Readers' letters - February 12

Don't pay footballers these obscene wages

By The Newsroom
Friday, 16th February 2018, 1:49 pm
Updated Friday, 16th February 2018, 2:55 pm
Tom Finney
Tom Finney

Are footballers of today worthy of their hire?

Football fans are entitled to ask this question, especially those who can remember the top flight players in the First Division, before the advent of the Premier League and the influx of overseas players.

Forwards of the calibre of Sir Tom Finney, pictured, Sir Stanley Matthews, Wilf Mannion, to name but a few.

All of these players had one thing in common – they were all paid the then Football Association club maximum weekly wage of £20.

Now we have £250,000-plus per week for Wayne Rooney while at Manchester United and similar exorbitant sums for imported foreign players.

These players are paid more in one week than Sir Stanley Matthews and his ilk earned in a lifetime career, and with less playing ability.

They play two matches a week at the most, which is three hours actual playing time if they remain on the pitch.

£85,000 per hour is an obscene and unjustifiable figure for a modern-day footballer to be paid – I refrain from saying earn.

Yes, they train during the week but this does not need them to be using any football skills as in match play.

Referees, while not being in the same pay category

as footballers, should also earn their pay for the job.

All too often players jostle and tug each other’s shirts when a corner is being taken, yet referees seldom do anything about it.

By all means pay footballers a fair wage, commensurate with their skills value to the team, but let sanity prevail by the clubs uniting to stop paying these ludicrous wages of today.

Players go on the field knowing they are on contracts to be paid, irrespective of performance. If their contract is not renewed, they have been paid enough for most of their fans to live on for life.

Cyril Olsen

Address supplied


We will be a trading success

Every comment that emanates from Brussels about Brexit reveals both their increasing desperation over our withdrawal and their misunderstanding about the very nature of the British.

Brexit Secretary David Davis has told EU chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier it is perfectly clear what we want to do, adding, ‘There’s no doubt about it, we are leaving the customs union.’

And Barnier’s response, “We have to respect the red lines of the British Government but they have to respect the rules of the Union.”

Well, I beg to disagree, we are heading for the door, backed by the majority of voters in this country, and no, we no longer have to respect the rules of the Union.

We may be a small island but that has never dinted our justified self-belief and our success as a trading nation. We will continue to be a successful trading power after we leave and the EU will always want to trade with us.

So the sooner the EU accepts that Britain – which has long been a thorn in its side, apart from our massive financial input – does not need them as much as they need us, the better.

Paul Nuttall

North West MEP, UK Independence Party


Be brave when it comes to tests

There have been a number of articles recently relating to medical testing.

The positive news is the development of a memory test to help indicate Alzheimer’s years earlier whereas the negative is the reluctance of men to have prostate cancer testing. However, the question that many ask is, do we want to know?

One of the initial concerns is that people may have to report their medical conditions to employers or medical insurers.

In many countries, female job applicants cannot be asked if they are pregnant or intend to start a family soon but if they have ‘genetic tests’ to look for possible disease indicators, they often have to report these results.

For me, my family history of prostrate cancer for my father and grandfather prompted testing in my 40s – earlier than most would start and, by my 50s, it showed up.

My discomfort with the manual test and a dislike of needles had to be put aside.

After a radiation treatment, all is well and I don’t glow in the dark as I jest.

The test for Alzheimer’s is more confronting and I am not so sure if I want to undertake this test yet.

The testing and side effects of prostrate treatments can be a bit deflating but knowing you were going to get Alzheimer’s would be terrifying as, in many cases, who you are and what you have done fades away and, as of yet, there are few treatments that help.

Worried as we are, we do need to know what is happening and check for issues that family histories predict as possibilities.

Be brave and help yourself and your family.

Dennis Fitzgerald

via email

animal welfare

Not enough of a punishment

I was shocked to hear about the person who starved his two dogs to death (LP January 19).

As usual he got a lenient sentence.

When they send him in jail, he should live among the other inmates so they could give him the punishment he deserves.

B of Preston