|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Sept 16, 2020 10:38:15 GMT
I mean this has been coming for as long as I can remember. They play at too a high a level to be sustainable. The people of Macc support the two Manchester clubs.
Hopefully they will reform and flourish as a lower league club.
|
|
|
|
Post by southcoaststokie on Sept 16, 2020 10:42:32 GMT
Very sad to see another club go to the wall, just hope it’s not one of many , don’t know how some of these clubs can afford to play with no cash coming through the turnstiles
|
|
|
|
Post by jonnybravo on Sept 16, 2020 10:49:43 GMT
So sad to see any club go bust but even worse when it's a local club,I always kept an eye out for maccs results
|
|
|
|
Post by spiderpuss on Sept 16, 2020 10:55:59 GMT
You'd think that the lower two divisions must go back to getting crowds in, well, this weekend. Unless the prem is prepared to bank-roll them for 1/2 a year.
|
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Sept 16, 2020 11:06:32 GMT
This is a sad indictment of the state of the game
With all the money around in football, the hierarchies are unable to find a way of acting to ward off these devastating blows to community football, the grassroots of the game.
If there was no money floating about it would be more understandable but not with the volumes of wealth in the game that exists.
146 years is not insignificant.
Southend have until 28th October.
|
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Sept 16, 2020 11:22:18 GMT
Probably a fair few clubs in League 2 pay their managers in that ballpark Vale pay Askey an annual basic salary of 45k. Which was report as the lowest in the country Like everything else in UK football it's hard to judge as there is very little transparency |
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Sept 16, 2020 11:23:06 GMT
I mean this has been coming for as long as I can remember. They play at too a high a level to be sustainable. The people of Macc support the two Manchester clubs. Hopefully they will reform and flourish as a lower league club. The long term issue would be the ground |
|
|
|
Post by maninasuitcase on Sept 16, 2020 11:25:00 GMT
Apparently Les Sealeys so wanted to buy the club to save them but got knocked back by the owner.
Sad day for football.
|
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Sept 16, 2020 11:28:42 GMT
Sad to hear of their demise, hopefully they can start afresh back in the North West Counties in the near future the same as AFC Bury
|
|
|
|
Post by scfcno1fan on Sept 16, 2020 11:44:33 GMT
Take a percentage of payments to agents and transfer them to lower league clubs.
Even a small percentage would help.
|
|
|
|
Post by nottinghamstokie on Sept 16, 2020 11:47:55 GMT
Devastating news. This I fear is the first of many. Really disturbing news infact. What is utterly bizarre is that in the last 3 weeks they've appointed a new Manager and in the last 7 days signed 8 players ! Did none of them see this coming ? |
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Sept 16, 2020 11:57:49 GMT
Devastating news. This I fear is the first of many. Really disturbing news infact. What is utterly bizarre is that in the last 3 weeks they've appointed a new Manager and in the last 7 days signed 8 players ! Did none of them see this coming ? To put this in some context, 17 players have recently left so they had to bring some players in on free transfers to make up a team. There are so many players out there without contracts, or whose contracts are nearly finished that this is very believable, those players will just be now looking for other clubs like they were 1 month ago. Non-League transfer scene is a right merry go round! |
|
|
|
Post by marylandstoke on Sept 16, 2020 11:58:14 GMT
This is a sad indictment of the state of the game With all the money around in football, the hierarchies are unable to find a way of acting to ward off these devastating blows to community football, the grassroots of the game. If there was no money floating about it would be more understandable but not with the volumes of wealth in the game that exists. 146 years is not insignificant. Southend have until 28th October. I don’t know how true it is but saw a line that said FIFA is saying that they are 11 billion down from the Rona. Its hard to see how the “old” model will be sustainable. |
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Sept 16, 2020 12:02:53 GMT
This is a sad indictment of the state of the game With all the money around in football, the hierarchies are unable to find a way of acting to ward off these devastating blows to community football, the grassroots of the game. If there was no money floating about it would be more understandable but not with the volumes of wealth in the game that exists. 146 years is not insignificant. Southend have until 28th October. I don’t know how true it is but saw a line that said FIFA is saying that they are 11 billion down from the Rona. Its hard to see how the “old” model will be sustainable. Maybe it's because people no longer like to lick brown envolopes |
|
|
|
Post by somersetstokie on Sept 16, 2020 12:38:22 GMT
Take a percentage of payments to agents and transfer them to lower league clubs. Even a small percentage would help. I'm going with this route. Clubs that are in the transfer market pay huge sums to agents, who only seem to take from the game and can be regarded as the leeches of the sport. Taking a percentage of each agent fee to go into a central support fund to help clubs in difficulty would be a good diversion of resources. After all in the legal system, as part of a sentance, offenders have to cover a payment to a victim support fund, to help others, even if the offender can ill afford it themselves. The "victim surcharge" was first introduced in April 2007. When a Court passess a sentence it must also order that the relevant surcharge is paid. The amount of the surcharge depends on the sentence and whether at the time the offence was committed the offender was an adult or a youth (under 18 years of age), or if the offender is an organisation. Revenue raised from the surcharge is used to fund victim services through the Victim and Witness General Fund. Surely a blanket fixed penalty system like this could be applied fairly across the football world, so the "Haves" automatically help out the "Have nots". |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Sept 16, 2020 12:39:31 GMT
I mean this has been coming for as long as I can remember. They play at too a high a level to be sustainable. The people of Macc support the two Manchester clubs. Hopefully they will reform and flourish as a lower league club. The long term issue would be the ground Definitely. And let’s be honest someone will make more money from building houses on it than playing football on there for the next 100 years. It’s really sad but they’re a club that imo just haven’t seemed viable at the level they want to operate at for a decade. Yes football has to change but also why should it be different to anything else in life? |
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Sept 16, 2020 12:47:05 GMT
The long term issue would be the ground Definitely. And let’s be honest someone will make more money from building houses on it than playing football on there for the next 100 years. It’s really sad but they’re a club that imo just haven’t seemed viable at the level they want to operate at for a decade. Yes football has to change but also why should it be different to anything else in life? There's the crux of the matter The fsa and other fan based groups should be campaigning to have football and other sporting venues to be exempt from devolpment If a lot of the grounds could never be used for anything else than sport That a lot of dodgy speculators would not get involved in the first place |
|
|
|
Post by ravey123 on Sept 16, 2020 12:58:14 GMT
Take a percentage of payments to agents and transfer them to lower league clubs. Even a small percentage would help. Shows how big the divide in football. Macc go to the wall for owing a sum LESS than 1 weeks wages of a top player (Bale????) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2020 13:13:25 GMT
not just football though is it? You can't just take an agent's earnings and give it to someone else as much as I disagree with them.
Some clubs will always be bigger than others as in business and you sadly have to work within your budget.Be nice to see more money filtered down but doesn't necessarily solve the problem
|
|
|
|
Post by sheds1862 on Sept 16, 2020 13:16:36 GMT
Incredibly sad situation again. Tip of the iceberg i feel. More clubs will follow suit.
When you read that they still owe Askey 173 grand as well as loads of other debts, just how on earth after Askey left for Shrewsbury were they able to pay Sir Sol a kings ransom ?
|
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Sept 16, 2020 13:19:30 GMT
And meanwhile at the same time as arranging to loan Gareth Bale and purchasing multi million pound players, Spurs organise a loan of £170 million from the British government because of the effect of Covid. How many small clubs who are the centres of their communities and have no income at the moment would that money save?
|
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Sept 16, 2020 13:21:27 GMT
Definitely. And let’s be honest someone will make more money from building houses on it than playing football on there for the next 100 years. It’s really sad but they’re a club that imo just haven’t seemed viable at the level they want to operate at for a decade. Yes football has to change but also why should it be different to anything else in life? There's the crux of the matter The fsa and other fan based groups should be campaigning to have football and other sporting venues to be exempt from devolpment If a lot of the grounds could never be used for anything else than sport That a lot of dodgy speculators would not get involved in the first place Indeed and you do have that scheme to protect grounds (I forget what it’s called). But it’s the one that Scholes got really arsey when questioned about why the Coates’ don’t make the Brit part of the scheme. |
|
|
|
Post by scfc75 on Sept 16, 2020 13:34:52 GMT
Take a percentage of payments to agents and transfer them to lower league clubs. Even a small percentage would help. I'm going with this route. Clubs that are in the transfer market pay huge sums to agents, who only seem to take from the game and can be regarded as the leeches of the sport. Taking a percentage of each agent fee to go into a central support fund to help clubs in difficulty would be a good diversion of resources. After all in the legal system, as part of a sentance, offenders have to cover a payment to a victim support fund, to help others, even if the offender can ill afford it themselves. The "victim surcharge" was first introduced in April 2007. When a Court passess a sentence it must also order that the relevant surcharge is paid. The amount of the surcharge depends on the sentence and whether at the time the offence was committed the offender was an adult or a youth (under 18 years of age), or if the offender is an organisation. Revenue raised from the surcharge is used to fund victim services through the Victim and Witness General Fund. Surely a blanket fixed penalty system like this could be applied fairly across the football world, so the "Haves" automatically help out the "Have nots". How about this..... when an agent is due a fee, it gets paid to a central governing body that regulates how agents operate. The agent in question then gets the fee in instalments across the life of the players contract.... so let’s say they are due a £1m fee for a transfer of a player who has signed a 3yr contract, they get £333k immediately and the remaining two thirds at each anniversary of the players contract. If the player doesn’t reach the anniversary because they’ve moved or signed an improved contract, then the remainder of the fee gets forfeited and goes into the pot to fund struggling clubs. Obviously the agent then gets a new fee linked to the new deal, again payable in instalments. Aswell as creating a fund pot, this should disincentivise unscrupulous agents who are always seeking to move their player on, as they’ll lose part of the fee they’re due. |
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Sept 16, 2020 13:50:10 GMT
not just football though is it? You can't just take an agent's earnings and give it to someone else as much as I disagree with them. Some clubs will always be bigger than others as in business and you sadly have to work within your budget.Be nice to see more money filtered down but doesn't necessarily solve the problem It seems like there are different ways to organise football financially though I am no expert and I imagine there are others on here with expertise but isn't the German model quite different with the 50+1 rule. I'm not saying it is perfect but it shows organisations can at least attempt to create systems where clubs' survivals are not just hanging on the whims of chancy owners. |
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Sept 16, 2020 14:00:53 GMT
I'm going with this route. Clubs that are in the transfer market pay huge sums to agents, who only seem to take from the game and can be regarded as the leeches of the sport. Taking a percentage of each agent fee to go into a central support fund to help clubs in difficulty would be a good diversion of resources. After all in the legal system, as part of a sentance, offenders have to cover a payment to a victim support fund, to help others, even if the offender can ill afford it themselves. The "victim surcharge" was first introduced in April 2007. When a Court passess a sentence it must also order that the relevant surcharge is paid. The amount of the surcharge depends on the sentence and whether at the time the offence was committed the offender was an adult or a youth (under 18 years of age), or if the offender is an organisation. Revenue raised from the surcharge is used to fund victim services through the Victim and Witness General Fund. Surely a blanket fixed penalty system like this could be applied fairly across the football world, so the "Haves" automatically help out the "Have nots". How about this..... when an agent is due a fee, it gets paid to a central governing body that regulates how agents operate. The agent in question then gets the fee in instalments across the life of the players contract.... so let’s say they are due a £1m fee for a transfer of a player who has signed a 3yr contract, they get £333k immediately and the remaining two thirds at each anniversary of the players contract. If the player doesn’t reach the anniversary because they’ve moved or signed an improved contract, then the remainder of the fee gets forfeited and goes into the pot to fund struggling clubs. Obviously the agent then gets a new fee linked to the new deal, again payable in instalments. Aswell as creating a fund pot, this should disincentivise unscrupulous agents who are always seeking to move their player on, as they’ll lose part of the fee they’re due. *Marko Arnautovic's brother dislikes this* |
|
|
|
Post by shakermaker on Sept 16, 2020 14:19:26 GMT
Devastating news. This I fear is the first of many. Really disturbing news infact. This isn't the first though. Bury have gone already, and now Macc. This is just tragic. The people of Macc support the two Manchester clubs. This is the endemic cancer threatening the finances of all smaller regional clubs - shameless gloryhunting. |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Sept 16, 2020 14:24:16 GMT
Devastating news. This I fear is the first of many. Really disturbing news infact. This isn't the first though. Bury have gone already, and now Macc. This is just tragic. The people of Macc support the two Manchester clubs. This is the endemic cancer threatening the finances of all smaller regional clubs - shameless gloryhunting. But it’s been a thing for a long time. Macc haven’t made it work for them. It’s sad but this has seemed on the cards for ages. |
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Sept 16, 2020 14:30:33 GMT
So sad to see any football club go to the wall Much more than just a group of players and staff - a whole community So sad a local club going under pity it wasn't the Vale after their council bailout. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2020 14:56:10 GMT
Devastating news. This I fear is the first of many. Really disturbing news infact. This isn't the first though. Bury have gone already, and now Macc. This is just tragic. The people of Macc support the two Manchester clubs. This is the endemic cancer threatening the finances of all smaller regional clubs - shameless gloryhunting. First since COVID I meant. Am well aware of Bury. |
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Sept 16, 2020 15:02:54 GMT
I'm going with this route. Clubs that are in the transfer market pay huge sums to agents, who only seem to take from the game and can be regarded as the leeches of the sport. Taking a percentage of each agent fee to go into a central support fund to help clubs in difficulty would be a good diversion of resources. After all in the legal system, as part of a sentance, offenders have to cover a payment to a victim support fund, to help others, even if the offender can ill afford it themselves. The "victim surcharge" was first introduced in April 2007. When a Court passess a sentence it must also order that the relevant surcharge is paid. The amount of the surcharge depends on the sentence and whether at the time the offence was committed the offender was an adult or a youth (under 18 years of age), or if the offender is an organisation. Revenue raised from the surcharge is used to fund victim services through the Victim and Witness General Fund. Surely a blanket fixed penalty system like this could be applied fairly across the football world, so the "Haves" automatically help out the "Have nots". How about this..... when an agent is due a fee, it gets paid to a central governing body that regulates how agents operate. The agent in question then gets the fee in instalments across the life of the players contract.... so let’s say they are due a £1m fee for a transfer of a player who has signed a 3yr contract, they get £333k immediately and the remaining two thirds at each anniversary of the players contract. If the player doesn’t reach the anniversary because they’ve moved or signed an improved contract, then the remainder of the fee gets forfeited and goes into the pot to fund struggling clubs. Obviously the agent then gets a new fee linked to the new deal, again payable in instalments. Aswell as creating a fund pot, this should disincentivise unscrupulous agents who are always seeking to move their player on, as they’ll lose part of the fee they’re due. Why don't the players pay their agents, they are working on their behalf, why should the club have to pay for them ? |
|
