COVID-19/20 season

[Enoch]

Just as we were in the middle of an unbeaten run too!

We were just about to surge up the table.

[Worthy4England]

Just as we were in the middle of an unbeaten run too!

We were just about to surge up the table.

Yup, Keith told me the same.

[officer_dibble]

The one thing I’ve learnt from the last couple of days...nothing is predictable. The one constant is the indecisiveness of the EFL, they don’t fill me with one iota of confidence. How will the majority of league one and two survive financially without the gate receipts?? As we know, league places is secondary to survival...

Watch this space I guess.

Here’s one - if the choice is between relegating us (take league places as they stand) and us starting again in this league on -12 (cancel season start again) what would you chose?

[DJBlu]

The embargo is for 2 seasons too. Does this one count towards that?

I think the club would take the -12 in league one.

[The_Gun]

The one thing I’ve learnt from the last couple of days...nothing is predictable. The one constant is the indecisiveness of the EFL, they don’t fill me with one iota of confidence. How will the majority of league one and two survive financially without the gate receipts?? As we know, league places is secondary to survival...

Watch this space I guess.

Here’s one - if the choice is between relegating us (take league places as they stand) and us starting again in this league on -12 (cancel season start again) what would you chose?

You'd take the -12 in League One every day of the week. Increased revenues and hopefully a better chance of staying up than we had initially.

[Harry Genshaw]

Definitely take the club in league 1 option.

There is an argument to be had that if this season is declared null and void, we've still been punished and shouldn't have another deduction in August.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Making the season null and void then would be less controversial than declaring the current placings the final position and promoting and relegating all those that occupy the relevant places now.

Would it? Would it really? Given the ongoing hoo-haa over our punishment, you think clubs deleteriously affected would just hold up their diseased hands and say "OK"?

There is no precedent for this. In 1939 the season was abandoned after three or four games. In 1914 they just carried on, presumably assuming Tommy would be back for the Christmas double-headers. But what's different now is the money. They would get sued out of existence. Compromise will be difficult but it will be achieved.

The only other alternative I see, is this season just carrying on where we left off until completion and adjusting the subsequent seasons over the next couple of years.

...which are already being adjusted for Qatar, because where there's a cheque there's a way.

The embargo is for 2 seasons too. Does this one count towards that?

If it's abandoned, no, because it's a "sporting sanction". Cue the sound of people changing their minds. Funny how if you go on a Liverpool or Leeds or Oxford or Exeter website they're not quite so keen to erase this season from history.

[Harry Genshaw]

Making the season null and void then would be less controversial than declaring the current placings the final position and promoting and relegating all those that occupy the relevant places now.

Would it? Would it really? Given the ongoing hoo-haa over our punishment, you think clubs deleteriously affected would just hold up their diseased hands and say "OK"?

I said it would be less controversial. Not that it wouldn't be controversial at all!

Clubs are no more likely (I'd argue that they're far less) to hold their diseased hands up and say "OK" to the league being declared finished in it's current state either. I'd expect there to be more litigation from all the relegated clubs and those that have missed out on promotion.

It is unprecedented though and in the likely event that we dont start again in April I can see the powers leaning towards that 3rd way. Starting again where we left off and adjusting subsequent seasons until we're straight again.

[officer_dibble]

Starting where we left off, reduced break and pre season, condense next season? I can hear Pep, Klopp and co with the 50 man squads squeal now...

Every answer has a counter problem.

[Harry Genshaw]

Starting where we left off, reduced break and pre season, condense next season? I can hear Pep, Klopp and co with the 50 man squads squeal now...

Every answer has a counter problem.

And theres the rub. Whichever way they jump someone's going to be hugely pissed off.

[nicholaldo]

I think the football calendar will prove to be quite flexible; it's just a matter of how soon clubs can get back training and playing matches behind closed doors. The problem I can't immediately think of a proper solution to is the expiry of the players' contracts one. The common sense approach would be for them to simply be extended for however long is required, but I don't know if that's viable higher up the footballing pyramid.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I think the football calendar will prove to be quite flexible; it's just a matter of how soon clubs can get back training and playing matches behind closed doors. The problem I can't immediately think of a proper solution to is the expiry of the players' contracts one. The common sense approach would be for them to simply be extended for however long is required, but I don't know if that's viable higher up the footballing pyramid.

I would have thought it eminently achievable.

Say for argument's sake the season is completed Jun-Aug rather than Mar-May; the sensible thing would be for contracts to extend, on the same terms, for two months (to end of Aug). If they've signed a pre-contract to shift somewhere else, it just moves along to the new cutoff date; chances are the new seasons would realign anyway, unless this thing clears up a lot quicker in one place than another.

Under contract law, if anybody wants to leave on Jun 30 then they can; equally, because the transfer window won't reopen until the season belatedly ends, they'll be sat on their arse for two months earning nowt. Well, maybe they'll be earning plenty from merchandising and sponsorship and personal appearances, but they won't be earning a wage from any football club, and they'll also have signalled quite clearly that they're the sort of player who'll manipulate a contractual situation to their own benefit. Some players are happy with that. Most, I'd wager, would stay put for the extra time.

[officer_dibble]

Why should we pay will Buckley beyond June/July?

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Why should we pay will Buckley beyond June/July?

Evidently some level of compromise will be needed. I can imagine under the above circumstances there'd be plenty of people p*ssed off if, say, Daryl Murphy or Ronan Darcy decided to walk away in June rather than August. There were certainly a lot of people vocally annoyed at the beginning of this season when some players who hadn't been paid in months decided they didn't want to work for nothing.

I rate the club more highly than any player. Doesn't mean I don't think we should be fair. I'd resent every penny we had to pay to poor old Will, but I'd more strongly resent the rotten luck than rendered him unavailable - and I would resent my club if it opportunistically used a global catastrophe to coat people off.

[Bruce Rioja]

Do we know how much cash is in the FV pot? They still have wages to pay in a period of zero match income. Are we likely to see a bunch of unpaid players exercising their rights to bugger off, once again?

[officer_dibble]

We don’t - but the level of player we have, I don’t see anyone walking off to join a club with plenty of cash put it that way.

[Bruce Rioja]

We don’t - but the level of player we have, I don’t see anyone walking off to join a club with plenty of cash put it that way.

True, Dibs. However, to looks principally Darcy and Politic fer nowt will be particularly galling.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

We don’t - but the level of player we have, I don’t see anyone walking off to join a club with plenty of cash put it that way.

True, Dibs. However, to looks principally Darcy and Politic fer nowt will be particularly galling.

To be clear, Politic is under contract until June 2022, but I know what you're saying - if unpaid, he'd eventually be legally entitled to leave. However, I don't think it'll come to that.

[Bruce Rioja]

We don’t - but the level of player we have, I don’t see anyone walking off to join a club with plenty of cash put it that way.

True, Dibs. However, to looks principally Darcy and Politic fer nowt will be particularly galling.

To be clear, Politic is under contract until June 2022, but I know what you're saying - if unpaid, he'd eventually be legally entitled to leave. However, I don't think it'll come to that.

It doesn't matter when he's contracted to. I hope it doesn't come to that also, but it's a huge possibility if we haven't got the brass to pay his wages.

[nicholaldo]

I think the football calendar will prove to be quite flexible; it's just a matter of how soon clubs can get back training and playing matches behind closed doors. The problem I can't immediately think of a proper solution to is the expiry of the players' contracts one. The common sense approach would be for them to simply be extended for however long is required, but I don't know if that's viable higher up the footballing pyramid.

I would have thought it eminently achievable.

Say for argument's sake the season is completed Jun-Aug rather than Mar-May; the sensible thing would be for contracts to extend, on the same terms, for two months (to end of Aug). If they've signed a pre-contract to shift somewhere else, it just moves along to the new cutoff date; chances are the new seasons would realign anyway, unless this thing clears up a lot quicker in one place than another.

Under contract law, if anybody wants to leave on Jun 30 then they can; equally, because the transfer window won't reopen until the season belatedly ends, they'll be sat on their arse for two months earning nowt. Well, maybe they'll be earning plenty from merchandising and sponsorship and personal appearances, but they won't be earning a wage from any football club, and they'll also have signalled quite clearly that they're the sort of player who'll manipulate a contractual situation to their own benefit. Some players are happy with that. Most, I'd wager, would stay put for the extra time.

I think you're right. The balance of the scales is in favour of completing the season and by and large everyone will just go along with it.

It's club owners who I expect to grumble the most. Specifically when it comes to their reluctance to commit what in many instances will be dead money when (presumably) not legally obliged to. For that reason, if they have nothing to play for, I can imagine some might try to forego the temporary renewal of the expiring contracts of players they don't want and play Academy youngsters in their place instead.