Could they void the PL due to the Coronavirus? | No | Resuming June 17th

Tarrou

Full Member
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
15,462
Location
Sydney
Jesus christ, we are 5 days into May and the teams haven't even got a date as to when training resumes.

This season is done. It will take teams 4 weeks to even get prepared again, let alone fit all the remaining games in before July.

Ifs buts and maybe's and Fifa/Uefa can talk as much shit as they want, but do you think that any club will be paying wages past 30 June 2020 to player if their contract has expired? If for example, Alexis Sanchez contract ran out at the end of this season, do people really think United would just keep paying his wage for an extra few weeks? Like feck they would. They can't wait for that bloke to get out the fecking door.

Seasons over. This is literally posturing by the Premier League in attempt to demonstrate they are trying to mitigate loss so that the TV deals don't collapse.
I agree with your wider point but I don't really understand why players contracts is a big problem?

Surely clubs just release the players they want to release. And offer new deals or short terms contracts to the ones they want to keep.

In your example United can just let Alexis go and continue without him, surely?
 

stevoc

Full Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2011
Messages
11,030
Location
And Solskjær has won it!
If the season can't finish behind closed doors then you have to base it on the current table? Unless you have a better solution?
Pull names from a hat to decide, the champions, Euro spots and who gets relegated.

Thats about as fair as deciding them based on an unfinished season where every team hasn't even played the same amount of games.
 

Leroy The Red

Full Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
13,003
Location
London
Again, please refer to post #9922 and #9943.

I keep explaining that testing is a diagnostic tool, not a precaution. How is it supposed to reduce the risk of transmission? Are you suggesting doing scans every day could lower the risk of getting cancer? Yes, testing in an industry alone (except healthcare) is ineffective in controlling the spread and it makes no difference at all.

What I'm asking is that how can you be so sure that you don't have the virus. According to WHO, the sensitivity of rapid tests ranges from 34% to 80%, and even with the best ones, 80% is far from ideal. So you've got to develop a rapid kit with 100% sensitivity, or you are just crossing your fingers hoping the players don't fall into the 20%.

https://www.who.int/news-room/comme...t-of-care-immunodiagnostic-tests-for-covid-19

As a healthcare professional I feel obligated to clear the misleading information about testing. Testing aims to screen potential transmission in high risk individuals (i.e. people with symptoms, those with close contacts with a confirmed COVID-19 patient, healthcare professionals). We are looking for positive cases so that we can manage them, not negative cases so that we feel safe and do whatever we want.

The actual point of testing is for epidemiological study so that the government can have a better picture about the rate of transmission, make estimation and tighten/loosen the measures accordingly. A single negative result is meaningless and not indicative, you should only feel happy when the absolute majority of the society is tested negative and that's the time for us to go out.

I don't need the look for the Internet as I work in this field and I know all the kits, their advantages and disadvantages. I actually wonder how your plan works, are you suggesting the Premier League to outsource the testing, or it sets up a lab on his own and does all the testing itself?
Seems like you're trying to argue one point with separate things I've mentioned. Still not sure why you're talking about cancer again, I didnt suggest testing for cancer everyday lowers the risk. As a healthcare professional I have to say i'm slightly surprised at the comparison. If you have five cancer patients and five without cancer and they mingle all together, you testing or not testing them isn't going to change the fact the five without cancer will not be getting infected with cancer due to mixing with the five cancer patients because cancer doesn't work like that. If you have five corona patients and five without corona and they mingle together, if you test and find positives you would stop them for mingling and therefore lessen the chance of spread, whereas if you let them mingle without testing the five without corona could then be infected with corona.

The Bundesliga just tested all their players and they've found ten infected players. Those players will now stay away. Had they not tested these players and let them mix with the others, the likelihood of transmission would be greater, no? because there'd be infected players mingling with those not infected. I mean isn't this all just logic?
Even if testing isn't 100% accurate, if enough people who have it and are found positive and are kept away this will still contribute to a lesser overall spread even if you have false negatives, how can this make no difference at all? when you've got a load of tested positive people self isolating. Isn't this what every country in the world has been doing? Saying a single negative result is meaningless is like saying a single vote is meaningless.

Weirdly, none of this was actually relevant to my main point and that's because the PL are going to be using the best available equipment whereas somewhere like Mcdonalds wont. Mcdonald's can give their staff all the gloves and masks they want but if they're not testing them then working in that environment will carry a greater risk of transmission than a football pitch will. How long do you think Mcd's staff can work in tightly congested hot kitchen before sweating and needing to remove their mask? How many staff members will unknowingly touch their face, nose or mouth and then go on to touch the chip pan handle? the till? that weird machine that squirts mcflurry's. Now of course none of this would matter if there was nobody infected (and I know you said otherwise but I'm gonna go with my instinct and say a person who is NOT infected with a virus CANNOT infect another person with said virus, because they don't have it....) but how would they ever know anyway when they're not testing anyone? Well apart from taking their temperature.

Also do you think I'm making this up or something about the equipment :lol:

https://www.cambridgeindependent.co...-as-it-tests-staff-seven-days-a-week-9107468/
https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news...by-cambridge-team-to-be-deployed-in-hospitals
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...-of-securing-covid-19-testing-kits-for-return

MBA II is able to deliver results while the patient waits, helping healthcare workers ensure that those infected can be quickly directed to specialised wards. Whereas current tests can take over 24 hours or longer to deliver their results, SAMBA is able to deliver a diagnosis in less than 90 minutes.


The tests have been validated by Public Health England, Cambridge, in 102 patient samples and shown to have 98.7% sensitivity (ability to correctly identify positive cases) and 100% specificity (the ability to correctly identify negative cases) compared to the currently used NHS/Public Health England test. This has enabled the team to obtain a CE mark.
You wonder how my plan works? It's not my plan , I'm a person on the internet, I just recycle crap I read online and then try and use logic and common sense to come to a final opinion, I have little say in what happens and my knowledge is basic at best, I do not have the overall blueprint for the PL's plans. But what I do know is those plans will have little or no effect on the governments capabilities to get the rest of the country in order and that was my actual point from the get go, now its spiralled into territory that it needn't.
 
Last edited:

predator

Youth NITK
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
4,944
Location
South Manchester
How about the finishing the seasons with penalty shootouts only.
Basically condense the last 9-10 games into simple penalty shootouts.
It could probably be finished within a week and wouldn't require too much match fitness.

On the 1st day back Ole and the lads could travel down to North London and bag 3 points in a quick shootout with spurs, then head south to Brighton (another 3 points) and finally head back to Manchester to have one final shootout with Bournemouth and call it a night. Potentially 9 points in a day and not too much to physically wear out the players. I'm sure they'd be raring to go again the day after tomorrow, in 3 more cities, potentially.

I'm sure some environmentalists will be criticising the carbon footprints of the clubs due to all the mileage but its doable.

Flabbergasted that this hasn't been suggested yet.

Hehe
 

mariachi-19

Full Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
16,048
Location
I may be the devil, but i'm not a monster
I agree with your wider point but I don't really understand why players contracts is a big problem?

Surely clubs just release the players they want to release. And offer new deals or short terms contracts to the ones they want to keep.

In your example United can just let Alexis go and continue without him, surely?
Youre not factoring in players that don't want to sign new contracts due to risk of injury? Can be extremely harmful for a team thats fighting relegation or promotion where players just up ship and go.
 

InfiniteBoredom

Full Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2013
Messages
10,482
Location
Melbourne
There’s simply no workable solution besides finishing the season once a vaccine is found or voiding it entirely. CL/EL places, relegation, promotion, there’s no way of finishing as is and make a lot of clubs massively upset. Reverting to last season will upset an equal amount of teams, but at least it won’t be arbitrary.
 

Tarrou

Full Member
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
15,462
Location
Sydney
Youre not factoring in players that don't want to sign new contracts due to risk of injury? Can be extremely harmful for a team thats fighting relegation or promotion where players just up ship and go.
if they don't want to sign then they won't sign, but I doubt there are a lot who fall in that category who are integral to promotion and relegation battles

It's not ideal but compared to the risk to clubs if the season is not completing it seems fairly trivial
 

Mindhunter

Full Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2013
Messages
2,733
How about the finishing the seasons with penalty shootouts only.
Basically condense the last 9-10 games into simple penalty shootouts.
It could probably be finished within a week and wouldn't require too much match fitness.

On the 1st day back Ole and the lads could travel down to North London and bag 3 points in a quick shootout with spurs, then head south to Brighton (another 3 points) and finally head back to Manchester to have one final shootout with Bournemouth and call it a night. Potentially 9 points in a day and not too much to physically wear out the players. I'm sure they'd be raring to go again the day after tomorrow, in 3 more cities, potentially.

I'm sure some environmentalists will be criticising the carbon footprints of the clubs due to all the mileage but its doable.

Flabbergasted that this hasn't been suggested yet.

Hehe
Not at all. We shouldn’t finish it like that because it is unfair. If we go down this route we need to replay every match already played using this approach first and take it from there. Tim Krul will surely be the highest paid footballer for about 2 months.
 

anant

Full Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2015
Messages
5,725
This is the most damaging option. I'd say the chances of this happening are close to 0% due to the amount of legal action this would cause.
Actually the legal options would be much lesser than considering the current table as final. Like I said, teams wouldn't accept relegation and missing out on CL football especially when teams haven't faced similar quality of opposition.
The 3 teams that would be relegated take the legal route, so will Utd (if City's appeal goes through), SHU, Wolves, Arsenal and all other teams that are in races to qualify for Europe
 

Pexbo

Online influencer who has never watched Star Wars
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
48,452
Location
Brizzle
What a surprise that John Aldridge has a completely Liverpool centric view:

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/spo...iverpool-wont-ideal-scenario-premier-18198760


I can understand what the Brighton chairman has been saying about losing home advantage when they play at neutral grounds but he's not mentioned that the sides they were due to play away are in the same boat so it's swings and roundabouts for me.

They have still got to play 'away' to the likes of Leicester, Southampton and Burnley so it would arguably give them a better chance of getting a result!
Yes, having to play Leicester, Southampton and Burnley (and Norwich) away is equal to having a home advantage for Arsenal, Man City, Liverpool, Man United and Newcastle.

It’s just another bad faith argument from someone who is more desperate for Liverpool to win the league than for the league to finish with any sort of integrity.
 

montpelier

Full Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
10,555
OK, I might have been convinced that footy can come back because every other activity apart from pubs are trying to or feel justified in wanting to or whatever.

But A BCD neutral grounds no relegation resumption is beyond farcical. There may not be any Euro footy to qualify for anyway. Who is going to reinstate their sky subs to watch that?
 

RobinLFC

Cries when Liverpool doesn't get praised
Joined
May 20, 2014
Messages
12,279
Location
Belgium
Supports
Liverpool
But A BCD neutral grounds no relegation resumption is beyond farcical. There may not be any Euro footy to qualify for anyway. Who is going to reinstate their sky subs to watch that?
Haven't been following the developments since last weekend - is that really a thing or what? :lol: So you'd have the top 2-8 or something playing for European places and all other games have literally no meaning at all anymore? Good luck getting people to watch Norwich-Bournemouth if relegation is scrapped.
 

christinaa

Gossip Girl
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Messages
6,103
Premier League doctors raise concerns over resuming season.

A number of Premier League club doctors have raised a range of concerns with league bosses over plans to resume the season, BBC Sport has learned.

One issue that the senior medics have sought assurances over includes their own liability and insurance cover if players contract the virus.

The Premier League has also been asked to provide some clarity over medical protocols, testing and player welfare.

The Premier League is hopeful of a potential 8 June resumption.

The 20 club doctors have been holding their own discussions about Project Restart - the label given to plans to resume action - with a view to feeding their thoughts into the Premier League's leadership.

A Premier League source told the BBC that they viewed the move by the medics as a natural part of the process with clubs, and a means of reaching "the best possible set of protocols".

They also confirmed that the league was in talks with insurance companies over the issue of club and doctor liability, and that this would be brought up with government representatives this week.

The Premier League is represented on a cross-sport working group of medical experts and public health officials which will meet for the second time in a week on Wednesday.

The panel is devising the health and hygiene measures that players, managers and club staff will be asked to agree to before full training and then competition can resume, but only if the government deems it safe to do so.

The government is set to review its lockdown measures later this week, with the Premier League meeting to vote on the plans next Monday. A number of players and sports medics have already voiced their concerns about whether it is safe to return to action.

Eamonn Salmon, the chief executive of the Football Medicine and Performance Association (FMPA), has told BBC Sport that opinion among doctors and physios at English football clubs regarding resumption plans was varied.

Speaking last week, he said: "I guess the views of our members will be a kind of snapshot of society really.

"There are those who think it can be done, there are those that are doubtful and there are those that probably suggest it is an impossible task.

"We have to wait, this is a waiting game all the time, it is such a changing landscape and fluctuating on a day to day basis.

"This is just the start in some respects, whatever proposals are put there it is then open to debate and for comment and opinion to feed into that."

If training is resumed before social distancing rules are relaxed, BBC Sport understands players will be tested for coronavirus twice a week and would be screened for symptoms every day.

All tests would be carried out by health professionals at a drive-through NHS testing facility that each club would have access to. Training grounds will be optimised for social distancing and high hygiene levels.

In addition:

  • Players must arrive at training grounds in kit and wear masks at all times.
  • They must not shower or eat on the premises. If clubs want to provide players with food, it must be delivered as a takeaway to players' cars.
  • Only essential medical treatment would be allowed, with all medical staff in full PPE.
  • All meetings and reviews must take place virtually and off-site.
In Germany, where the Bundesliga is set to become the first major football league in Europe to return to competition, 10 positive results have been returned from 1,724 coronavirus tests from clubs in the top two divisions.

Cubs have been training in groups and the tests are being taken before a planned return to training as teams.

Measures including "the isolation of the affected person" have been taken, said the DFL.

Top-flight side Cologne have had no further Covid-19 infections after three people tested positive last week.

Bundesliga officials suggested resuming on 9 May but the government delayed the decision and a restart may now be on 16 or 23 May.
 
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
4,224
Haven't been following the developments since last weekend - is that really a thing or what? :lol: So you'd have the top 2-8 or something playing for European places and all other games have literally no meaning at all anymore? Good luck getting people to watch Norwich-Bournemouth if relegation is scrapped.
I would have zero interest in watching these games.

I can’t remember what fixtures Utd have left - but I doubt I’d be interested in watching Utd play anyone in the bottom half in a pointless game. I certainly won’t be paying to watch us play against a team that has no incentive to play.

utterly pointless.

really can’t believe the PL can be strong handed into this. This solution is worse than not seeing any football.
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
96,024
Location
Dublin, Ireland
If the season can't finish behind closed doors then you have to base it on the current table? Unless you have a better solution?
BCD - still too many safety risks and by all accounts players are not happy to play until it’s fully safe. Playing in masks? Ludicrous. What happens if someone contracts it? It’ll all halt again.
PPG - unfair on those teams that setup defensively to survive and maybe don’t score as many.
As they stand - unfair again because several teams are within distance of top 4, United included. Relegation, Villa are bottom 3 but a game in hand.

The only LOGICAL thing is to cancel this season,
and try to prepare for when football can restart as well as supporting the clubs who very much may go to the wall. There is too much focus on liverpool and winning the title when the focus should be on safety first and helping clubs survive.
 

Figgins

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 2, 2016
Messages
326
Location
Araʻura
Seems like you're trying to argue one point with separate things I've mentioned. Still not sure why you're talking about cancer again, I didnt suggest testing for cancer everyday lowers the risk. As a healthcare professional I have to say i'm slightly surprised at the comparison. If you have five cancer patients and five without cancer and they mingle all together, you testing or not testing them isn't going to change the fact the five without cancer will not be getting infected with cancer due to mixing with the five cancer patients because cancer doesn't work like that. If you have five corona patients and five without corona and they mingle together, if you test and find positives you would stop them for mingling and therefore lessen the chance of spread, whereas if you let them mingle without testing the five without corona could then be infected with corona.

The Bundesliga just tested all their players and they've found ten infected players. Those players will now stay away. Had they not tested these players and let them mix with the others, the likelihood of transmission would be greater, no? because there'd be infected players mingling with those not infected. I mean isn't this all just logic?
Even if testing isn't 100% accurate, if enough people who have it and are found positive and are kept away this will still contribute to a lesser overall spread even if you have false negatives, how can this make no difference at all? when you've got a load of tested positive people self isolating. Isn't this what every country in the world has been doing? Saying a single negative result is meaningless is like saying a single vote is meaningless.

Weirdly, none of this was actually relevant to my main point and that's because the PL are going to be using the best available equipment whereas somewhere like Mcdonalds wont. Mcdonald's can give their staff all the gloves and masks they want but if they're not testing them then working in that environment will carry a greater risk of transmission than a football pitch will. How long do you think Mcd's staff can work in tightly congested hot kitchen before sweating and needing to remove their mask? How many staff members will unknowingly touch their face, nose or mouth and then go on to touch the chip pan handle? the till? that weird machine that squirts mcflurry's. Now of course none of this would matter if there was nobody infected (and I know you said otherwise but I'm gonna go with my instinct and say a person who is NOT infected with a virus CANNOT infect another person with said virus, because they don't have it....) but how would they ever know anyway when they're not testing anyone? Well apart from taking their temperature.

Also do you think I'm making this up or something about the equipment :lol:

https://www.cambridgeindependent.co...-as-it-tests-staff-seven-days-a-week-9107468/
https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news...by-cambridge-team-to-be-deployed-in-hospitals
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...-of-securing-covid-19-testing-kits-for-return



You wonder how my plan works? It's not my plan , I'm a person on the internet, I just recycle crap I read online and then try and use logic and common sense to come to a final opinion, I have little say in what happens and my knowledge is basic at best, I do not have the overall blueprint for the PL's plans. But what I do know is those plans will have little or no effect on the governments capabilities to get the rest of the country in order and that was my actual point from the get go, now its spiralled into territory that it needn't.

I really have to question whether you're serious.

1) What your post suggests about MDs, supermarkets and matches is nothing short of waffle. The interactions are very different; more importantly, the expectation of interaction ARE different. MDs, supermarkets are expected to do everything possible to distance staff, FOOTBALL the expectation is that staff MUST minimise distance. To allow football needs a completely different set of rules.

2) Testing; Yes the PL is pushing clubs to get these machines. Having these machines and testing as proposed requires other equipment, manpower, and PPE for those extracting/testing the samples. That increases demand when there is short-supply. In other words, PL/football would affect the NHS directly and indirectly.

3) Money; You didn't want to go too deep. Where money goes is an important discussion. Resuming BCD wouldnt be for Joe public or the usual supply chain and additional services (Burgers served to supports etc). It is merely to pay players wages. This is very different than opening up most other businesses. whether or not MDs has huge revenue is irrelevant, they have a vast supply chain to decentralise that revenue rather than centralise. PL appears to be doing next to nothing to support the NHS.

What you don't seem to understand is that the plans are not only divergent from the rationale for other businesses, they DO have impact on the NHS, and more so if they cluster games at neutral locations (centralised NHS support at games, rather than distributed at home/away games). Those plans do the reverse of what you believe, they set a precedent for societal interactions.. If the PL can do it, so can we..
 
Last edited:

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
29,721
BCD - still too many safety risks and by all accounts players are not happy to play until it’s fully safe. Playing in masks? Ludicrous. What happens if someone contracts it? It’ll all halt again.
PPG - unfair on those teams that setup defensively to survive and maybe don’t score as many.
As they stand - unfair again because several teams are within distance of top 4, United included. Relegation, Villa are bottom 3 but a game in hand.

The only LOGICAL thing is to cancel this season,
and try to prepare for when football can restart as well as supporting the clubs who very much may go to the wall. There is too much focus on liverpool and winning the title when the focus should be on safety first and helping clubs survive.

Generally agree but don't get your comment on PPG.

It's points average, not goal difference or goals scored?
Setting up defensively shouldn't put them at any disadvantage on PPG, surely?

The problems with PPG is that it doesn't take into account any current form or having easier or harder games left than rivals.
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
96,024
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Honestly if it had been any other club top of the league, the season would be cancelled already. It’s like the entire focus is on trying to find a way for Liverpool to win the league and feck everything else
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
96,024
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Generally agree but don't get your comment on PPG.

It's points average, not goal difference or goals scored?
Setting up defensively shouldn't put them at any disadvantage on PPG, surely?

The problems with PPG is that it doesn't take into account any current form or having easier or harder games left than rivals.
Is it not points per goal?

I could have picked it up entirely wrong

If I’m wrong then I agree with your points
 

Figgins

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 2, 2016
Messages
326
Location
Araʻura
BCD - still too many safety risks and by all accounts players are not happy to play until it’s fully safe. Playing in masks? Ludicrous. What happens if someone contracts it? It’ll all halt again.
PPG - unfair on those teams that setup defensively to survive and maybe don’t score as many.
As they stand - unfair again because several teams are within distance of top 4, United included. Relegation, Villa are bottom 3 but a game in hand.

The only LOGICAL thing is to cancel this season,
and try to prepare for when football can restart as well as supporting the clubs who very much may go to the wall. There is too much focus on liverpool and winning the title when the focus should be on safety first and helping clubs survive.
Curtail the league, retain current sporting performance for Europe, no relegation, promotion or title.

UEFA can use the coefficient to settle places for CL and EL.

United to get CL spot through use of the coefficient on EL or city ban.


In terms of transfers; I wonder whether we're going to see cancelled contracts for those with 12 months left, players on a free. Particularly with football unlikely fully returned until 20/21.
 
Last edited:

esmufc07

Won the Grand National Sweepstake once, Snitch
Scout
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
37,936
Project Restart is such a naff name.
 

TheLiverBird

Full Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2014
Messages
640
BCD - still too many safety risks and by all accounts players are not happy to play until it’s fully safe. Playing in masks? Ludicrous. What happens if someone contracts it? It’ll all halt again.
PPG - unfair on those teams that setup defensively to survive and maybe don’t score as many.
As they stand - unfair again because several teams are within distance of top 4, United included. Relegation, Villa are bottom 3 but a game in hand.

The only LOGICAL thing is to cancel this season,
and try to prepare for when football can restart as well as supporting the clubs who very much may go to the wall. There is too much focus on liverpool and winning the title when the focus should be on safety first and helping clubs survive.
It’s not though

I’m a Liverpool fan, and although I want us to win this seasons premier league, I can assure you I am way past being excited about being champions

yes ok I’d be happy but the “excitement” has gone for obvious reasons

but

a new season isn’t going to be starting anytime soon, we aren’t under a time restraint to start the new season

so why cancel this current season that is 75% of the way through to prepare for the new season which is going to be disrupted anyway???

that does not make sense, nor is it logical

finish this season when safe and suitable to do so, and then plan for the next season which is already massively disrupted. Our stadiums aren’t going to be crowed with fans for a long time yet
 

RobinLFC

Cries when Liverpool doesn't get praised
Joined
May 20, 2014
Messages
12,279
Location
Belgium
Supports
Liverpool
Honestly if it had been any other club top of the league, the season would be cancelled already. It’s like the entire focus is on trying to find a way for Liverpool to win the league and feck everything else
Not a chance. Liverpool is the least of the PL's worries, all they care about right now is £££.

Is it not points per goal?

I could have picked it up entirely wrong

If I’m wrong then I agree with your points
It's point per game, not per goal scored. It would still be unfair given it doesn't take into account strength of opposition though.
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
4,323
It seems such a big risk to restart the league again. Yes there may be measures to put players and staff safe however; what about the non playing staff it takes to get a PL game ? The fans?

Also, they say the reason is because of TV rights and money however; they will make the remainder games free to view ? wont Sky and BT contest this?

Other big businesses have had to deal with losses, why shouldn't football?

Players across the PL should accept a pay cut, and if be it dont spend big on transfers.

I think United are in a good position at the moment where really if we were to spend, we could get away with signing a RW and bringing through youth.

This should be no. 1 priority for clubs in the next window, promote the youth and give them a chance.
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
96,024
Location
Dublin, Ireland
It’s not though

I’m a Liverpool fan, and although I want us to win this seasons premier league, I can assure you I am way past being excited about being champions

yes ok I’d be happy but the “excitement” has gone for obvious reasons

but

a new season isn’t going to be starting anytime soon, we aren’t under a time restraint to start the new season

so why cancel this current season that is 75% of the way through to prepare for the new season which is going to be disrupted anyway???

that does not make sense, nor is it logical

finish this season when safe and suitable to do so, and then plan for the next season which is already massively disrupted. Our stadiums aren’t going to be crowed with fans for a long time yet
You could be talking, at the earliest 18 months before a vaccine so not sure it’ll be absolutely safe anytime soon.

Honestly, I think people need to forget about football for the foreseeable future instead of coming up with ludicrous suggestions
 

Gambit

Desperately wants to be a Muppet
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
29,878
Don't know if it's been covered in the thread, but as we seem to have enough scousers in here, any truth to Liverpool fc wanting to cancel the women's league due to corona health and safety?
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
96,024
Location
Dublin, Ireland
It seems such a big risk to restart the league again. Yes there may be measures to put players and staff safe however; what about the non playing staff it takes to get a PL game ? The fans?

Also, they say the reason is because of TV rights and money however; they will make the remainder games free to view ? wont Sky and BT contest this?

Other big businesses have had to deal with losses, why shouldn't football?

Players across the PL should accept a pay cut, and if be it dont spend big on transfers.

I think United are in a good position at the moment where really if we were to spend, we could get away with signing a RW and bringing through youth.

This should be no. 1 priority for clubs in the next window, promote the youth and give them a chance.
I don’t think many clubs will be spending too much this summer, I expect to see a few more free transfers, loans and maybe swaps but very few big money deals. Many of the clubs would be spending what they don’t have coming in.
 

alsabi

Full Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Messages
1,246
So, potentially shorter matches, played behind closed doors at neutral grounds, with no relegation? That wouldn't so much be 'restarting' the league season as starting something entirely new...
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
4,323
I don’t think many clubs will be spending too much this summer, I expect to see a few more free transfers, loans and maybe swaps but very few big money deals. Many of the clubs would be spending what they don’t have coming in.
I agree on that. However; I think the figures put out by the PL and other bodies about the money they risk to lose out on.

I read somewhere that United and Arsenal risk to lose out on most from gate receipts however; we've only got 4 home games.

I feel there is a case of over estimating these numbers to pressurise the govt to let football commence again.
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
4,323
So, potentially shorter matches, played behind closed doors at neutral grounds, with no relegation? That wouldn't so much be 'restarting' the league season as starting something entirely new...
What difference would that make to the risk of the disease spreading? Shorter game makes no sense whatseover.
 

Pagh Wraith

Full Member
Joined
May 2, 2011
Messages
3,590
Location
Germany
Reuters are reporting that the German federal and state governments have agreed to restart the league on 15 May.
 

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
29,721
Is it not points per goal?

I could have picked it up entirely wrong

If I’m wrong then I agree with your points
Definitely points per game.
On goals would be carnage!

My other boys Wycombe will finish 3rd in league one on pp game. On goals we'd be well off! Mid table possibly!
 

stevoc

Full Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2011
Messages
11,030
Location
And Solskjær has won it!
8 weeks later and the only solid decision these clowns have made is to agree that the project to restart the season will be named drum roll......

Project Restart.

No fans, neutral venues, shorter games, increased subs, maybe no relegation, possibly no euro qualification. What sport is this again?

They should have named it “Project flogging a dead horse and exploring every ludicrous avenue in an attempt to finish the season to avoid financial losses from not fulfilling contractual obligations when it’s obvious the season can’t and probably shouldn’t restart any time soon”.

Though granted that’s a bit wordy.
 

Scriblerus

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
172
Location
Surrey (in exile)
Hancock's interview on R4 Today this morning indicates that there is now political will behind bringing back Premier League football as a 'morale booster'. I won't repeat the well-worn practical objections here, but that could be the clincher. Oh, and horse racing, too.