General Premier League Thread 2019-20

Soups123

Rock77 wrote: »

Why do u think it won’t be finished now? Has something been announced?

Anything official has said they will try to finish the season when safe to do so.

I don’t think there needs to be any new announcements to cause the line of thinking

I’d have said 5 weeks ago no chance it will be voided but the reality is now is that it’s a real possibility.

To finish this season I think now has to impact on next season and reality is clubs need the finances of next season more than ever now.

I don’t know how they solve for awarding league and relegation without finishing it but it’s hard to see how they finish it

MD1990

Soups123 wrote: »

I don’t think there needs to be any new announcements to cause the line of thinking

I’d have said 5 weeks ago no chance it will be voided but the reality is now is that it’s a real possibility.

To finish this season I think now has to impact on next season and reality is clubs need the finances of next season more than ever now.

I don’t know how they solve for awarding league and relegation without finishing it but it’s hard to see how they finish it

the virus will impact next season I cant see clubs being able to play 38 games next year,
it wont be voided. Uefa want the leagues finished one way or another.

Soups123

MD1990 wrote: »

the virus will impact next season I cant see clubs being able to play 38 games next year,

100% my point was it’s already impacting on next season now, so add 4 more weeks and realistically more to that and it’s a mess.

There are so many variables my gut is they will probably end up voiding the season, it’s such on unprecedented state that I think the teams it hits hardest on will have a hard case legally appealing it.

It’s a mess the knock on effect of it all and how much has to be rearranged with the global football

Drumpot

I miss the older days when Things were not perfect but you had a harder player who Worked a lot harder for team mates. How often do teams regularly down tools for managers (chelsea, United, Leicester, Spurs, city) from season to season that leads to managers getting sacked?!

Teams are fitter but squads are so much more fickle, probably a mental fragility that’s allowed more athletic players (as opposed to naturally gifted or mentally stronger players) thrive ...

Rock77

MD1990 wrote: »

no.

just the leaks all saying clubs wanting to finish before June 30.

I cant see that happening.
also the virus has stagnated in Italy & Spain but not a huge drop. Going to be a big problem for a long time.

So some clubs need it finished by July for financial reasons...

Surely if it can’t resume by then they can’t relegate anyone as it stands??

I never put much thought into the financial implications of suspending indefinitely.. if it has that much affect on clubs and they decide the season is over surely it’s null and void?

Complete madness but I can’t see this playing out any other way than some sort of madness !!

citytillidie

Rock77 wrote: »

So some clubs need it finished by July for financial reasons...

Surely if it can’t resume by then they can’t relegate anyone as it stands??

I never put much thought into the financial implications of suspending indefinitely.. if it has that much affect on clubs and they decide the season is over surely it’s null and void?

Complete madness but I can’t see this playing out any other way than some sort of madness !!

Scotland have finished and named league winners and relegated teams bottom of the table.

MD1990

Rock77 wrote: »

So some clubs need it finished by July for financial reasons...

Surely if it can’t resume by then they can’t relegate anyone as it stands??

I never put much thought into the financial implications of suspending indefinitely.. if it has that much affect on clubs and they decide the season is over surely it’s null and void?

Complete madness but I can’t see this playing out any other way than some sort of madness !!

no players will be out of contract.

Hard to know exactly will happen its mostlu just leaks the PL have extended the season but not said much more.

Many EFL clubs will go under with games with fans possibly off until 2021.

Rock77

citytillidie wrote: »

Scotland have finished and named league winners and relegated teams bottom of the table.

Really?? Is that official?

That really is madness, especially if the leaders can be caught and the teams could have saved themselves from relegation.. Do they not see how ridiculously unfair that is??

Soups123

Rock77 wrote: »

Really?? Is that official?

That really is madness, especially if the leaders can be caught and the teams could have saved themselves from relegation.. Do they not see how ridiculously unfair that is??

Yes below premier league and paid out price money too. Looks like Premiership will follow suit there to the annoyance of Rangers and Hearts.

The Hearts push back I fully get, where as Rangers are so far behind Celtic they just need to swallow it

citytillidie

Rock77 wrote: »

Really?? Is that official?

That really is madness, especially if the leaders can be caught and the teams could have saved themselves from relegation.. Do they not see how ridiculously unfair that is??

Teams voted for it, getting prize money was more important. Just waiting on UEFA approval to call the top division.

Rock77

citytillidie wrote: »

Teams voted for it, getting prize money was more important. Just waiting on UEFA approval to call the top division.

Yeah I just looked it up.. I’m slowly accepting that whatever happens I’m not going to accept it!!!!

Mitch Connor

My personal view is that Liverpool are so far ahead if the season was called now they would be champions.

I could see in a league like Italy where you would have a team in 1st, but no champion named.

I actually think who gets the Euro spots and who (if anyone) gets relegated are far more important than who is champion or if there is one declared at all.

Spain's FA have been drawing up plans to call their season, and at the moment Real S would get 4th (and CL) and Getafe would get 5th. Despite both being on the same number of points after the same number of games (and Getafe won at Real S). Real S get the spot on goal difference because head-to-head isn't used, as the Getafe vs Real S return match hasn't been played. Its a very unfair situation to be awarding positions (and european qualification/relegation) when the season has not been completed.

it is why leagues want to finish the season, awarding positions without finishing is going to be hugely unfair to a number of clubs. Liverpool are, imo, the absolutely least affected (imo) cause they have legitimately qualified for the CL next season by virtue of being certain of a top 4 finish. (you do get people arguing that if the season is not completed to 38 games no one can have qualified but I disagree).

In saying all of that, if Liverpool are crowned champs now without completing the season or any more matches - while I agree they should be named champions (personal opinion, I know they could still technically be caught!) I would also always say on here that they were simply handed the title and put an asterix against any mention of their title win*. (:-P)

Asterix champions elect!

Rock77

Mitch Connor wrote: »

My personal view is that Liverpool are so far ahead if the season was called now they would be champions.

I could see in a league like Italy where you would have a team in 1st, but no champion named.

I actually think who gets the Euro spots and who (if anyone) gets relegated are far more important than who is champion or if there is one declared at all.

Spain's FA have been drawing up plans to call their season, and at the moment Real S would get 4th (and CL) and Getafe would get 5th. Despite both being on the same number of points after the same number of games (and Getafe won at Real S). Real S get the spot on goal difference because head-to-head isn't used, as the Getafe vs Real S return match hasn't been played. Its a very unfair situation to be awarding positions (and european qualification/relegation) when the season has not been completed.

it is why leagues want to finish the season, awarding positions without finishing is going to be hugely unfair to a number of clubs. Liverpool are, imo, the absolutely least affected (imo) cause they have legitimately qualified for the CL next season by virtue of being certain of a top 4 finish. (you do get people arguing that if the season is not completed to 38 games no one can have qualified but I disagree).

In saying all of that, if Liverpool are crowned champs now without completing the season or any more matches - while I agree they should be named champions (personal opinion, I know they could still technically be caught!) I would also always say on here that they were simply handed the title and put an asterix against any mention of their title win*. (:-P)

In my opinion it’s ludicrous to let positions stand as they are. Extremely unfair to relegate a team that hasn’t been relegated or award a title that hasn’t been won no matter how many points ahead a team are.

Having said that I also think it would be extremely unfair to null and void the season...

The only thing close to fair in my mind is finish the season when safe but that also has its drawbacks with out of contract players/transfers and clubs financial situations.

If Liverpool are awarded the title then I would like all other positions to stand also.. I wouldn’t be happy having one rule for them and another for everyone else..

Mitch Connor

MD1990 wrote: »

the virus will impact next season I cant see clubs being able to play 38 games next year,
it wont be voided. Uefa want the leagues finished one way or another.

I think the impact on next season will more likely be on domestic cups, rather than the league.

Easy(ish) options:

1. No Community Shield - first week of PL instead.
2. Single leg league cup semi-finals.
3. No Fa Cup replays.
4. Extend the season calendar to June 30th, giving an extra month for the calendar from the beginning.

If they are looking to finish out this season by July, it could force a later start of 20/21 - maybe it starts in September, but if you work on a basis that this season is possible to practically finish relatively soon, then next season should be able to start relatively close to its original start date.

Even if it is not possible to finish this season, it may still be possible to start next season relatively close to normal dates. (not with fans in the stadiums, imo, when football returns it will be behind closed doors at first.). One reason for not finishing this season could be the impact it has on the calendar of next season. Ie if you can only restart football in August, it is more likely (imo) that it is next season that starts then, rather than the end of this season.

There is also the potential of Uefa doing something with International dates (remove friendlies?) as they are also looking to do Euro 2020 next summer instead of this summer.

~Rebel~

On the subject of ending the season early, I really hope they at least find a way for games-in-hand to be played. If everyone has played the same number of games, at least there’s some level of fairness and merit to the positions. But to relegate Villa with a game fewer played, when a win in that game would keep them up, seems totally wrong.

So at very least I think we just need those 4 teams on 28 games played to make it to 29.

MD1990

Mitch Connor wrote: »

I think the impact on next season will more likely be on domestic cups, rather than the league.

Easy(ish) options:

1. No Community Shield - first week of PL instead.
2. Single leg league cup semi-finals.
3. No Fa Cup replays.
4. Extend the season calendar to June 30th, giving an extra month for the calendar from the beginning.

If they are looking to finish out this season by July, it could force a later start of 20/21 - maybe it starts in September, but if you work on a basis that this season is possible to practically finish relatively soon, then next season should be able to start relatively close to its original start date.

Even if it is not possible to finish this season, it may still be possible to start next season relatively close to normal dates. (not with fans in the stadiums, imo, when football returns it will be behind closed doors at first.). One reason for not finishing this season could be the impact it has on the calendar of next season. Ie if you can only restart football in August, it is more likely (imo) that it is next season that starts then, rather than the end of this season.

There is also the potential of Uefa doing something with International dates (remove friendlies?) as they are also looking to do Euro 2020 next summer instead of this summer.

A Pl players,referee or backroom staff member going without contracting the virus for 8 months is impossible.
That means at least a 2 week break for a certain club probably guaranteed a member from each club during the season will get the virus.

Games will be postponed regularly.
But maybe a breakthrough might happen before a vaccine hopefully

Mitch Connor

Rock77 wrote: »

In my opinion it’s ludicrous to let positions stand as they are. Extremely unfair to relegate a team that hasn’t been relegated or award a title that hasn’t been won no matter how many points ahead a team are.

Having said that I also think it would be extremely unfair to null and void the season...

The only thing close to fair in my mind is finish the season when safe but that also has its drawbacks with out of contract players/transfers and clubs financial situations.

If Liverpool are awarded the title then I would like all other positions to stand also.. I wouldn’t be happy having one rule for them and another for everyone else..

I can see a scenario where the league is called as is.
Positions are decided as they currently are or based on Points Per Game (to try make up for some sides having played 28 games rather than 29) - might make no difference, i've not done the math.
Positions determine Euro Qualification and prize money payments.
No teams are relegated.
Two two teams from Championship promoted making a 22 team league next season.
Bottom 5 clubs are relegated next season to bring it back to 20 the following season.

It would be unfair on the teams battling for 4th spot (few care about the EL, if we are being honest!) but we're dealing with an unprecedented global pandemic, things aren't going to fair.

As i say, I think the biggest issue is not who is crowned champs, if anyone, it is who qualifies for the CL and who, if anyone, gets relegated.

I don't see how you could relegate Bournemouth (as the best example) while they are in 18th but on the exact same points as Watford and West Ham. Or Villa who are two points further back but have a game in hand.

Mitch Connor

MD1990 wrote: »

A Pl players,referee or backroom staff member going without contracting the virus for 8 months is impossible.
That means at least a 2 week break for a certain club probably guaranteed a member from each club during the season will get the virus.

Games will be postponed regularly.
But maybe a breakthrough might happen before a vaccine hopefully

Genuine question....

If a player is confirmed to have Covid-19, and all the other players/staff are tested the next day and they all come back negative - if there is no further contact with that player (lets say they are isolated and treated as a standard injury from a football perspective), could the other players still end up as having contracted it? Is a negative result the following day mean they did not get it, or they just aren't showing testable indicators yet?

If the clubs were able to conduct testing every day and immediately isolate a player or staff member who tests positive, would that stop the spread, or does it take days to be able to test positive after contracting it?

8-10

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/52326617

Premier League clubs remain committed to finishing the 92 remaining fixtures of the current season but did not discuss a deadline by which play must resume at a meeting on Friday.

Clubs were expected to debate a 30 June deadline to resume play but instead discussed "possible scheduling models".

The Premier League said it "remains our objective" to complete matches but currently "all dates are tentative".

Rock77

Mitch Connor wrote: »

but we're dealing with an unprecedented global pandemic, things aren't going to fair.
.

This is the part that I’m just going to have to accept.. I’m trying to hope something fair happens but fair may not be possible..

y0ssar1an22

https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/11974841/totti-del-piero-we-dont-regret-ballon-dor

4 serie a legends. who has the most caps?

for those who cant click the link:

maldini
totti
del piero
zanetti

Fitz*

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Genuine question....

If a player is confirmed to have Covid-19, and all the other players/staff are tested the next day and they all come back negative - if there is no further contact with that player (lets say they are isolated and treated as a standard injury from a football perspective), could the other players still end up as having contracted it? Is a negative result the following day mean they did not get it, or they just aren't showing testable indicators yet?

If the clubs were able to conduct testing every day and immediately isolate a player or staff member who tests positive, would that stop the spread, or does it take days to be able to test positive after contracting it?

I was thinking the same myself. Like for example if Harvey Elliot, who mainly plays in the Liverpool academy but has briefly appeared on the first team bench, was to test positive and no other senior player or coach tested positive, would that rule out everyone at Liverpool playing a game the next gameweek?

Guy:Incognito

Mitch Connor wrote: »

I think the impact on next season will more likely be on domestic cups, rather than the league.

Easy(ish) options:

1. No Community Shield - first week of PL instead.
2. Single leg league cup semi-finals.
3. No Fa Cup replays.
4. Extend the season calendar to June 30th, giving an extra month for the calendar from the beginning.

If they are looking to finish out this season by July, it could force a later start of 20/21 - maybe it starts in September, but if you work on a basis that this season is possible to practically finish relatively soon, then next season should be able to start relatively close to its original start date.

Even if it is not possible to finish this season, it may still be possible to start next season relatively close to normal dates. (not with fans in the stadiums, imo, when football returns it will be behind closed doors at first.). One reason for not finishing this season could be the impact it has on the calendar of next season. Ie if you can only restart football in August, it is more likely (imo) that it is next season that starts then, rather than the end of this season.

There is also the potential of Uefa doing something with International dates (remove friendlies?) as they are also looking to do Euro 2020 next summer instead of this summer.

Slight issue there in that the Euros are on in June.

dogbert27

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Slight issue there in that the Euros are on in June.

Euros are cancelled this year and postponed to 2021

Mitch Connor

dogbert27 wrote: »

Euros are cancelled this year and postponed to 2021

My suggestion was to extend to June 30 2021. My suggestion was stupid.

dogbert27

Mitch Connor wrote: »

My suggestion was to extend to June 30 2021. My suggestion was stupid.

My bad, I didn't read the full post.

Rayne Wooney

I think Newcastle will break into the big 6 if taken over, 300 million seems like a bargain for a club with a lot going for it, I’d do a whip around myself but I’d probably end up 299,999,950 short.

The wealth these guys possess is just crazy, buying Newcastle for them is the equivalent of me buying a 4K TV or something similar.

I’m just reading up on it and Mike Ashley seems a bit skeptical it’ll happen though, they are quibbling over 40 million which is strange and I’m not sure why this Amanda Staveley is involved.

8-10

Rayne Wooney wrote: »

I think Newcastle will break into the big 6 if taken over, 300 million seems like a bargain for a club with a lot going for it, I’d do a whip around myself but I’d probably end up 299,999,950 short.

Yeah and far as I recall, Liverpool's current owners bought the club for £300m albeit a good few years ago. But must be worth a couple of billion now so it can be lucrative.

Newcastle have a loyal fanbase and only one club in their city so lots of potential.

Rayne Wooney

Rayne Wooney wrote: »

I’m not sure why this Amanda Staveley is involved.

I presume because she is owns PCP Capital Partners, which provides financial and investment advice, and they have previously advised the Saudi Royal Family on UK investments. You hardly think Mike Ashley walked up to the Saudi Royal Palace, knocked on the door and said "anyone here fancy buying a football club"?

y0ssar1an22

8-10 wrote: »

Yeah and far as I recall, Liverpool's current owners bought the club for £300m albeit a good few years ago. But must be worth a couple of billion now so it can be lucrative.

Newcastle have a loyal fanbase and only one club in their city so lots of potential.

will FFP impact them much?

location will be a drawback for a lot of players

TitianGerm

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

will FFP impact them much?

location will be a drawback for a lot of players

Not when Saudi Aramco pay £500m a year for the naming rights of St James Park.

smelly sock

https://www.the42.ie/simon-harris-sporting-events-ireland-5078219-Apr2020/


You'd imagine the UK with a lot more sporting events will follow suit.

smelly sock

smelly sock wrote: »

https://www.the42.ie/simon-harris-sporting-events-ireland-5078219-Apr2020/


You'd imagine the UK with a lot more sporting events will follow suit.

Behind closed doors for next season must be a possibility

smelly sock

smelly sock wrote: »

https://www.the42.ie/simon-harris-sporting-events-ireland-5078219-Apr2020/


You'd imagine the UK with a lot more sporting events will follow suit.

Elite sports that get a lot of money in the UK may be able to compete behind closed doors. And the likes of Rugby (due to the scarcity of sport) may get paid more for competitions.

But, the big money is based on TV subscribers and while bored subscribers are boosting TV company coffers in the short term, a large section of the population unemployed may not be able to support it going forward.

Tom Mann Centuria

Corona virus chat, excellent.

smelly sock

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Elite sports that get a lot of money in the UK may be able to compete behind closed doors. And the likes of Rugby (due to the scarcity of sport) may get paid more for competitions.

But, the big money is based on TV subscribers and while bored subscribers are boosting TV company coffers in the short term, a large section of the population unemployed may not be able to support it going forward.

100 per cent agree. The GAA is all about selling tickets and bums in stadiums. TV money isnt huge tbh.

The PL would clean up if they could play games behind closed doors this summer.

MadYaker

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

Corona virus chat, excellent.

Well they closed the other thread so it was inevitable

Tom Mann Centuria

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

Corona virus chat, excellent.

Considering it's the very reason the season has been postponed (potentially cancelled) with possibilities of restarting dependent on its management, it's hardly surprising.

Tom Mann Centuria

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Considering it's the very reason the season has been postponed (potentially cancelled) with possibilities of restarting dependent on its management, it's hardly surprising.

Oh absolutely agree, it's not surprising at all.

Mitch Connor

Talk that clubs that have imposed paycuts or deferrals might have spending restrictions imposed. Times have an article on it.

On the one hand, I get it. Clubs that commit to paying what they are contracted to would be at a respective disadvantage to those that have not, financially, in the transfer market.

On the other hand, its between the club and the players what they are paid, and one reason for deferrals could be so that the club can both survive and remain somewhat competitive.

Its an odd one.

I had thought about clubs going for deferrals now, or cutting pay of casual staff, and then spending millions in the next window, and that being a hard pill. But I hadn't really considered it something that may result in restrictions.

~Rebel~

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Talk that clubs that have imposed paycuts or deferrals might have spending restrictions imposed. Times have an article on it.

On the one hand, I get it. Clubs that commit to paying what they are contracted to would be at a respective disadvantage to those that have not, financially, in the transfer market.

On the other hand, its between the club and the players what they are paid, and one reason for deferrals could be so that the club can both survive and remain somewhat competitive.

Its an odd one.

I had thought about clubs going for deferrals now, or cutting pay of casual staff, and then spending millions in the next window, and that being a hard pill. But I hadn't really considered it something that may result in restrictions.

I can understand it to an extent with pay cuts, but it seems strange to impose that sort of thing with deferrals... after all they’re still committing to paying out on the contract in full. I mean, deferrals make sense, even if they have the money right now. We’re in a state of uncertainty, with no idea when it will end, so the more any club can mitigate against losses in the short term, the quicker they can bounce back in the longer term. I see no harm in that as long as players are ok with it, and ultimately still get paid as per their contract.

fyfe79

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Talk that clubs that have imposed paycuts or deferrals might have spending restrictions imposed. Times have an article on it.

On the one hand, I get it. Clubs that commit to paying what they are contracted to would be at a respective disadvantage to those that have not, financially, in the transfer market.

On the other hand, its between the club and the players what they are paid, and one reason for deferrals could be so that the club can both survive and remain somewhat competitive.

Its an odd one.

I had thought about clubs going for deferrals now, or cutting pay of casual staff, and then spending millions in the next window, and that being a hard pill. But I hadn't really considered it something that may result in restrictions.

If ever there was a time to absolutely dismiss transfer rumours it's now. Hard to see any activity in the market when everything is so up in the air. All clubs right now simply have no idea how much this whole shutdown will eventually cost them, as the time frame is unknown. No way are they planning any purchases in the near term, imo. I'm still hearing of Timo Werner linked to Liverpool - that's a transfer I had pegged as a cert in Feb to no chance now.

Mitch Connor

fyfe79 wrote: »

If ever there was a time to absolutely dismiss transfer rumours it's now. Hard to see any activity in the market when everything is so up in the air. All clubs right now simply have no idea how much this whole shutdown will eventually cost them, as the time frame is unknown. No way are they planning any purchases in the near term, imo. I'm still hearing of Timo Werner linked to Liverpool - that's a transfer I had pegged as a cert in Feb to no chance now.

I don't think we will see signings made til it's over, but it would be bad management if clubs aren't planning and discussing various transfer plans based on different outcomes over the next few months.

As much as clubs will need to buy, loads will need to sell.

Maybe Liverpool won't be able to afford werner after such a financial blow, but also maybe werner costs half what be would have done.

There will be transfers, loads of them, when the window opens again. Whenever that is. But yeah, we may not see the transfers we thought were certainties.

Mitch Connor

~Rebel~ wrote: »

I can understand it to an extent with pay cuts, but it seems strange to impose that sort of thing with deferrals... after all they’re still committing to paying out on the contract in full. I mean, deferrals make sense, even if they have the money right now. We’re in a state of uncertainty, with no idea when it will end, so the more any club can mitigate against losses in the short term, the quicker they can bounce back in the longer term. I see no harm in that as long as players are ok with it, and ultimately still get paid as per their contract.

Yep, would agree with this.

With deferrals the money is still due to be paid, so there is no real cost saving (maybe there is in interest and stuff like that, but practically speaking it is a zero sum). And on top of that why is it the business of the PL, FA or any other club when you pay your players? If United switched to paying their players quaterly or yearly what has it got to do with anyone else?

The issue is slightly different with pay-cuts as there is a cost saving, but again... so what?

If Rashford agreed to earn 30% less for the next 3 months (or whatever) whose business is it but United and the players?

I can only really see it being a thing if the pay-cut is forced, in some way, where the players don't specifically agree to it. ie. The PFA agree as a whole for their members - but even that is an agreement.

United players lose 25% of their wages (or something like that) if the club fail to qualify for the CL. It is in the contracts they agree to, so it is a pre-arranged thing, but it is a pay-cut - a cost saving measure based on incoming revenue being decreased. United aren't punished by the PL or FA in the form of transfer restrictions when they implement that.

Now, this story may amount to nothing, and I obviously don't know the finer details of it, but even the fact the Times are saying it is seen as an uncontroversial proposal... it just seems so odd to me.

gstack166

https://twitter.com/mailsport/status/1252175202248728577?s=21

~Rebel~

gstack166 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/mailsport/status/1252175202248728577?s=21

Clubs at that level basically need to wind down until the 21/22 season when this is (hopefully!) entirely over. They definitely can't afford their players wages, and there's no market for them to play behind closed doors either. They all pretty much need to dump their entire staff, including players, to be able to consolidate enough money to ever come back.

Can't say I see this setting a precedent though, it's just apples and oranges in comparison to the Premier League. The PL can still generate revenue over the coming months behind closed doors, whereas League 2 (and even League 1), can't.

Mitch Connor

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Clubs at that level basically need to wind down until the 21/22 season when this is (hopefully!) entirely over. They definitely can't afford their players wages, and there's no market for them to play behind closed doors either. They all pretty much need to dump their entire staff, including players, to be able to consolidate enough money to ever come back.

Can't say I see this setting a precedent though, it's just apples and oranges in comparison to the Premier League. The PL can still generate revenue over the coming months behind closed doors, whereas League 2 (and even League 1), can't.

Some of the Non-Leagues have called their season done iirc, and they didn't (immediately) set any precedent for the leagues above them.

As you say, the revenue circumstances and potential contractual penalities are very different between PL (and to a lesser extent Champ) and L1 and L2.

Where the issues really arise here is how each league deals with the ones above and below, if they have different implementations of how the season ends.

We have L1 clubs that should be promoted to Champ (but no playoff winner) so 3 clubs in Champ relegation spots, only two possibily coming up, but will the Champ relegate even two teams without playing out the season.

Not playing out the season makes things very tricky.

citytillidie

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Some of the Non-Leagues have called their season done iirc, and they didn't (immediately) set any precedent for the leagues above them.

As you say, the revenue circumstances and potential contractual penalities are very different between PL (and to a lesser extent Champ) and L1 and L2.

Where the issues really arise here is how each league deals with the ones above and below, if they have different implementations of how the season ends.

We have L1 clubs that should be promoted to Champ (but no playoff winner) so 3 clubs in Champ relegation spots, only two possibily coming up, but will the Champ relegate even two teams without playing out the season.

Not playing out the season makes things very tricky.

Also the case in League 1 with the odd teams because Bury went out of business, so they need to sort that too

Drumpot

Just heard of a family friends dad whose family has been told to say their goodbyes as they don’t think he’s gonna survive. They believe he got it at the Liverpool v Athletico game when he stayed over the night for the game. I’d say there’s loads of examples of people like this at sporting events all across the spectrum.

It’s a tragedy, but it also makes me wonder if people’s affinity with sports or going to games might change. Once it’s back on tv we can all watch our teams but people won’t be as quick to travel to games. I won’t be getting on a plane anytime soon and the thought of getting a ferry to a match after the cruise issues is not a priority. Now I know some people won’t care but a lot of people will be slow to travel to games abroad, some may never do it again.