Scotland's League One and Two could be off until JANUARY

[The Moonster]

On 23/05/2020 at 18:14, AGPar said:

Some clubs. Possibly even a majority. Certainly not all. And the counter-proposal is straightforward enough. The club or clubs approach the SPFL, advise them that they plan to participate next season, prove that they have the financial wherewithal to do so, state they do not wish to be consigned to the sidelines for a potentially considerable period of time due to the inability of the other clubs in their current league to do the same, and reiterate that they will not be looking favourably upon any restraint of trade. It is then incumbent upon the SPFL, in looking after the best interests of all their member clubs, to do everything the can to accommodate this request by allocating them a set of fixtures and opponents to play against. Given the announcements from a couple of Championship clubs over the past 24 hours, it should not be an insurmountable obstacle.

I'm not sure where I stand on this tbh. If I'm reading what you've said correctly, you essentially feel that if say 8 of the 10 teams in this league couldn't afford to run a team and the others could, that the others should be accommodated in the Championship for next season (assuming the clubs at that level could also afford to run teams)?

[vikingTON]

5 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

I'm not sure where I stand on this tbh. If I'm reading what you've said correctly, you essentially feel that if say 8 of the 10 teams in this league couldn't afford to run a team and the others could, that the others should be accommodated in the Championship for next season (assuming the clubs at that level could also afford to run teams)?

It's just the standard, braying, desperate nonsense emanating from Grangemouth since their club proved too shite to get of the seaside leagues by merit.

The idea that the SPFL is bound to let them play with the big teams again and punt the permadiddies to the sidelines for a season is utterly laughable. Such a plan would of course require a club vote which would be lost handily.

[Shadwell Dog]

31 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

I'm not sure where I stand on this tbh. If I'm reading what you've said correctly, you essentially feel that if say 8 of the 10 teams in this league couldn't afford to run a team and the others could, that the others should be accommodated in the Championship for next season (assuming the clubs at that level could also afford to run teams)?

Surely the spfl has to find clubs leagues to play in if they are ready and willing to do so.  Otherwise it must be a restraint of trade. It's bad enough partick getting bumped the way they did but if they suddenly find they cant play at all then they're getting shafted twice.

[The Moonster]

1 minute ago, Shadwell Dog said:

Surely the spfl has to find clubs leagues to play in if they are ready and willing to do so.  Otherwise it must be a restraint of trade. It's bad enough partick getting bumped the way they did but if they suddenly find they cant play at all then they're getting shafted twice.

The majority of League 1 and below won't be able to play. You'd probably have Falkirk, Partick Thistle, Queens Park and Kelty Hearts who could maybe fund themselves? You happy for those 4 to go straight into the Championship? If so, or are you running with additional teams? If you're running with additional teams, how are you remedying that in future? How do you decide who then fills the spare places in League 1/2/LL?

All of the above creates far more headaches for the leagues system than simply asking those 4 clubs to wait 4 months and kick off at the same time as every one else.

[Shadwell Dog]

8 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

The majority of League 1 and below won't be able to play. You'd probably have Falkirk, Partick Thistle, Queens Park and Kelty Hearts who could maybe fund themselves? You happy for those 4 to go straight into the Championship? If so, or are you running with additional teams? If you're running with additional teams, how are you remedying that in future? How do you decide who then fills the spare places in League 1/2/LL?

All of the above creates far more headaches for the leagues system than simply asking those 4 clubs to wait 4 months and kick off at the same time as every one else.

4 months of paying fulltime players to do nothing is a decent wad of cash if you dont have any income coming in. 

[AGPar]

1 hour ago, virginton said:

It's just the standard, braying, desperate nonsense emanating from Grangemouth since their club proved too shite to get of the seaside leagues by merit.

The idea that the SPFL is bound to let them play with the big teams again and punt the permadiddies to the sidelines for a season is utterly laughable. Such a plan would of course require a club vote which would be lost handily.

Except no-one is "punting the permadiddies to the sidelines" as said permadiddies will have been free to make their own decision on whether they are in a position to take part in next season. And if you think that any club willing and able to play behind closed doors next season, whatever format that may take, is going to be prevented from doing so you're even more deluded than I suspected.

[Guest Ecosse83]

1 hour ago, virginton said:

It's just the standard, braying, desperate nonsense emanating from Grangemouth since their club proved too shite to get of the seaside leagues by merit.

The idea that the SPFL is bound to let them play with the big teams again and punt the permadiddies to the sidelines for a season is utterly laughable. Such a plan would of course require a club vote which would be lost handily.

If certain diddies don't want to play then I'm sorry you will lose your right to vote on such matters. 

If we get up by the back door it will be worth it just for the Morton seethe alone

[TxRover]

8 hours ago, Hank von Hell said:

I think you are underestimating the attendance, supporters would come out in the time of need. And of course there could well be stadia used outside the central belt such as Pittodrie & Tannadice to suit logistics. 

Overheads/costs would have to be cut of course but this will happen regardless.

Surely it's preferable to playing behind closed doors or not playing at all for a year (or ever).

  

Again, though, the mechanics of this are an issue. Let’s say the teams manage to draw 5,000 fans. So now we have a couple of thousand groups of people traveling via car, train or bus to the site...arriving as the previous game lets out, or staggered (which significantly reduces the number of games playable)...entering the facility via the same or different gates (cleaning issues)...sitting in the same or different seats/areas (cleaning issues)...using the same facilities (ditto).

This has the feel of Trump’s demands to be promised a full 50,000 person arena in August, now. There is simply no way to anticipate when or if there will be additional waves of infection, we don’t know if reinfection is possible (almost certainly is, but on what timeframe, as most corona virus infections give limited protection) and we have little idea of how people will react as restrictions are lifted. If you look at the U.S., this holiday weekend, we have numerous examples of mass gatherings of people disregarding recommendations because “this is ‘Merica, and we don’t have to...if we get it, we get it and deal with it”.

So sit back and watch for the next month as one of the largest experiments ever on viral bounce back infections gets run live. You think fitba is dysfunctional, you ain’t got nothing on U.S. virus politics. The good news, I guess, is Australia and German provide two other examples for us to compare it to.

Edited May 26, 2020 by TxRover

[The Moonster]

34 minutes ago, Shadwell Dog said:

4 months of paying fulltime players to do nothing is a decent wad of cash if you dont have any income coming in. 

Furlough until the end of September and with a league starting in January you'd like be signing a squad by the start of December anyway, so 2 months paying those wages. It's not ideal, I concede that, but far more palatable than fucking up every league from tier 2 down for the next however many seasons.

 

[Shadwell Dog]

3 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

Furlough until the end of September and with a league starting in January you'd like be signing a squad by the start of December anyway, so 2 months paying those wages. It's not ideal, I concede that, but far more palatable than fucking up every league from tier 2 down for the next however many seasons.

 

Is there not talk of the furlough system changing though?

[CALDERON]

2 minutes ago, Shadwell Dog said:

Is there not talk of the furlough system changing though?

It will be in its current form until end of Jul, then between Aug and Oct employers will be asked to make a contribution towards it. I think. 

[Shadwell Dog]

1 minute ago, CALDERON said:

It will be in its current form until end of Jul, then between Aug and Oct employers will be asked to make a contribution towards it. I think. 

What I thought which will be money going out the door with no income.

[DA Baracus]

1 hour ago, The Moonster said:

The majority of League 1 and below won't be able to play. You'd probably have Falkirk, Partick Thistle, Queens Park and Kelty Hearts who could maybe fund themselves? You happy for those 4 to go straight into the Championship? If so, or are you running with additional teams? If you're running with additional teams, how are you remedying that in future? How do you decide who then fills the spare places in League 1/2/LL?

All of the above creates far more headaches for the leagues system than simply asking those 4 clubs to wait 4 months and kick off at the same time as every one else.

Why do you think the Championship can afford it? Because they absolutely can't.

21 minutes ago, Ecosse83 said:

If certain diddies don't want to play then I'm sorry you will lose your right to vote on such matters. 

If we get up by the back door it will be worth it just for the Morton seethe alone

You've outright made that up.

[The Moonster]

3 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

Why do you think the Championship can afford it? Because they absolutely can't.

I have no knowledge on whether Championship sides could afford it or not, I was just using it as an example in the argument that those with enough money should be promoted to whatever league is available for matches. I'm not surprised they couldn't afford it, I do genuinely wonder as to how even Falkirk could afford it given the money they've spunked up the wall the last 3 seasons but their fans seem confident they're looking to start in August, so I'll take their word for it.

[Guest Ecosse83]

11 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

Why do you think the Championship can afford it? Because they absolutely can't.

You've outright made that up.

If you pull out of the league then you shouldn't be able to vote to force more financially stable clubs to do the same!

[DA Baracus]

1 minute ago, Ecosse83 said:

If you pull out of the league then you shouldn't be able to vote to force more financially stable clubs to do the same!

No one will pull out. There will be a vote to start or not.

[The Moonster]

3 minutes ago, Ecosse83 said:

more financially stable clubs 

Is this Falkirk we're talking about here?

[Guest Ecosse83]

1 minute ago, The Moonster said:

Is this Falkirk we're talking about here?

Yes

[Guest Ecosse83]

5 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

No one will pull out. There will be a vote to start or not.

Dundee and Hearts already want to play so just 1 more vote needed. 

[stuartcraig]

I have no knowledge on whether Championship sides could afford it or not, I was just using it as an example in the argument that those with enough money should be promoted to whatever league is available for matches. I'm not surprised they couldn't afford it, I do genuinely wonder as to how even Falkirk could afford it given the money they've spunked up the wall the last 3 seasons but their fans seem confident they're looking to start in August, so I'll take their word for it.

I miss the time on here when Falkirk fans were all about sporting integrity.