BBC Home

Explore the BBC

34 comments

user rating: 3 star

PFA

Premier League Hull City
comment on the article

So it is reported the city players have contacted the PFA regarding the club asking them to consider a wage reduction.
If i was some of them i would be worried that i was in breach of contract.When signed on surely they agreed to 'play' football for Hull City AFC.
Towards the end of the season i would argue some didnt conform to their contract and play football--being on the pitch doesnt mean they are playing.

Latest 10 comments

Read members' comments or add your own

posted May 13, 2010

The club wouldn't go into liquidation. Somebody would buy them for some price. Therefore the players don't have to worry.

If I was a player on 20k per week I wouldn't accept a reduced salary but I would be happy to defer 30% of it.

As was said earlier, owners are supposed to be rich but they don't pay up the creditors yet ask footballers to make sacrifices.

These "rich lists" can be a joke. They add up the assets but they don't have a clue what debts were taken out to buy the assets.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 13, 2010

Villa fan in peace....

Forgive me if i'm being stupid and missed something here but did Duffen and his team not even remotely consider the potential for relegation from the Premiership when offering these contracts and put a clause in stating that wages would be related to status? i.e. if we get relegated your wages drop by 25% a month and vice versa??

Obviously not being Lord Alan Sugar i'm not top of the tree when it comes to business accumen but come on....it's not rocket science!!!

I can see the argument of the players in that they signed the contracts and they are entitled to the money but they need to open their eyes and release that if the club go bump they will get sweet FA!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 13, 2010

Surely, the players also have to take part of the blame for getting the club relegated?
Its OK to take the cash when things are going well, but why not cut when things are going bad?
The playing staff & senior management should all take a drop in wages.
If the club goes belly up, then no one gets paid.
I would rather have a part of something than nothing at all.
It just shows how selfish not only the players are, but Pearson & the rest of the management team.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by Benjo (U13631346)

posted May 13, 2010

Aston ScriVilla,

The contracts really are that bad I'm afraid. We had no debt when we came up and the fees we paid to clubs weren't that bad.

Through Duffen we ended up paying insane weekly wages for average at best players and we also ended up paying unbelievable fees to agents... most of whom were connected to Duffen somehow.

Something dodgy going on there? Apparently so, that's why Pearson's back.

Duffen essentially got us into the premier league but has really sold the club down the river as a result.

The players accepted their mad contracts as any of us would, but now that things have gone belly up (mainly because of them) they're complaining about wages when to be quite honest they're lucky as hell they're getting that much in the first place.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 13, 2010

It's not actually true that we went up without any debt, we were sold without any debt, but we ran up an 8m debt getting to the Premier League.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 13, 2010

" I wouldn't even consider taking a voluntary pay cut and believe they are entitled to the money they were offered"

Let's hope that the Hull players aren't as selfish as you, or you'll have no club to suport!

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by Benjo (U13631346)

posted May 13, 2010

I never knew that OLM, I still can't believe how much that's increased though.

Do you think we're in this situation because we were in the Premier League or do you think that under Duffen we'd have accrued these sorts of debts even if we hadn't been promoted?

Personally I think if we hadn't have won at Wembley Duffen would have offered Brown whatever he needed to go for promotion the following season.

We could well be in the same situaiton we're in now except without the experience of having been in the top flight for two years and with even less 'assets' to sell on.

Ironically, winning the play-off final two years ago could mean that we're better off now than we might have been otherwise.

No way of knowing for sure though.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 13, 2010

I suspect that had we not been promoted, we'd have still built up debt trying, Duffen was reckless with his spending when we went up and I suspect he would have done the same had we stayed down, though obviously on a far smaller scale.

On that basis, there is a chance that we could have been in similar trouble without going up, though we wouldn't have individual players putting such a massive burden on the finances.

There's such a massive amount of money from the Premier League, it shouldn't be possible to get in this mess, but if you sign poor players on daft wages, then it's easy to run up debt, while getting yourself relegated in the process and compounding the problems.

Anyone who employs Duffen now, is a very brave(or stupid) man.

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by Benjo (U13631346)

posted May 13, 2010

True, that being said though Duffen was on Sky Sports News fairly recently at the horse races.

They interviewed him and he was on about not only getting back into football but people being interested in his services as well!

I just thought "no chance, if anyone takes you then it's their own fault what happens"... I thought about the supporters after that though.

add comment | complain about this comment

Comment on this article

Sorry, you can only contribute to 606 during opening hours. These are 0900-2300 UK time, seven days a week, but may vary to accommodate sporting events and UK public holidays.

RATE THIS ARTICLE

Rate Breakdown

  • 5 50.00%
    2 votes
  • 4
    0 votes
  • 3
    0 votes
  • 2
    0 votes
  • 1 50.00%
    2 votes

average rating:
3.00 from 4 votes