciepts and the wage bill would drop significantly.

 

[FishFright]

Yes, I'd keep selling to the original customer for £20 and I'll tell you why. If you found the customer prepared to pay this £30 and found him objectionable and boorish and not really understanding the product he was buying, then I'd suspect he'd ruin the basic principle of what I was selling. And you see that's what's happening every week. Fans who don't know the song and applaud while it's half way through; 'fans' who applaud the other team giving the ball away; applaud the other team making a mistake; arrive at their seats ten minutes late laden down with plastic bags and hot dogs, spend the game with their faces buried in PDAs and leave with ten minutes to go when your team's 1-0 down or level with all to play for; 'fans' who wear half and half scarves! I don't care what term the 'marketeers' ascribe to them, to me, they are parasites ruining the heritage of the game and undermining the bedrock it depends on.

Are you going to give up a third of your income as a symbol of solidarity to the true fans ?

 

[Smokin Joe]

I think I would understand this more if all professional sportspeople earned a similar wage. A top snooker player for example; Mark Selby earned just over £1M from tournaments in the last 2 years, so half a million a year. They would have been practicing 6-8 hours a day since they were young, have no other team mates to back them up if they have on "off day" or injury, yet are earning 20 times less than a top footballer.

I understand about popularity, supply and demand and the fact that there's more money in Football. But why should it all be weighted so heavily towards the players wages? Surely the "game" should be getting more money, so reduced ticket prices, better club facilities etc so that youngsters can play football for free? All football has done is elevate players' worth, a but like the inflated property prices in this country.

When the maximum wage was in force the game was generating comparatively huge money which was being syphoned off by the owners and directors. The men who made that possible, the players, were treated like slaves unable to play for another club even when their contract expired unless their present club agreed - for a fee, of course. The fans who provided that money had to put up with crumbling stadiums which were a danger to life and limb (Hillsborough, Ibrox, Heysel, Bradford to name just four). Now at least you can go to a game and see the whole pitch without having to peer round a pillar (How many of us can remember watching a match where little more than half the pitch was visible because of poor ground design?), and the money is going to the entertainers.

As for snooker, I'm a fan but they earn one twentieth of what footballers do because they generate one twentieth of the income footballers do.

 

[User482]

Sad reflection on society that this is the value of pro footballers.

That's how I feel about chief executives.

 

[BrumJim]

That's how I feel about chief executives.

The problem is that Chief Executives decide their own salary, which is agreed by their colleagues on the board. Footballers are clearly not in the same cosy situation with the board of the football club.

 

[swee'pea99]

Chief Executives decide their own salary

On the soundest of L'Oréal principles...

 

[vickster]

I think I would understand this more if all professional sportspeople earned a similar wage. A top snooker player for example; Mark Selby earned just over £1M from tournaments in the last 2 years, so half a million a year. They would have been practicing 6-8 hours a day since they were young, have no other team mates to back them up if they have on "off day" or injury, yet are earning 20 times less than a top footballer.

I understand about popularity, supply and demand and the fact that there's more money in Football. But why should it all be weighted so heavily towards the players wages? Surely the "game" should be getting more money, so reduced ticket prices, better club facilities etc so that youngsters can play football for free? All football has done is elevate players' worth, a but like the inflated property prices in this country.

Snooker doesn't have the global appeal of football as explained above (some might say that this is because it's really dull and goes on for hours )

Tennis for example - talking of top players, Andy Murray won £10.8million in prize money during 2016 and presumably made a buketload more in sponsorship, appearances etc

 

[Markymark]

Snooker doesn't have the global appeal of football as explained above (some might say that this is because it's really dull and goes on for hours )

Tennis for example - talking of top players, Andy Murray won £10.8million in prize money during 2016 and presumably made a buketload more in sponsorship, appearances etc

It appears some resent football players as they sometimes come from poorer backgrounds. Many slate Beckham/Rooney etc for supposedly being thick or chavy. Snooker and tennis players often come across as coming from a better off background, possibly due to the cost of the opportunity they needed making it more selective to those from richer backgrounds. Football talent can grow in a dirt-patch at the back of a council estate.

I think this may have something to do with how footballers are viewed where the success is somehow undeserved due to their expected position in society.

Beckham was widely ridiculed for being thick. Most likely because he spent his formative years developing an exceptional talent rather than studying English. Yet nobody ridicules Stephen Hawking for being rubbish at football.

 

[User482]

The problem is that Chief Executives decide their own salary, which is agreed by their colleagues on the board. Footballers are clearly not in the same cosy situation with the board of the football club.

Quite. Notwithstanding the obscene sums of money, and what else could be done with it, I would argue there is a very strong correlation between a footballer's skill and wages. I'm not so sure this is the case in the corporate world.