The Telegraph are reporting it, DM are just copy pasting their story.
Could they void the PL due to the Coronavirus? | No | Resuming June 17th
- Thread starter Tarrou
- Start date
Inside the Premier League’s coronavirus meeting
By Laurie Whitwell and David Ornstein Mar 21, 2020
As representatives from all 20 Premier League clubs dialled into Thursday’s conference call hosted at the Brunel Building in Paddington, London, the agenda was clear: reassess the postponement to English football in alignment with the growing coronavirus pandemic.
None of the executives could see each other, rather the list of names ‘present’ at Premier League headquarters appeared on each person’s computer screen across the country, but that did not inhibit a robust dialogue about a number of issues that the current crisis has caused.
For those who went armed with a suspicion the meeting could become embroiled in partisanship there was instead a welcome sense of unity and when Claudia Arney, the Premier League’s interim chair, brought the discussion to a close, a further suspension of matches to April 30 and a firm intention to complete the 2019-20 season had been unanimously agreed.
There were though other matters on the table and by gaining an insight into the subject and tone of those conversations, The Athletic can now address some of the questions many supporters have about how — and when — football might be able to crank back into action.
How realistic is it that English football will resume on April 30?
Sources say there was an acceptance in the room that the date announced would “probably not” see a return of Premier League action, but a line had to be drawn to provide some kind of structure for clubs.
April 30 is far enough in the future whereby a semblance of planning can take place. “You can now give players a set three weeks off,” said one executive. “If you push it back a week at a time everyone is in no-man’s land.
“Equally, there is no point making the date too far off — say May 30 — and then it turns out we could play games earlier, as bleak as the situation looks right now.”
Another director was left with the impression the Premier League would do “everything they can” to get football back on by the end of May, even if that meant going behind closed doors — although curiously the issue of playing in empty stadiums was not specifically discussed. A number of clubs privately accept that in these unprecedented times, drastic measures are required.
What would this delay mean for the start of next season?
While such particulars will only be ascertained once the full effect of coronavirus is known, it has been speculated among decision-makers that as far as fitness is concerned players might only require a fortnight break in between campaigns due to the inevitable long hiatus now, rather than the customary six weeks in summer.
People would then simply have to come to terms more quickly with however their seasons finished — good or bad — and the only real issue would relate to the transfer market, and whether clubs could accept a truncated window in which to do business.
Was the summer window discussed on Thursday?
It was, because a number of executives are aware of particular cases that could get messy without clarification. Players often have contract extensions that need to be activated by a certain date, the middle of May usually, but some clubs would be unable to hit the button without knowing what division they might be in and what budget they might have.
This three-week period before the next meeting will allow for discussions to be had on such details. In the meeting one suggestion was that dates in contracts could be pushed back to correlate with the postponement of the football calendar, as long as the Professional Footballers’ Association concurred.
“Everyone accepts there needs to be a common-sense approach,” said a source. “We could in effect rewrite contracts so May becomes June, or July becomes August. It would need all parties to agree of course. But it felt like everyone was on the same page. We are all going to be affected one way or another, so as long as new rules don’t advantage anyone, I think people will be sensible.”
Could we yet see the campaign declared null and void?
During the conference call there was a collective, concerted message that the 2019-20 season had to be finished.
Ed Woodward, Manchester United’s executive vice-chairman, was among the most strident on this point. Described as being “very fair” in his wider input, Woodward was nevertheless firm in saying that even if the season had to run into September or October, that should be the course of action. There was no hint of trying to deny Liverpool a first title in 30 years, as might mischievously be proposed by some.
Uniting all those dialling in was the prospect of a massive financial penalty for failing to complete the season. As The Athletic revealed on Friday, executives were told that broadcasters such as Sky and BT Sport could demand a total of £762 million be returned if the campaign was curtailed, to cover the games still due to be shown on TV. It would be considered breach of contract.
There would be the prospect of negotiation on that figure, sources argue, given the Premier League’s importance to both channels — but it remains enough of a concern to bring a common consensus.
“There was a togetherness that we need to sort this out,” said a source. “Finance was the big motivator.”
This is not about greed, however. “Ultimately, we’re just businesses that make tiny profits,” said one Premier League executive. “If the cashflow dries up we’re no different to hotel groups or anything else. If we don’t put on the show we don’t get paid. If we don’t finish the season it’s a massive, massive problem.
“It’s not just the TV money — after that the sponsors won’t pay you because they’re not on TV and you’ll also miss out on gate money, which is £5 million to £6 million per game for some clubs.”
Another club director said: “Losing money like that doesn’t just affect the first-team players, it affects the receptionist, the canteen staff. These are the people who possibly face redundancies. Sub-contractors, pie sellers, people who rely on the club for their businesses. They are the first cutbacks when you don’t have the income arriving.
“If somebody asked me to take a pay cut in these circumstances, I’d do it tomorrow. If it meant keeping me and other people in jobs, why wouldn’t you?
“What people need to realise with big clubs is they also have big expenditure — you’re not talking hundreds of thousands but hundreds of millions. It could have catastrophic effects.”
Did any clubs offer an alternative opinion?
Karren Brady, West Ham United’s chief executive, and Paul Barber, the equivalent for Brighton & Hove Albion, were said to express a note of caution on the realities of finishing the season, given the scale of the crisis is not yet known.
If, for example, humanitarian reasons mean football cannot be resumed until July or later, the prospect of completing the remaining nine rounds of fixtures and starting a new season in a suitable manner would come into doubt.
Brady has written in her Sun newspaper column that in the event of a curtailment the “only fair and reasonable thing to do is declare the whole season null and void” but that would invite legal challenges from clubs in the Championship chasing promotion, notably Leeds United and West Bromwich Albion.
There was no talk of league positions during the call — with “egos parked at the door” — but it is clear that any attempt to relegate the clubs currently in the drop zone, as some observers have proposed, would automatically bring court cases from Norwich City, Aston Villa (who have a game in hand), and Bournemouth.
Was it all about money?
No. It was also touched on how clubs have a responsibility to fans and communities in these difficult times. “Football is a release,” said a source. “People will be getting bored and going stir crazy. Broadcasting games can be good for mental well-being.”
To fit all the missed fixtures, Gary Neville has suggested that players could play nine days in a row in a “festival of football” once it is safe to do so. Is this feasible?
“It would be something spectacular,” Neville said on Sky’s Debate programme. “Football can bring some hope and joy to the country when we finally come out of this crisis.”
Well intentioned, sources say that in reality this would be extremely unlikely. Neville built his career on absolute dedication, but the modern game is different to his era and the PFA would have a view on such physical exposure.
“I’d be gobsmacked,” said one executive. “I don’t think clubs would let it come to that. It would put players at risk of injury and whether you are Man United or Accrington Stanley nobody wants a player to snap his Achilles through fatigue and be out for six months for the sake of finishing the season quickly.”
https://theathletic.com/1691634/2020/03/21/premier-league-meeting-qa/?redirected=1
By Laurie Whitwell and David Ornstein Mar 21, 2020
As representatives from all 20 Premier League clubs dialled into Thursday’s conference call hosted at the Brunel Building in Paddington, London, the agenda was clear: reassess the postponement to English football in alignment with the growing coronavirus pandemic.
None of the executives could see each other, rather the list of names ‘present’ at Premier League headquarters appeared on each person’s computer screen across the country, but that did not inhibit a robust dialogue about a number of issues that the current crisis has caused.
For those who went armed with a suspicion the meeting could become embroiled in partisanship there was instead a welcome sense of unity and when Claudia Arney, the Premier League’s interim chair, brought the discussion to a close, a further suspension of matches to April 30 and a firm intention to complete the 2019-20 season had been unanimously agreed.
There were though other matters on the table and by gaining an insight into the subject and tone of those conversations, The Athletic can now address some of the questions many supporters have about how — and when — football might be able to crank back into action.
How realistic is it that English football will resume on April 30?
Sources say there was an acceptance in the room that the date announced would “probably not” see a return of Premier League action, but a line had to be drawn to provide some kind of structure for clubs.
April 30 is far enough in the future whereby a semblance of planning can take place. “You can now give players a set three weeks off,” said one executive. “If you push it back a week at a time everyone is in no-man’s land.
“Equally, there is no point making the date too far off — say May 30 — and then it turns out we could play games earlier, as bleak as the situation looks right now.”
Another director was left with the impression the Premier League would do “everything they can” to get football back on by the end of May, even if that meant going behind closed doors — although curiously the issue of playing in empty stadiums was not specifically discussed. A number of clubs privately accept that in these unprecedented times, drastic measures are required.
What would this delay mean for the start of next season?
While such particulars will only be ascertained once the full effect of coronavirus is known, it has been speculated among decision-makers that as far as fitness is concerned players might only require a fortnight break in between campaigns due to the inevitable long hiatus now, rather than the customary six weeks in summer.
People would then simply have to come to terms more quickly with however their seasons finished — good or bad — and the only real issue would relate to the transfer market, and whether clubs could accept a truncated window in which to do business.
Was the summer window discussed on Thursday?
It was, because a number of executives are aware of particular cases that could get messy without clarification. Players often have contract extensions that need to be activated by a certain date, the middle of May usually, but some clubs would be unable to hit the button without knowing what division they might be in and what budget they might have.
This three-week period before the next meeting will allow for discussions to be had on such details. In the meeting one suggestion was that dates in contracts could be pushed back to correlate with the postponement of the football calendar, as long as the Professional Footballers’ Association concurred.
“Everyone accepts there needs to be a common-sense approach,” said a source. “We could in effect rewrite contracts so May becomes June, or July becomes August. It would need all parties to agree of course. But it felt like everyone was on the same page. We are all going to be affected one way or another, so as long as new rules don’t advantage anyone, I think people will be sensible.”
Could we yet see the campaign declared null and void?
During the conference call there was a collective, concerted message that the 2019-20 season had to be finished.
Ed Woodward, Manchester United’s executive vice-chairman, was among the most strident on this point. Described as being “very fair” in his wider input, Woodward was nevertheless firm in saying that even if the season had to run into September or October, that should be the course of action. There was no hint of trying to deny Liverpool a first title in 30 years, as might mischievously be proposed by some.
Uniting all those dialling in was the prospect of a massive financial penalty for failing to complete the season. As The Athletic revealed on Friday, executives were told that broadcasters such as Sky and BT Sport could demand a total of £762 million be returned if the campaign was curtailed, to cover the games still due to be shown on TV. It would be considered breach of contract.
There would be the prospect of negotiation on that figure, sources argue, given the Premier League’s importance to both channels — but it remains enough of a concern to bring a common consensus.
“There was a togetherness that we need to sort this out,” said a source. “Finance was the big motivator.”
This is not about greed, however. “Ultimately, we’re just businesses that make tiny profits,” said one Premier League executive. “If the cashflow dries up we’re no different to hotel groups or anything else. If we don’t put on the show we don’t get paid. If we don’t finish the season it’s a massive, massive problem.
“It’s not just the TV money — after that the sponsors won’t pay you because they’re not on TV and you’ll also miss out on gate money, which is £5 million to £6 million per game for some clubs.”
Another club director said: “Losing money like that doesn’t just affect the first-team players, it affects the receptionist, the canteen staff. These are the people who possibly face redundancies. Sub-contractors, pie sellers, people who rely on the club for their businesses. They are the first cutbacks when you don’t have the income arriving.
“If somebody asked me to take a pay cut in these circumstances, I’d do it tomorrow. If it meant keeping me and other people in jobs, why wouldn’t you?
“What people need to realise with big clubs is they also have big expenditure — you’re not talking hundreds of thousands but hundreds of millions. It could have catastrophic effects.”
Did any clubs offer an alternative opinion?
Karren Brady, West Ham United’s chief executive, and Paul Barber, the equivalent for Brighton & Hove Albion, were said to express a note of caution on the realities of finishing the season, given the scale of the crisis is not yet known.
If, for example, humanitarian reasons mean football cannot be resumed until July or later, the prospect of completing the remaining nine rounds of fixtures and starting a new season in a suitable manner would come into doubt.
Brady has written in her Sun newspaper column that in the event of a curtailment the “only fair and reasonable thing to do is declare the whole season null and void” but that would invite legal challenges from clubs in the Championship chasing promotion, notably Leeds United and West Bromwich Albion.
There was no talk of league positions during the call — with “egos parked at the door” — but it is clear that any attempt to relegate the clubs currently in the drop zone, as some observers have proposed, would automatically bring court cases from Norwich City, Aston Villa (who have a game in hand), and Bournemouth.
Was it all about money?
No. It was also touched on how clubs have a responsibility to fans and communities in these difficult times. “Football is a release,” said a source. “People will be getting bored and going stir crazy. Broadcasting games can be good for mental well-being.”
To fit all the missed fixtures, Gary Neville has suggested that players could play nine days in a row in a “festival of football” once it is safe to do so. Is this feasible?
“It would be something spectacular,” Neville said on Sky’s Debate programme. “Football can bring some hope and joy to the country when we finally come out of this crisis.”
Well intentioned, sources say that in reality this would be extremely unlikely. Neville built his career on absolute dedication, but the modern game is different to his era and the PFA would have a view on such physical exposure.
“I’d be gobsmacked,” said one executive. “I don’t think clubs would let it come to that. It would put players at risk of injury and whether you are Man United or Accrington Stanley nobody wants a player to snap his Achilles through fatigue and be out for six months for the sake of finishing the season quickly.”
https://theathletic.com/1691634/2020/03/21/premier-league-meeting-qa/?redirected=1
The telegraph have already had a few cracks at what Will supposedly happen.
They don't know anything beyond anyone else.
Some teams in lower leagues have 10 or more games left and would need playoffs too.
You can't just cram 13 games into 6 weeks as it'll be a logistical nightmare with fixture computers, police, bookings and all sorts.
My point is just that the DM is a shit newspaper that is not worth its bandwidth and it’s no point quoting it. They were running the same story as Telegraph were.
I am convinced something terrible happened to Gary Neville's brain while he was managing Valencia. Imagine suggesting clubs play all their remaining games over a period of 9 days, then having the audacity to call it the Festival of Football. Not to mention half of those clubs still have 10 games to finish. What, are they expected to play twice in a day?
The guy's lost his marbles completely.
The guy's lost his marbles completely.
There have been some comparisons between the situation in Italy and the UK with the UK said to be 2 weeks behind Italy.
I really don't see Serie A resuming until, at the very earliest, the beginning of May and more realistically I don't think will resume until mid-May maybe even late May. Therefore, I can't see the premier league resuming until June. At this point, next season would have to be rescheduled in some way if they want to finish the season. I'm still in favour of finishing the season because I think it's the only fair way to determine the winners and losers.
I really don't see Serie A resuming until, at the very earliest, the beginning of May and more realistically I don't think will resume until mid-May maybe even late May. Therefore, I can't see the premier league resuming until June. At this point, next season would have to be rescheduled in some way if they want to finish the season. I'm still in favour of finishing the season because I think it's the only fair way to determine the winners and losers.
Over 600 people died in Italy last Friday, Football is probably the last thing on their minds right now
This is spectacularly dumb.
You're right but like the Premier League, there are teams who need to sort out the future of Italian football. These are businesses which can't stop playing forever. They'll also be thinking about when football can resume and what can be done about the league. The same for every country in Europe right now.
He was only resurrected a week ago after the champaign celebration tweet.Gary Neville life status:
☐ Alive
Dead
Dammit Gary.
Yep. If anything damages the "integrity" of the league, nonsense like that certainly does.
Although back in the early 90s my boys Wycombe in the conference played something like 12-13 games in the last month! Including back to back days and 3 in 4 days!
And there wasn't loads of rotation back then!
Mismanagement of this pandemic almost ceremony means no end to this season. We'll be on to wave two or three of the virus in June.
So clubs better get that £762m ready to payback...
So clubs better get that £762m ready to payback...
9 games in 6 weeks would be fine if it were just the Premier League left. There's also the Fa and European Cups. That's up to 10 additional games.
Sorry, only saw it on Twitter. Either way, it seems like that’s the planned outcome. Not a chance it happens mind.
If the do not get the season up and running again by the end of May, I just do not see how the season ends. As hinted in this article, if this season cannot be ended, then that £760m fine could be negotiated. As for prize money, whatever is there could be split with teams which would spread the pain.
I say this as a bigger problem, in my opinion, would be that in order to save this season they would then have to put similar limitations on next. Surely TV would rather lose 25% of this season rather than a bigger proportion of next?
At some point a compromise is going to have to reached. This I think will come down to what percentage of each season will be lost. For instance, at this moment in time if the loss is 10% of next season to save 25% of this, then they will do that. However, if it means to save this season requires a 30%+ reduction of next season, then they will void this season as a 30% loss would be even more ruinous.
Bizzare isn’t it?Just read the league in Belarus is still going on
Shocking stuff. Think its the only professional league in world that's still playing. (I stand to be corrected on this, it's what the article said)
Super crazy decision even though they only have 69 cases. That number can soar in a matter of days.
Anyway, with Italy confirming the highest death toll in a 24 hour period, it's really sad to see the state this virus has brought upon the world, all the panic and death, football just seems soooo trivial right now, as much as I miss it, its meaningless.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Aye
Honestly if PL somehow restarts in next three months then they'll have to keep whole squads in isolation and every game's deffo played bcd. It just seems absolutely ridiculous. In my country we were told today that borders could be closed for another two years because some countries will be dealing with this in 2021 and even in 2022.
His point was about Liverpool and that date.
How many other games were played with fans there that midweek?
If the issue here is another club made a silly decision, that doesn't make his point moot/wrong, it just means another club were wrong too? And as this is a UK/United site (lots of other posters too), you can imagine there will be more focus on the Liverpool game (down the road with thousands of people from Madrid/Spain) than the other game?
Lots of things have been done wrong (in hindsight) but maybe that one could have been done differently? (whichever club it was?)
I remember making a post on matchday saying how irresposible that was from the city of Liverpool and Liverpool FC (and Leipzig as well). They knew. We all knew.
Until Arteta was confirmed to have Covid-19 the Premier League was continuing as normal on the weekend following Liverpool Atletico. There was no travel ban in place and no other games in England were being played behind closed doors. You can’t ban away fans from attending but still allow home fans in either. Spain was at the beginning of their outbreak which was just starting to explode in Madrid.
Perhaps the government should’ve stepped in earlier. Blaming Liverpool for making the outbreak worse is tribal BS.
Yeah, many of us raised that point.
That the Liverpool hierarchy decided to allow 50k people to attend the game, for no other reason than to create an atmosphere, speaks volumes for their priorities. It wasn't if they weren't aware of the threat either, evidenced by Klopp's OTT reaction to one of his fans offering a handshake.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
If no Premier League players or managers had tested positive a few days prior, Premier League games would’ve gone ahead as normal with full stadiums the weekend after our game with Atletico. United and their away fans would’ve travelled to London for a packed game at Spurs.
Would you be blasting United, Spurs and everyone else in the league for carrying on as normal?
At the time of our game with Atletico no players, staff, coaches or managers were infected. As soon as Arteta had it games were called off.
Can you say, beyond any reasonable doubt, that there was not a single member of the fanbase in attendance that night carrying the virus? No, you can't, and neither could any of the Liverpool hierarchy, but they allowed the fans to attend despite the risk attached. Leipzig did the same thing the night before and was equally shamed for it before you claim anti-Liverpool bias.
But could you say without any doubt that fans of other clubs didn’t have it? Games were going to go ahead as normal prior to Arteta’s announcement.
Shouldn’t all clubs be shamed in that case?
That's not true.
LASK and United decided to play their game behind closed days only 24 hours after the Liverpool game, opting to show responsibility rather than creating an atmosphere for a meaningless football match. The Arteta announcement came after that.
There were several other leagues already shut down before that too.
Nice idea in theory (normally in two months things can change a fair bit) but reality is all the models say U.K going to be in a bleak place around that time with huge number of cases so I really can't see it. Add on another six weeks to that date and perhaps there may be a chance.
Add that to the contrasting natures of the Chinese and UK political structures. The people of the former are very used to having limitations on their freedoms. The latter not so much.
The decision to let fans attend Liverpool vs Atletico was beyond stupid.
I think the league will end up getting voided with no-one relegated and a few teams promoted. I'd be shocked and delighted if we are over coronavirus by the summer.
Wowzer. That's just crazy
A part of me wants to believe these conspiracy nuts after reading that!
I didn’t ask about that game. I asked if Premier League clubs would’ve prevented fans from coming to games on the weekend following our game with Atletico, prior to Arteta testing positive. Some clubs decided to play behind closed doors but no clubs were doing that in England unless ordered to by UEFA or the Premier League.
To say otherwise would be daft.
Rather reminds me of the Greenland tournament. Seems like fun, but you better have a large roster for rotation.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2019/09/20/sports/greenland-soccer.amp.html
It’s not an unnecessary risk at all and it’s not at all like your boss telling you to speed on your scooter, least not because that would be breaking the law. But yeah, it’s not an unnecessary risk, it’s something that literally cannot be controlled and It’s with us now. The risk is always going to be there with this thing now.The idea that footballers will sue or quit the game and give up all this money they earn because of this virus, which will give pretty much all of them at worse a bad flu, is a fantasy. Loads of people with non critical jobs have got the virus and have you heard of anybody suing ? Well this the same thing. They’re not extra special because they’re footballers.
How can you promote anyone?
Leeds and West Brom don't have anything like unassailable leads.
Hell, we're saying Liverpool haven't actually won it yet, and they're miles clear!
Any legal stuff the two teams above might pull would surely be matched by anyone 3rd/4th etc.
You simply play it out, or you void it. You can't be doing bits and pieces.
Wasnt really what he was saying though i dont think.
He said how there was one time at united they played 4 games in 7 days.
So what he was saying was if they have to finish this league before the next one starts they'll find a way to do it.
He was speaking to ssn for over 2 hours and tbf he was brilliant.
Yeah, the legalities concerning European qualification and promoted/relegated teams is the main thing preventing the FA from voiding the season entirely I'd imagine. I'm sure they'd be more than happy to void the season, sparing themselves a massive headache trying to sort this mess out.
I haven't a clue what's going to happen at this point, but we simply must start football up soon if only to prevent many clubs outside the prem going bust.
Have you got a link to the interview?
I still think he has brain issues regardless. Although I don't think it's the cause of the problem, constantly resurrecting him cannot be helping matters.
Let the guy die in peace, you know?