Jump to content
TxRover

What happens if they ban large gatherings due to COVID-19?

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

Every single team is working with that "reduced income" though, so it's not like some have an advantage over others. And in my scenario players would be out of contract from June to end of August (almost as they usually are) so it's not really a case of clubs still having to pay their entire squads until we get back to playing football. The "gentlemens agreement" part and getting players to agree to go back to clubs in September to finish this season seems the most difficult part of that suggestion to me.

Agree it would be a level playing field but I still don’t think it will be workable. By moving to half a season, you are asking teams to work with 50% less income next season. We already have 9 players signed up for next season based on having our expected 18 home games. I have no idea how much of our budget has been used up to sign those players but let’s say it’s 35% of our budget based on 18 games at League One level. All of a sudden we need to put together the remainder of the squad (around 9-11 players) on the remaining 15% of our budget because it has halved. It punishes teams who have planned ahead and started to sign players up, it would work if nobody had anyone contracted for next season and we were all signing players on reduced terms.

Also, not sure if the PFA would be involved in these talks, I assume they could be since they were involved down south in the decision not to play games behind closed doors from a player welfare point of view. If they are, I can’t see them accepting potentially players being out of contact from June till the end of August (almost 2 months more than they are currently) plus the ‘gentleman agreement’ issues plus the fact they would then be signing on much smaller contracts (if they didn’t want to move there family from Scotland) as all teams would be playing less games and have reduced budgets as a result, even if only for a season.

As said, there are flaws to every plan and nothing is going to be fair or please everyone but I just don’t see a shortening of the season being a viable option. I could well be proved wrong though, just my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, R.R.FC said:

Agree it would be a level playing field but I still don’t think it will be workable. By moving to half a season, you are asking teams to work with 50% less income next season. We already have 9 players signed up for next season based on having our expected 18 home games. I have no idea how much of our budget has been used up to sign those players but let’s say it’s 35% of our budget based on 18 games at League One level. All of a sudden we need to put together the remainder of the squad (around 9-11 players) on the remaining 15% of our budget because it has halved. It punishes teams who have planned ahead and started to sign players up, it would work if nobody had anyone contracted for next season and we were all signing players on reduced terms.

Also, not sure if the PFA would be involved in these talks, I assume they could be since they were involved down south in the decision not to play games behind closed doors from a player welfare point of view. If they are, I can’t see them accepting potentially players being out of contact from June till the end of August (almost 2 months more than they are currently) plus the ‘gentleman agreement’ issues plus the fact they would then be signing on much smaller contracts (if they didn’t want to move there family from Scotland) as all teams would be playing less games and have reduced budgets as a result, even if only for a season.

As said, there are flaws to every plan and nothing is going to be fair or please everyone but I just don’t see a shortening of the season being a viable option. I could well be proved wrong though, just my opinion.

Working with 50% less income, but they're playing 50% less games. There's no doubt clubs would need to be inventive and original in their fundraising/ticket selling ideas, but I to me this is the only solution I can see which concludes all the games from this season and allows us to continue in our traditional sense in the quickest time. The other solution is restarting this season in say November/December and letting it run to March, then taking a break before the Euros and restarting again in July/August. You have a lot of bare months there though with clubs doing f**k all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Moonster said:

Lets say we're planning for restarting this season in September, finishing for end of November. Majority of player contracts are up in June for the lower leagues, could we not just get the clubs together and come to a "gentlemens agreement" that players return to their clubs to complete these remaining fixtures, then use December and perhaps some of January as the "Summer Transfer window" to allow players to move on before starting the shortened season in February, which would end possibly in June?

You are assuming that players do not move between leagues or countries? This will need to be an over-arching solution for all leagues and all countries to avoid some 'playing by the agreement' and some not. What if you have already signed a pre-contract on better wages? What if your dream move is imminent? What about TV contracts for competitions - distort them and you run the risk of voiding contracts. 

 

The more I consider this, the more I favour a clean break for 2019/20 - void it.

 

And f*** Liverpool and Celtic in particular 😄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SouthLanarkshireWhite said:

You are assuming that players do not move between leagues or countries? This will need to be an over-arching solution for all leagues and all countries to avoid some 'playing by the agreement' and some not. What if you have already signed a pre-contract on better wages? What if your dream move is imminent? What about TV contracts for competitions - distort them and you run the risk of voiding contracts. 

 

The more I consider this, the more I favour a clean break for 2019/20 - void it.

 

And f*** Liverpool and Celtic in particular 😄

Clubs might lose one or two players for those reasons, Bowie going to Fulham for example, but on the whole I reckon you could keep 90% (if not more) of the squads the same. Appreciate it could get messy with players going/coming from overseas and it would be impossible to force the agreement across global FA's.

I tend to agree that if playing out the games is completely unworkable then voiding the season is the only option. We can't be awarding promotions when it's mathematically possible for 4 clubs to win a league. Klopp doesn't even want the title awarded and his team are probably the most likely of all to win their league. It's a bit of a riddy the number of Raith fans on here saying the only "fair" way to do it is to promote them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Moonster said:

Clubs might lose one or two players for those reasons, Bowie going to Fulham for example, but on the whole I reckon you could keep 90% (if not more) of the squads the same. Appreciate it could get messy with players going/coming from overseas and it would be impossible to force the agreement across global FA's.

I tend to agree that if playing out the games is completely unworkable then voiding the season is the only option. We can't be awarding promotions when it's mathematically possible for 4 clubs to win a league. Klopp doesn't even want the title awarded and his team are probably the most likely of all to win their league. It's a bit of a riddy the number of Raith fans on here saying the only "fair" way to do it is to promote them.

One other thing I've just thought of. Managers will already have decided who they do not want back next year. Imagine having to extend their contracts to get 8 games completed. Players would likely ask for at least 12 months and would have upper hand due to short time-scales. Not a good situation at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

Clubs might lose one or two players for those reasons, Bowie going to Fulham for example, but on the whole I reckon you could keep 90% (if not more) of the squads the same. Appreciate it could get messy with players going/coming from overseas and it would be impossible to force the agreement across global FA's.

I tend to agree that if playing out the games is completely unworkable then voiding the season is the only option. We can't be awarding promotions when it's mathematically possible for 4 clubs to win a league. Klopp doesn't even want the title awarded and his team are probably the most likely of all to win their league. It's a bit of a riddy the number of Raith fans on here saying the only "fair" way to do it is to promote them.

I think most Rovers fans think the only properly fair thing to do is play the season fully. I'd rather lose it that way than win it by default. 

However it's surely fairer to award a league title based on 75 percent of it being completed than disregard all those games entirely?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SouthLanarkshireWhite said:

One other thing I've just thought of. Managers will already have decided who they do not want back next year. Imagine having to extend their contracts to get 8 games completed. Players would likely ask for at least 12 months and would have upper hand due to short time-scales. Not a good situation at all.

It would take compromise from everyone, of that there is no doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CALDERON said:

However it's surely fairer to award a league title based on 75 percent of it being completed than disregard all those games entirely?

No, I don't think that's fairer at all. Every club has been dropped into this situation through no fault of their own, why should the team who just happen to be top (by a single point) at this lucky point be promoted? If it was next week and Falkirk had just gone top, would you argue it was fair that Falkirk went up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

No, I don't think that's fairer at all. Every club has been dropped into this situation through no fault of their own, why should the team who just happen to be top (by a single point) at this lucky point be promoted? If it was next week and Falkirk had just gone top, would you argue it was fair that Falkirk went up?

I don't think any of it is fair, but I don't think I'd feel any differently to be honest. I'd be quite raging, but probably more so at the daft dropped points. Flip side is, why should 3 quarters of a season be wiped out altogether. Why should Falkirk get another chance at trying to not balls up their promotion campaign? Apply that to Rangers, Hearts etc. 

There is no situation that will appease everyone, other than finishing the season. And that doesent look like happening any time soon. Making a call as things stand isn't the most ridiculous idea ever. 

Edited by CALDERON

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, CALDERON said:

I don't think any of it is fair, but I don't think I'd feel any differently to be honest. I'd be quite raging, but probably more so at the daft dropped points. Flip side is, why should 3 quarters of a season be wiped out altogether. Why should Falkirk get another chance at trying to not balls up their promotion campaign? Apply that to Rangers, Hearts etc. 

Alternatively, Raith still have time to balls up their current title bid, so why should they be promoted? 

Under your scenario, Falkirk get another chance at winning this league anyway, it's just that your team wouldn't be here to fight it out with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

No, I don't think that's fairer at all. Every club has been dropped into this situation through no fault of their own, why should the team who just happen to be top (by a single point) at this lucky point be promoted? If it was next week and Falkirk had just gone top, would you argue it was fair that Falkirk went up?

The problem is that this league is the oddity this season. With our league being so tight nobody could really argue if it was decided the season was void but for the other three league leaders that would be a real kick in the teeth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Moonster said:

Every single team is working with that "reduced income" though, so it's not like some have an advantage over others. And in my scenario players would be out of contract from June to end of August (almost as they usually are) so it's not really a case of clubs still having to pay their entire squads until we get back to playing football. The "gentlemens agreement" part and getting players to agree to go back to clubs in September to finish this season seems the most difficult part of that suggestion to me.

Yeah, I dont think it would take much, or very long for the gentlemen's agreement part to fall to bits. With an 8 game stretch I can imagine clubs like Hearts throwing the kitchen sink at anyone they thought would give them a short term fix up. Same with any club in a tight race. I doubt the culture amongst players is such that they would ostracize anyone making a short term move for potentially good money either.

I suspect the way round it would be if it were a wide enough move in Europe that the transfer window could be moved about not to include that summer? (And even then you'd have situations where Rovers would lose Bowie but more widely a bunch of loan players potentially not getting to go back to the clubs they'd been regularly appearing for)

Edited by renton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said at the weekend, if season is to run on & be completed in September, move the transfer window until 2019/2020 is completed, that way no one could move between teams before then, similar to the gentlemen agreement idea. 

Longer this runs on, the closer to the liklihood of it being voided though. 

Euro 2020, is now postponed until next year, so let's hope we can get back playing around July. Fairest on everyone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UEFA now saying all associations committed to completing their domestic programs by June 30th. Of course, that could go by the wayside if we are only starting to relax the lockdown after 12 weeks as the government has suggested it'll last for. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
UEFA now saying all associations committed to completing their domestic programs by June 30th. Of course, that could go by the wayside if we are only starting to relax the lockdown after 12 weeks as the government has suggested it'll last for. 
Yeah I doubt very much that will be possible. That's no more than a holding announcement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As I said at the weekend, if season is to run on & be completed in September, move the transfer window until 2019/2020 is completed, that way no one could move between teams before then, similar to the gentlemen agreement idea. 
Longer this runs on, the closer to the liklihood of it being voided though. 
Euro 2020, is now postponed until next year, so let's hope we can get back playing around July. Fairest on everyone. 


If we do run into August and then started the 2021 season in late September. Would it be possible to maybe even ditch the league cup for a season? Maybe even do away with the winter break? Fill the spaces left with league games? We would probably still run into late may for 20220/2021 season is the only thing with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the greed is good league (SPL) would for one season let the leagues reconstruct into say 3 leagues of 14, which would allow promotion of 2 from the championship, and the top 6 from Div 1 into the championship and then combine the rest into the new Div 1.......... its then a play each other home n away 26 game season, just for 20/21............. depends of course on if its not possible to finish this season and the bigot brothers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, SirJimmyofNic said:

If the greed is good league (SPL) would for one season let the leagues reconstruct into say 3 leagues of 14, which would allow promotion of 2 from the championship, and the top 6 from Div 1 into the championship and then combine the rest into the new Div 1.......... its then a play each other home n away 26 game season, just for 20/21............. depends of course on if its not possible to finish this season and the bigot brothers

I was actually thinking along the same lines, although i thought 3 x16 with more clubs joining. That way most teams with shout of promotion get it (in some form) and nobody gets relegated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, The Moonster said:

No, I don't think that's fairer at all. Every club has been dropped into this situation through no fault of their own, why should the team who just happen to be top (by a single point) at this lucky point be promoted? If it was next week and Falkirk had just gone top, would you argue it was fair that Falkirk went up?

Most Rovers fans were preparing for that to happen over the weekend past.

If it had, I wouldn't have an issue with it. I would even have suggested that the result had more credibility as it would have been another game completed.

Whilst the last 8 games could certainly change things (and most probably would have) I don't think there a question of the integrity of awarding a league title after more than 75% of the games have been played, given the extraordinary circumstances we are in.

We are going to need to find a compromise as there is not a chance in hell of completing all fixtures required to complete the season by 30th June. 

Either the league standings are taken as final or the season is null and void. I would use whatever window becomes available to finish the cups/ play-offs so we can start next season on time in August. An agreement to create a compensation fund for all disadvantaged clubs could be pooled from next seasons prize money and distributed accordingly.

Bottom line is there needs to be compromise, not self interest. This is no-ones fault but everyones problem. If self interest prevails then Scottish Football will not survive this in it's current form.

From what I've seen so far, i don't have much hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just seeing there the EPL is looking to play the remainder of the season behind closed doors and broadcast/stream the games, that would be a fair enough solution i would think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...