Exeter City captain Jordan Moore-Taylor has exercised a "non-promotion release" clause (never heard of that one before) and joined former manager Paul Tisdale at M K Dons on a free.

The Exeter fans are furious.

Cornish Exile wrote:Exeter City captain Jordan Moore-Taylor has exercised a "non-promotion release" clause (never heard of that one before) and joined former manager Paul Tisdale at M K Dons on a free.

The Exeter fans are furious.

They are right to be furious. Football has become a circus. I mean that in the truest sense of the word not in the pejorative sense. When I started watching football the bulk of teams at our level were made up of local lads who would often spend an entire career at a club. I can still probably name ten regulars from 40 years ago, not so from 5 years ago. Players move from club to club more often than some people change their socks.

You can't blame the players because we all go to work to make a living, but in truth those of us of a certain age know something about our game has gone for good. Don't believe me? From memory name the starting eleven for Terry Butcher's first game in charge at Cambridge United?

And just from memory, honest our 12 at Walsall in the season of triumph. No doubt someone will check.

Plumley, Byrne, Walden, Oakes, Davies, Baily, Lowndes, Vaughan, Tynan, Aldridge, Gwyther, Moore.

I blame Jimmy Hill, things were fine while we had the maximum wage.

Amberexile wrote:I blame Jimmy Hill, things were fine while we had the maximum wage.

I know you are joking. But for me the real villains are League chairman and women who have allowed the PFA to bully them. Collectively if clubs decided to pay realistic wages we'd be okay. In terms of course we'll pay you £2,000 a week, just as soon as you play so well that 10,000 people come of a Saturday to see you play.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

Amberexile wrote:I blame Jimmy Hill, things were fine while we had the maximum wage.

I know you are joking. But for me the real villains are League chairman and women who have allowed the PFA to bully them. Collectively if clubs decided to pay realistic wages we'd be okay. In terms of course we'll pay you £2,000 a week, just as soon as you play so well that 10,000 people come of a Saturday to see you play.

So it's the union's fault for doing the bullying?

Amberexile wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

Amberexile wrote:I blame Jimmy Hill, things were fine while we had the maximum wage.

I know you are joking. But for me the real villains are League chairman and women who have allowed the PFA to bully them. Collectively if clubs decided to pay realistic wages we'd be okay. In terms of course we'll pay you £2,000 a week, just as soon as you play so well that 10,000 people come of a Saturday to see you play.

So it's the union's fault for doing the bullying?

No. It's the chairman/woman's fault for allowing themselves to be bullied. In any really competitive industry those who choose to play there can't complain about how tough it is.

Years ago during a trial a policeman gave an answer which was true but was given in such a way as to completely shaft me by misleading the jury. I suppose I could blame said plod for being devious. However I blamed myself for being naive.

Big boys games, big boys rules.

No that was your fault for breaking the golden rule of asking a question not knowing what the answer would be beforehand.

Schoolboy error.

In this case, get rid of the union and all will be well.

Amberexile wrote:No that was your fault for breaking the golden rule of asking a question not knowing what the answer would be beforehand.

Schoolboy error.

In this case, get rid of the union and all will be well.

It was my fault. But it wasn't me who asked the question. My failing was not realizing the significance until it was too late.

Seriously you can always blame someone else for everything that goes wrong, and you can usually construct a good case as to why it's not your fault. But that is the wrong approach.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

Amberexile wrote:No that was your fault for breaking the golden rule of asking a question not knowing what the answer would be beforehand.

Schoolboy error.

In this case, get rid of the union and all will be well.

It was my fault. But it wasn't me who asked the question. My failing was not realizing the significance until it was too late.

Seriously you can always blame someone else for everything that goes wrong, and you can usually construct a good case as to why it's not your fault. But that is the wrong approach.

And ultimately, we all know the world would be a better place if employers ganged up to control wages

Amberexile wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

Amberexile wrote:No that was your fault for breaking the golden rule of asking a question not knowing what the answer would be beforehand.

Schoolboy error.

In this case, get rid of the union and all will be well.

It was my fault. But it wasn't me who asked the question. My failing was not realizing the significance until it was too late.

Seriously you can always blame someone else for everything that goes wrong, and you can usually construct a good case as to why it's not your fault. But that is the wrong approach.

And ultimately, we all know the world would be a better place if employers ganged up to control wages

No it would be better if someone had the cohones to say, I will pay you a fair wage and give you good working conditions. If that's not enough by all means go elsewhere.

But as you said initially it would only be effective if all clubs act collectively. That would effectively create a monopoly controlling wages. Little different to the maximum wage era.

Amberexile wrote:But as you said initially it would only be effective if all clubs act collectively. That would effectively create a monopoly controlling wages. Little different to the maximum wage era.

There is an element of the conundrum known as the prisoners dilemma. However until or unless has the balls to say enough is enough we will never know.

Back on topic the fact remains that the case instant under discussion clearly shows where the power lies in football. It was once with the directors of football clubs, it is now with the players. It has never been with the supporters.

But surely it is better for the workers to hold the balance of control rather than the emoloyers,.

Amberexile wrote:But surely it is better for the workers to hold the balance of control rather than the emoloyers,.

Two things,

I finally got to a post office today, and bought a stamp. My apologies for the further delay.

As a socialist I am more concerned with the rights of workers on zero hours contracts who have to pay too much to watch football rather than the overpaid prima donnas who get a living and a bloody good one, out of kicking a football.
Reading your comments this evening I suggest drinking lots of water and trying to get a good night's sleep.

Amberexile wrote:But surely it is better for the workers to hold the balance of control rather than the emoloyers,.

I’m with you on this. After all nobody would employ a useless worker/footballer at astronomical wages, would they? I meant what I’ve just written for about 15 seconds but now a nagging doubt has entered my head ......... No, on balance we have got to be right on this, otherwise I have visions of coal owners , company shops and slave wages. Clubs want a certain outcome, in order to achieve it they must pay for it, if at some time that payment becomes too high they must either stop paying it or go out of business.