Issa comes with an enormous $$$ expectation and needs constant attention and help. The help and attention could be supplied, not sure about the $$. A tough call to make because he is one of the most lethal strikers in the countrty.
Waitakere United
Issa's attitude is pretty average as well. Looked unmotivated during the last NRFL season.
The stand was a nice touch yesterday - anyone know if this will be a permanent fixture at their games or just for Sky's benefit?
Waitak 3 Wanderers 0
Don't know what it looked like on TV but it was awful to watch.
Hamilton a bit unlucky as they lost their keeper in the 1st minute from what looked like an innocuous challenge and then the sub keeper was probably at fault for the first two goals..
Lots of misdirected passes and the pitch certainly doesn't help in my view.
Don;t know what came through on the sound effects mike but Derek Tieku (who i thought was average) was f this and f that all the way through.
Semmy looked good.
Waitak have over achieved this year and look like they will be top 4. More a commentary on how average the rest of the league is than a credit to them.
Waitak 3 Wanderers 0
Don't know what it looked like on TV but it was awful to watch.
...
Lots of misdirected passes and the pitch certainly doesn't help in my view.
...
Waitak have over achieved this year and look like they will be top 4. More a commentary on how average the rest of the league is than a credit to them.
Whilst I didn't see this game, I've seen others at Seddon Fields and was at the Waitak - TW game before Christmas.
The pitch is shocking and I can't help but feel it's actually helped them with results this season. They were poor against TW and Bassett had horrible bobbles on three shots he would have normally buried.
Waitak certain gained points that day.
Some of the football I've watched this season (from most teams) has been so poor it's almost laughable.
Waitak 3 Wanderers 0
Don't know what it looked like on TV but it was awful to watch.
...
Lots of misdirected passes and the pitch certainly doesn't help in my view.
...
Waitak have over achieved this year and look like they will be top 4. More a commentary on how average the rest of the league is than a credit to them.
Whilst I didn't see this game, I've seen others at Seddon Fields and was at the Waitak - TW game before Christmas.
The pitch is shocking and I can't help but feel it's actually helped them with results this season. They were poor against TW and Bassett had horrible bobbles on three shots he would have normally buried.
Waitak certain gained points that day.
Some of the football I've watched this season (from most teams) has been so poor it's almost laughable.
Worth noting they did *not* want to play on that turf. They wanted to play on the main grass pitch at Seddon Fields.
Interesting comment Andrew about "not" wanting to play on that artificial pitch. Don't blame them. Main grass pitch is a good surface but probably not suitable in terms of facilities , etc, although it's not a good viewing experience on the turf unless you are on the clubrooms balcony - TV tower probably obscures that a bit at the moment. The big benefits of turfs is that it allows a large number of games in all conditions - surely not a important factor in the summer ? Probably not a popular view here but the best venue that Waitak have played at is the much derided Fred Taylor . Good viewing for someone like me that likes to stand on the touchlines and smell the gunpowder and whilst it is a bit out of town (and I live on the Hibiscus Coast) it is on the main road. Not going to happen though if my understanding of the relationship with Waitakere City is correct
Probably not a popular view here but the best venue that Waitak have played at is the much derided Fred Taylor
I am with you Chubbs, always enjoyed the viewing there. I read the other comments about poor quality of the game and have to say as a spectator it was extremely hot pitch side yesterday to the point of uncomfortable, and then you throw in the awful bounce of the pitch which neither side can get accustomed to, regardless of it being one teams home turf, and it diminishes the league. Give them all grass i say!
I haven't been to Fred Taylor since the winter season but both pitches then were pretty bad, almost like they'd been left to die. Fred Taylor also doesn't have any facilities.
Lots of clubs claiming government subsidy also it seems.
$86,829.60 for 20 staff !!!
Would anyone else like an explanation for this ? I feel sorry for the people who actually needed the money.
$86,829.60/20 = $4341.40 per staff member
$4,341.40/12 = $361.79/staff member/week for 12 weeks. Which would ,mean that each of the 20 staff count as part time. I would suggest that the 20 staff members receiving their wages for the next 12 weeks are pretty happy and equally deserving of this money.
I think you missed my point - They would have no where near 20 staff ! maybe 5 at the most
The subsidy cannot be for players can it ? It is an amateur league
They have 20 staff for 2 football teams and the youth league was over
I think you missed my point - They would have no where near 20 staff ! maybe 5 at the most
The subsidy cannot be for players can it ? It is an amateur league
They have 20 staff for 2 football teams and the youth league was over
2 teams = coach and assistant each, no? (4 staff), the you have the office admin staff, whoever runs their webpage. You could easily get to 20 part timers running a club.
$86,829.60 for 20 staff !!!
Would anyone else like an explanation for this ? I feel sorry for the people who actually needed the money.
The subsidy is a very blunt instrument.
With the subsidy, you can only get two amounts 7029.60 for a full-timer which is defined as 20 hours or more, and 4200 for a part-timer which is defined as less than 20 hours.
If you know total payment and number of staff, you can work out the portion of full-timers v part-timers by solving two simultaneous equations
x+y=20
7029.6x+4200y = 86829.20
In this case, x=1, y=19, that is 86829.90 = 1x7029.6 + 19 x4200
They claimed for 1 person working 20 hours or more a week, and 19 working less than 20 hours a week
Wether that 1 full-timer, worked 20 hours or 40 hours a week, the subsidy claim is still the same, 7029.6
Wether those 19 part-timers worked 1 hour a week or 19 hours a week, the subsidy claim is still the same 4200.
The subsidy claim process had no provision if those employees were on fixed term contracts that expired during the 12 weeks other than to "make best efforts to retain the employee". You put the numbers in and claim the amount for the 12 weeks.
The sweetspot is to have lots of employees on 20 hours and 1 hour a week.
A sweetspot of wasting tax payers money, and taking it away from more worthwhile causes.
it’s not like Waitak pay anyone they have promised anyway
A sweetspot of wasting tax payers money, and taking it away from more worthwhile causes.
hardly wasting taxpayers money. the payment is there to pay any employee that fits the criteria, if it means people are getting money in their hands that might not then that's a good thing, is it not?
I can't work out if your against the payment in principle or just against Waitakere FC claiming it?
A sweetspot of wasting tax payers money, and taking it away from more worthwhile causes.
hardly wasting taxpayers money. the payment is there to pay any employee that fits the criteria, if it means people are getting money in their hands that might not then that's a good thing, is it not?
I can't work out if your against the payment in principle or just against Waitakere FC claiming it?
I was referring to the wage subsidy effectively having a "sweetspot", because of it blunt application. ie you can effectively maximise/inflate your overall payment by having a whole team of part time staff who yes may only work the magical 1 hour per week.
Basically it's blunt application, so leaves itself open to abuse. But yeah for sure it had to be rolled out in a hurry.
But I don't like to see tax payer's dollars exploited in any form. The IRD are going to have a massive drop in revenue for the next few years, especially re business taxation.
So it figures that the tax take needs to be spent in areas of genuine need more than ever, not frittered by folks exploiting sweetspots or other rorts. Not accusing Waitak of this at all, just again highlighting it's a problem.
All Wage subsidies will washout when the IRD review 2020/21 returns. Some will willingly repay unjustified claims.
Others I can see going to dispute.
A sweetspot of wasting tax payers money, and taking it away from more worthwhile causes.
hardly wasting taxpayers money. the payment is there to pay any employee that fits the criteria, if it means people are getting money in their hands that might not then that's a good thing, is it not?
I can't work out if your against the payment in principle or just against Waitakere FC claiming it?
I was referring to the wage subsidy effectively having a "sweetspot", because of it blunt application. ie you can effectively maximise/inflate your overall payment by having a whole team of part time staff who yes may only work the magical 1 hour per week.
Basically it's blunt application, so leaves itself open to abuse. But yeah for sure it had to be rolled out in a hurry.
But I don't like to see tax payer's dollars exploited in any form. The IRD are going to have a massive drop in revenue for the next few years, especially re business taxation.
So it figures that the tax take needs to be spent in areas of genuine need more than ever, not frittered by folks exploiting sweetspots or other rorts. Not accusing Waitak of this at all, just again highlighting it's a problem.
the whole payout thing is being audited by IR, so any abuse will be caught and prosecuted for fraud.
A sweetspot of wasting tax payers money, and taking it away from more worthwhile causes.
hardly wasting taxpayers money. the payment is there to pay any employee that fits the criteria, if it means people are getting money in their hands that might not then that's a good thing, is it not?
I can't work out if your against the payment in principle or just against Waitakere FC claiming it?
I was referring to the wage subsidy effectively having a "sweetspot", because of it blunt application. ie you can effectively maximise/inflate your overall payment by having a whole team of part time staff who yes may only work the magical 1 hour per week.
Basically it's blunt application, so leaves itself open to abuse. But yeah for sure it had to be rolled out in a hurry.
But I don't like to see tax payer's dollars exploited in any form. The IRD are going to have a massive drop in revenue for the next few years, especially re business taxation.
So it figures that the tax take needs to be spent in areas of genuine need more than ever, not frittered by folks exploiting sweetspots or other rorts. Not accusing Waitak of this at all, just again highlighting it's a problem.
It's open to abuse, but that's a risky game. You can get caught out in an audit or dobbed in. Or been seen to be a tosser while everyone is doing it tough.
INAE, but I figure it has the purpose of protecting jobs and creating stimulus. The second part would be to keep people spending and keep consumer confidence up, which will mean people keep their jobs etc.
Seems to me that if Waitakere have genuinely got that many staff, which seems to be the only issue brought up, it fits both those purposes?
Or it's against your instincts?