Football & Coronavirus [READ MOD NOTE IN FIRST POST - updated 06-05-20]

yabadabado

FitzShane wrote: »

Galway Bay FM Sport reporting that the GAA have indicated that Club Championships will begin in June or July - No spectators, formats redrawn to ensure each team get minimum 2 games. 8 weeks to complete from start date, which is dependent on the restrictions being eased by June.

I have also heard some rumours of Junior football cups such as the FAI cup and provincial cups being played, but not the leagues as there are too many games for some teams to make up after deferring games earlier in the season. Also the GAA season will take precedence for players who play soccer & GAA so the soccer clubs will have fewer players.

How can the GAA take precedent?

Two separate sporting bodies and you think they will force their members to choose one over the other.

Really odd considering the amount of animosity there would be between the two bodies in some areas .

Chuck Noland

gstack166 wrote: »

From my experience you’ll find more of the City lads choosing soccer & more of the country lads choosing GAA. Least in my neck of the woods that is.

Bit of a mixture where I am but to make the above statement is just nonsense and tar every player with the same brush

gstack166

yabadabado wrote: »

How can the GAA take precedent?

Two separate sporting bodies and you think they will force their members to choose one over the other.

Really odd considering the amount of animosity there would be between the two bodies in some areas .

Oh they’ll force them, believe that 100%. Not the associations or both sports but the GAA clubs & managements will. Shur they’ve always done it, they do it from u12’s in GAA. Tell them they’ll be dropped if they play soccer.

Edit: they do it in a lot of GAA clubs. Not tarring them all with the same brush but the clubs that do it would be in the majority.

gstack166

https://twitter.com/mailsport/status/1249822184496914437?s=21

Very good read & interesting points.

~Rebel~

gstack166 wrote: »

Nobody said it wouldn’t be played without fans. I’m saying it shouldn’t be played without fans & I stand by it.

Hopefully the lads in charge don’t share your views, or they’ll be signing the death warrants of an awful lot of clubs that simply can’t wait 14-18 months without any revenue whatsoever.

It’s a lovely romantic notion that it should only be played in front of fans, but the reality is a lot more complicated, with a lot of livelihoods riding on people making realist decisions rather than romantic ones.

gstack166

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Hopefully the lads in charge don’t share your views, or they’ll be signing the death warrants of an awful lot of clubs that simply can’t wait 14-18 months without any revenue whatsoever.

It’s a lovely romantic notion that it should only be played in front of fans, but the reality is a lot more complicated, with a lot of livelihoods riding on people making realist decisions rather than romantic ones.

That is some load of rubbish to be reading. The clubs that can’t wait that long for revenue are the clubs outside the premier league who are solely dependent on most part on the revenue of gate receipts.

What about the livelihoods of the match day security workers, the club shop check out workers, the burger van workers, the bar staff, the hospitality staff, the coach drivers etc. Should their livelihoods be put on hold just so you can watch a bit of football on your hole on a couch to see somebody lift a trophy.

~Rebel~

gstack166 wrote: »

That is some load of rubbish to be reading. The clubs that can’t wait that long for revenue are the clubs outside the premier league who are solely dependent on most part on the revenue of gate receipts.

Most of the championship clubs would be in serious trouble. Lower prem clubs too. Do you really think Bournemouth can afford their player wages for 14-18 months? And if they don’t pay they lose their chief assets.

What about the livelihoods of the match day security workers, the club shop check out workers, the burger van workers, the bar staff, the hospitality staff, the coach drivers etc. Should their livelihoods be put on hold just so you can watch a bit of football on your hole on a couch to see somebody lift a trophy.

I have absolutely no idea how anything here has absolutely anything to do with what I said. All those people will return when it’s safe for crowds to be at matches, completely irrespective of if there’s football played in the meantime. Though in some cases there won’t be a club to return to if they don’t get some revenue in in the meantime.

And a bit of misguided vitriol thrown in at the end to boot.

MD1990

gstack166 wrote: »

It should be back when stadiums can host fans & fans can travel to the games without restrictions. Like it’s always been, any scutter talk of behind closed doors or in St. George’s Park or anywhere remote then it leaves open the door to overseas league games & that inevitably would lead to Super leagues etc.

Cancel the thing & when everything can be reopen like before this virus hit then play football again. However long it takes.

football will be back behind closed doors to give clubs the best chance to survive.

We know you& others would rather no football so as Liverpool dont win the league.

But any true football fan wants the game back asap even if it is behind closed doors.

gstack166

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Most of the championship clubs would be in serious trouble. Lower prem clubs too. Do you really think Bournemouth can afford their player wages for 14-18 months? And if they don’t pay


I have absolutely no idea how anything here has absolutely anything to do with what I said. All those people will return when it’s safe for crowds to be at matches, completely irrespective of if there’s football played in the meantime. Though in some cases there won’t be a club to return to if they don’t get some revenue in in the meantime.

It should be about safety integrity & togetherness. The games shouldn’t be played until everyone can go again. It’s like with social distancing, we’re doing it so that when we all meet each other again nobody is missing, same should be for football, when it meets again everyone including fans are there for it.

How many games a year do you travel over to? I’m assuming tv is your chosen way of watching football? That’s fair enough but it isn’t for the core support of every football club.

fyfe79

Christ almighty, Liverpool would be in serious trouble if they need to pay their playing staff for 18 months with nothing coming in, let alone the likes of Bournemouth!

Football will be back behind closed doors within 3/4 months. The business is simply too big for anything else to happen.

Otherwise, how would any club (with the obvious exception of Man City, and possibly Man Utd) survive?

gstack166

MD1990 wrote: »

football will be back behind closed doors to give clubs the best chance to survive.

We know you& others would rather no football so as Liverpool dont win the league.

But any true football fan wants the game back asap even if it is behind closed doors.

Ahh - a Liverpool fan, your tribal comments are your undoing - this is about safety, integrity and togetherness, not about who wins what trophy - but of course you’re entitled to your opinion


Read my posts. I’ve stated only a few posts back I’ve no problem Liverpool being awarded the league.

davemckenna25

davemckenna25 wrote: »

It should always be a game we enjoy and hopefully give us some light at the very end of the tunnel but it should be at the very end of the tunnel, not before we get to the end.

Define the end of the tunnel?

This is getting deep!

Amirani

MD1990 wrote: »

football will be back behind closed doors to give clubs the best chance to survive.

How many people would need to be present for behind closed doors games? Might be able to do 50 in and around the pitch.

~Rebel~

gstack166 wrote: »

It should be about safety integrity & togetherness. The games shouldn’t be played until everyone can go again. It’s like with social distancing, we’re doing it so that when we all meet each other again nobody is missing, same should be for football, when it meets again everyone including fans are there for it.

How many games a year do you travel over to? I’m assuming tv is your chosen way of watching football? That’s fair enough but it isn’t for the core support of every football club.

Again, a lovely romantic notion, that unfortunately does not mesh with reality. Player wages are 40-70% of revenue for most clubs. It’s fine for the end of this season, they can absorb that. But if they had to go a full season with no income, whilst still having an outlay in the tens of millions... I mean you don’t have to be an economist to see those numbers are not positive.

davemckenna25

6 wrote: »

Define the end of the tunnel?

This is getting deep!

Its where you come out, the opposite side to which you enter.

On the debate of matches behind closed doors, this will only benefit PL teams and Championship teams. How will the lower leagues make money from games behind closed doors, they won't be televised and will only cost them money to play the matches..... discuss....:)

8-10

People seem to forget that only last month there were major games in Europe played behind closed doors.

The idea that it shouldn't happen is fine as a personal preference but it's not based in the reality of what's happening and what games have already been played.

I already miss going to live soccer but I expect to see it back on TV long before I can go again

Thanx 4 The Fish

davemckenna25 wrote: »

Its where you come out, the opposite side to which you enter.

On the debate of matches behind closed doors, this will only benefit PL teams and Championship teams. How will the lower leagues make money from games behind closed doors, they won't be televised and will only cost them money to play the matches..... discuss....:)

Televise on Youtube or another streaming type app, allow the fans of those teams to watch online for a fee somewhat akin to the gate money or get a non league/league 1 pass etc and share the proceeds between all clubs, perhaps charge a little more which I am sure fans would be happy to pay, I know I have watched my local non league club this way when they are away from home in cup games etc a couple of times, BT even pick up the non league games and put a roundup sometimes.

gstack166

gstack166 wrote: »

That is some load of rubbish to be reading. The clubs that can’t wait that long for revenue are the clubs outside the premier league who are solely dependent on most part on the revenue of gate receipts.

What about the livelihoods of the match day security workers, the club shop check out workers, the burger van workers, the bar staff, the hospitality staff, the coach drivers etc. Should their livelihoods be put on hold just so you can watch a bit of football on your hole on a couch to see somebody lift a trophy.

How can you call his post rubbish and then post the above??

Not a chance most clubs in the PL could survive without a year/18 months of no revenue. United, Liverpool & City pay approx 300 million in wages to staff per year. Doesn't take much to do the figures and see even big clubs would be in trouble very quickly, nevermind the smaller PL ones.

How would you propose paying staff for 18+ months with little or no revenue?

fyfe79

gstack166 wrote: »

Ahh - a Liverpool fan, your tribal comments are your undoing - this is about safety, integrity and togetherness, not about who wins what trophy - but of course you’re entitled to your opinion

Read my posts. I’ve stated only a few posts back I’ve no problem Liverpool being awarded the league.

What if it's considered safe to play behind closed doors in 3 months time? We're obviously not going to immediately go from a state of shutdown, straight to like it was before. There's going to be a gradual easing of restrictions. In the world of sport, it's logical to think that sporting events will come back behind closed doors first.

Otherwise, in terms of football, the only togetherness will be non-playing employees in the dole queue. The majority of clubs will go bust but if we need to wait until a vaccine and full-house crowds. If sport can begin behind closed doors, when safe, then those clubs can continue to exist in order to continue furloughing non-playing staff until eventually bringing them back to the workplace.

davemckenna25

davemckenna25 wrote: »

Its where you come out, the opposite side to which you enter.

On the debate of matches behind closed doors, this will only benefit PL teams and Championship teams. How will the lower leagues make money from games behind closed doors, they won't be televised and will only cost them money to play the matches..... discuss....:)

What if a vaccine can't be made successfully? Are we still in the tunnel?..

gstack166

6 wrote: »

How can you call his post rubbish and then post the above??

Not a chance most clubs in the PL could survive without a year/18 months of no revenue. United, Liverpool & City pay approx 300 million in wages to staff per year. Doesn't take much to do the figures and see even big clubs would be in trouble very quickly, nevermind the smaller PL ones.

How would you propose paying staff for 18+ months with little or no revenue?

I don’t know and I don’t care, that decision is for someone with higher IQ’s than any of us here.

It’s the end of football as we know it if it’s played behind closed doors, it’s the biggest fcuk you we don’t care about you to fans that they could possibly give and proves that all they care about is money.

It’s actually just plain distasteful to even be hearing about football possibly being played over in the UK anytime soon considering what their going through, but hey, fcuk it if it means Liverpool lifting a trophy tho eh.

Richard Hillman

Football has been shut down for about a month now. Top clubs have missed out on about 2 home games. The vast majority of the income from those 2 home games would have been from the season tickets sold last summer.The money is in the bank.

Their income from selling shirts in the club shop is little because they usually just take a payment from the kit maker and forgo a cut in the sales. Plus it's the end of the season, they have new shirts coming out in a couple of months.

And for all that money that have missed out on in the short term, the save some back on the massive police costs for every game.

Premier League Clubs are not in the poor house. And if they are in the poor house then the club has been run badly.

8-10

gstack166 wrote: »

I don’t know and I don’t care, that decision is for someone with higher IQ’s than any of us here.

It’s the end of football as we know it if it’s played behind closed doors, it’s the biggest fcuk you we don’t care about you to fans that they could possibly give and proves that all they care about is money.

It’s actually just plain distasteful to even be hearing about football possibly being played over in the UK anytime soon considering what their going through, but hey, fcuk it if it means Liverpool lifting a trophy tho eh.

Nobody's saying play games before it's safe to.

But reality is the majority of fans watching their teams play in the Premier League are doing it on TV or internet stream already.

fyfe79

gstack166 wrote: »

I don’t know and I don’t care, that decision is for someone with higher IQ’s than any of us here.

It’s the end of football as we know it if it’s played behind closed doors, it’s the biggest fcuk you we don’t care about you to fans that they could possibly give and proves that all they care about is money.

It’s actually just plain distasteful to even be hearing about football possibly being played over in the UK anytime soon considering what their going through, but hey, fcuk it if it means Liverpool lifting a trophy tho eh.

Second time you've had an anti-Liverpool rant in a few mins.

The end of football if it's behind closed doors? Serious question - would the majority of match-going fans be ok with watching their club on TV for a few months, if the only other option was their club going bankrupt?

The end of football would be guaranteed if we would need to wait 18 months for a vaccine.

gstack166

8-10 wrote: »

Nobody's saying play games before it's safe to.

But reality is the majority of fans watching their teams play in the Premier League are doing it on TV or internet stream already.

They’re not the fans that should be given preference. The season ticket holders who’ve already paid to go to the games remaining should be accommodated to see them games before anyone else, if that means you have to wait then you should just have to wait.

gstack166

gstack166 wrote: »

I don’t know and I don’t care, that decision is for someone with higher IQ’s than any of us here.

It’s the end of football as we know it if it’s played behind closed doors, it’s the biggest fcuk you we don’t care about you to fans that they could possibly give and proves that all they care about is money.

It’s actually just plain distasteful to even be hearing about football possibly being played over in the UK anytime soon considering what their going through, but hey, fcuk it if it means Liverpool lifting a trophy tho eh.

Why is is distasteful? Nobody has said it should be played before it's safe to do so, nobody.

As for your last comment, that says more about you tbh and your views. Not sure why you need to go down that route. Loads of clubs want to get football back soon (when safe). In fact, most of them. Fans too.

Richard Hillman

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Football has been shut down for about a month now. Top clubs have missed out on about 2 home games. The vast majority of the income from those 2 home games would have been from the season tickets sold last summer.The money is in the bank.

Their income from selling shirts in the club shop is little because they usually just take a payment from the kit maker and forgo a cut in the sales. Plus it's the end of the season, they have new shirts coming out in a couple of months.

And for all that money that have missed out on in the short term, the save some back on the massive police costs for every game.

Premier League Clubs are not in the poor house. And if they are in the poor house then the club has been run badly.

Burnley have said they are down 50 million if the season isn't completed. Not sure if any other club has given a similar figure publically.

~Rebel~

gstack166 wrote: »

I don’t know and I don’t care, that decision is for someone with higher IQ’s than any of us here.

It’s the end of football as we know it if it’s played behind closed doors, it’s the biggest fcuk you we don’t care about you to fans that they could possibly give and proves that all they care about is money.

It’s actually just plain distasteful to even be hearing about football possibly being played over in the UK anytime soon considering what their going through, but hey, fcuk it if it means Liverpool lifting a trophy tho eh.

Why do you keep talking about Liverpool? This has nothing to do with what we come back to, the facts remain the same irrespective of if they continue the season or start over... it’s pretty irrelevant, this season isn’t the damaging one - it’s next season, 20/21, the one that doesn’t take place at all under your proposal, and the one for whom clubs receive pretty much no revenue, whilst having an average annual wage bill of ~90million pounds to finance, or lose their chief assets.

Your argument is entirely emotional, which is fine, but without any real world backing at all, it’s head in the sand stuff.

gstack166

6 wrote: »

Why is is distasteful? Nobody has said it should be played before it's safe to do so, nobody.

As for your last comment, that says more about you tbh. Not sure why you need to go down that route. Loads of clubs want to get football back soon (when safe). In fact, most of them. Fans too.

That’s not my point at all, course the clubs want it back soon as possible but if it means without fans my opinion is it shouldn’t be back until they can go back.

gstack166

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Why do you keep talking about Liverpool? This has nothing to do with what we come back to, the facts remain the same irrespective of if they continue the season or start over... it’s pretty irrelevant, this season isn’t the damaging one - it’s next season, 20/21, the one that doesn’t take place at all under your proposal, and the one for whom clubs receive pretty much no revenue, whilst having an average annual wage bill of ~90million pounds to finance, or lose their chief assets.

Your argument is entirely emotional, which is fine, but without any real world backing at all, it’s head in the sand stuff.

Because I was accused of wanting the league cancelled to stop Liverpool winning it a few posts back after saying numerous times I’ve no problem with them being declared champions & starting the season off fresh when safe to do so with fans in attendance.

~Rebel~

Put simply, what you want is for many clubs to commit suicide for a moral stand.

gstack166

gstack166 wrote: »

That’s not my point at all, course the clubs want it back soon as possible but if it means without fans my opinion is it shouldn’t be back until they can go back.

It wouldn't be the same without fans in the crowd, it would be frankly weird.

However, I'd take that over clubs going bust, which is what will happen to multiple teams if games aren't played for 18 months.

fyfe79

6 wrote: »

It wouldn't be the same without fans in the crowd, it would be frankly weird.

However, I'd take that over clubs going bust, which is what will happen to multiple teams if games aren't played for 18 months.

The PL 2021/22 would be just Man City playing Man Utd 38 times.

Some craic.

gstack166

6 wrote: »

It wouldn't be the same without fans in the crowd, it would be frankly weird.

However, I'd take that over clubs going bust, which is what will happen to multiple teams if games aren't played for 18 months.

A genuine question, what stops them going bust by playing the games behind closed doors? The premier league have already stated they’ve released the funds early that usually get distributed in the summer to help ease the cash flow problems for clubs now, so in theory they’re safe until August anyways as they’ve received the money they were due. The only revenue they’re down is gate receipts & playing behind closed doors won’t change that.

I don’t grasp the concept that it’s vital to play this games at any cost just to survive. Unless I’m missing some other factors that I don’t know about.

~Rebel~

gstack166 wrote: »

A genuine question, what stops them going bust by playing the games behind closed doors? The premier league have already stated they’ve released the funds early that usually get distributed in the summer to help ease the cash flow problems for clubs now, so in theory they’re safe until August anyways as they’ve received the money they were due. The only revenue they’re down is gate receipts & playing behind closed doors won’t change that.

I don’t grasp the concept that it’s vital to play this games at any cost just to survive. Unless I’m missing some other factors that I don’t know about.

Yeah... you’re forgetting about next year... they got paid for this year, which covers their costs for this year... they won’t for next year unless games take place.

Honestly I feel like I’m taking crazy pills... it’s pretty simply... no games means no revenue from advertising or tv or league placement or Europe. No revenue from those equals no money for wages. No money for wages for a year equals voided contracts and a lot of free agents and dead clubs.

gstack166

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Yeah... you’re forgetting about next year... they got paid for this year, they won’t for next year unless games take place.

Obviously, but there’s 4 months from now until the due date of next season, 4 months ago this virus wasn’t even here, or at least wasn’t envisaged to turn out like it has. A lot can happen between now and August, they’ve plenty time to revisit the scenario again down the line.

gstack166

gstack166 wrote: »

A genuine question, what stops them going busy by playing the games behind closed doors? The premier league have already stated they’ve released the funds early that usually get distributed in the summer to help ease the cash flow problems for clubs no, so in theory they’re safe until August anyways as they’ve received the money they were due. The only revenue they’re down is gate receipts & playing behind closed doors won’t change that.

I don’t grasp the concept that it’s vital to play this games at any cost just to survive. Unless I’m missing some other factors that I don’t know about.

This season, it'll be mainly gate receipts revenue affected if the TV money isn't touched. Most PL clubs could possibly suck this up, even though it'd be a big enough hit.

However, if next season was impacted there's no TV money or no gate receipts. Then clubs would be in big financial trouble.

~Rebel~

gstack166 wrote: »

Obviously, but there’s 4 months from now until the due date of next season, 4 months ago this virus wasn’t even here, or at least wasn’t envisaged to turn out like it has. A lot can happen between now and August, they’ve plenty time to revisit the scenario again down the line.

True, there is the possibility something magical will happen. But it’s more likely that we have to wait for a vaccine before mass gatherings can be permitted. Human trials on various hopeful vaccines are on their first month of 14 month trials. Those trials exist to ensure the side effects of any vaccine (if any of them even work), don’t kill people or have serious side effects. Then, if one of them is successful, you have production which will take several months before it’s freely available for people. So a likelihood of 14-18 months before it’s safe to put 40,000 people together.

And saying “this wasn’t even here 4 months ago”, is akin to shooting someone today, and thinking, “well, they were alive yesterday, maybe they’ll be alive again tomorrow!”.

8-10

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Yeah... you’re forgetting about next year... they got paid for this year, which covers their costs for this year... they won’t for next year unless games take place.

Honestly I feel like I’m taking crazy pills... it’s pretty simply... no games means no revenue from advertising or tv or league placement or Europe. No revenue from those equals no money for wages. No money for wages for a year equals voided contracts and a lot of free agents and dead clubs.

Yeah some clubs are losing a lot of players in the summer and it's going to be hard to get boards and chairmen to sign off on spending much on new players when there's so much still uncertain.

Some clubs have even suggested curtailing spending on players just due to the optics. Can't be seen to throw millions after a new winger when many fans are now out of work and relying on welfare and foodbanks.

This whole thing could widen the chasm between the big clubs and the rest even further.

citytillidie

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Why do you keep talking about Liverpool? This has nothing to do with what we come back to, the facts remain the same irrespective of if they continue the season or start over... it’s pretty irrelevant, this season isn’t the damaging one - it’s next season, 20/21, the one that doesn’t take place at all under your proposal, and the one for whom clubs receive pretty much no revenue, whilst having an average annual wage bill of ~90million pounds to finance, or lose their chief assets.

Your argument is entirely emotional, which is fine, but without any real world backing at all, it’s head in the sand stuff.

Everything for him and a few others revolve around Liverpool its not healthy

Mitch Connor

The PL behind closed makes sense, from the TV money perspective. With TV money in tact, the PL can probably survive.

But it doesn't really help anyone below the PL, where gate receipts are far more important than in the PL. And if the teams below the PL can't survive, I don't know if football in England in general can survive that.

I don't know how football squares that or fixes it. greater redistribution of the PL TV cash so that the EFL clubs get more, to replace average gate reciepts? Its a possible solution (maybe, I obviously don't know the full ins/outs of the finances for each club) but would the PL clubs do it?

While it isn't the responsibility of United or Liverpool or Spurs or Newcastle to insure Acrington Stanley survive this, surely it is the collective responsibility of football to do what they can to ensure football survives.

citytillidie

Mitch Connor wrote: »

The PL behind closed makes sense, from the TV money perspective. With TV money in tact, the PL can probably survive.

But it doesn't really help anyone below the PL, where gate receipts are far more important than in the PL. And if the teams below the PL can't survive, I don't know if football in England in general can survive that.

I don't know how football squares that or fixes it. greater redistribution of the PL TV cash so that the EFL clubs get more, to replace average gate reciepts? Its a possible solution (maybe, I obviously don't know the full ins/outs of the finances for each club) but would the PL clubs do it?

While it isn't the responsibility of United or Liverpool or Spurs or Newcastle to insure Acrington Stanley survive this, surely it is the collective responsibility of football to do what they can to ensure football survives.

PL are giving £125M to the Football league

noodler

Obviously football will need to be played behind closed doors first as it will take alot longer for crowds to be allowed.

How that could be seen as disrespect to the fans is beyond reason, such games wouldn't go ahead at all if not behind closed doors.

gstack166

MD1990 wrote: »

But any true football fan wants the game back asap even if it is behind closed doors.

https://twitter.com/skysports/status/1249681491711463426?s=21

The majority of the over 1k comments underneath this post suggests not only are you wrong but you’re totally out of touch with what match going fans feel about playing behind closed doors.

Iused2likebusts

gstack166 wrote: »

That’s not my point at all, course the clubs want it back soon as possible but if it means without fans my opinion is it shouldn’t be back until they can go back.

Its called making the best of a bad situation. Some restaraunts are doing takeaways now. Teachers and students are trying learning from home. The solution to football is behind closed doors. The solution to us being able to get food is a limited amount of people in a shop at the same time. The solution to a pub reopening will be with limited customers. The alternative is shut everything down indefinetly till we have a vaccine its just not feasible. Football wants to survive, the uk government will need the money from any industry that can generate money. The money football will generate for the Uk governement will help them save future lives.Football behind closed doors will bring positives to a huge part of the population that will need a boost another few months down the line. Nobody wants football behind closed doors but when you know what the alternative is you pick it everytime.

Mitch Connor

citytillidie wrote: »

PL are giving £125M to the Football league

They aren't really.

The 125milliion is money they would have been given anyway, it has just been given earlier.

It helps right now, in lieu of money they are losing now, but it is also money they would have been budgeting for as part of the 20/21 season. They now won't ge that money now.

citytillidie

All eyes will be next on Poland they are easing restrictions on Sunday coming.

Mitch Connor

gstack166 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/skysports/status/1249681491711463426?s=21

The majority of the over 1k comments underneath this post suggests not only are you wrong but you’re totally out of touch with what match going fans feel about playing behind closed doors.

So these fans would rather football didn't come back, and their club likely fold.

I just can't agree with them.

The choice isn't between football behind closed doors and football with fans. It is between no football at all and football behind closed doors. And if you are picking no football at all (as likely to be until next year) I don't see how the majority of clubs can survive that. Even surviving with behind closed doors football is going to be difficult for anyone under the PL (including abroad where the TV deals aren't as big for most 'top' clubs)

gstack166

Mitch Connor wrote: »

So these fans would rather football didn't come back, and their club likely fold.

I just can't agree with them.

The choice isn't between football behind closed doors and football with fans. It is between no football at all and football behind closed doors. And if you are picking no football at all (as likely to be until next year) I don't see how the majority of clubs can survive that. Even surviving with behind closed doors football is going to be difficult for anyone under the PL (including abroad where the TV deals aren't as big for most 'top' clubs)

And that’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it. My opinion was football should be played only when everyone is allowed back into the stadium & I was told most fans want it back ASAP anyway that’s possible & I was shot down when I said that’s not the case for the majority of match day going fans.

There’s no argument here, it’s an objective view on most clubs fans who attend home and away. If that’s beneficial or not to a clubs long term future is another matter. Obviously there’s clubs that will be in trouble I wish no ill on those people/clubs who suffer from any financial suffering - it is the entity of football that I refer to not the innocent individuals who make their living from it.

grumpymunster

There is a definite advantage to playing some sports behind closed doors when the hospitals and security forces are able to manage. In all reality there will be no pubs, restaurants, cinema's, museums or galleries open for months if at all this year. People will need a distraction you cannot expect to be able to keep most of the population in doors for an extended period of time outside of work or shopping with nothing to do.

I am very lucky I work in an essential industry and the company I work for have been able to keep going but even I am sick of Netflix, Sky and Amazon Prime already. There is only so much gardening and painting you can do until the house is pristine or you run out of money.

If at all possible this seasons leagues should be finished, the FA Cup may need to go by the wayside and it is difficult to see how the CL and Europa league can continue as long distance travel will be difficult.

But if social distancing is to be maintained people need to have something to occupy them or to look forward to. There are only so many times you can watch Star Wars but play football nearly everyday and show more of the lower leagues on TV then at least the teams have some revenue and give the smaller clubs some slice of the pie. It may even help the League of Ireland though extended exposure.

I have no time for horse racing I find it tedious in the extreme but that needs to reopen soon as it is not a people intensive sport and by and large crowds are not that important. But an awful lot of people enjoy it and a small flutter (providing it is just a small flutter) will help some people and get another industry operating.

It will be a long long way back to any form of normality but peoples mental health as well as their physically health needs to be addressed the reopening of sports in the absence of spectators when hospitals are over the worst of the crisis I think will be important.