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

[Guest Ecosse83]

4 minutes ago, stuartcraig said:

 

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

So because we as a club want to play a full season that's somehow not sporting? You will need to talk me through that one!

[stuartcraig]

So because we as a club want to play a full season that's somehow not sporting? You will need to talk me through that one!

Correct me if I’m wrong but don’t you want to be promoted to the Championship in order to play the other clubs who want to play a full season?

[Shadwell Dog]

2 minutes ago, stuartcraig said:

 

Correct me if I’m wrong but don’t you want to be promoted to the Championship in order to play the other clubs who want to play a full season?

 

We just want to play a full season. We'll play in whatever league the spfl can put us in to do that.

[Guest Ecosse83]

2 minutes ago, stuartcraig said:

 

Correct me if I’m wrong but don’t you want to be promoted to the Championship in order to play the other clubs who want to play a full season?

 

No idea what league we will be in Stuart, it just seems like the club want to play so that's good enough for me. 

Hopefully if there is a vote then all league's will go ahead as normal. 

[Shadwell Dog]

6 hours ago, craigkillie said:

Sky have exclusive rights for the Premiership, so they wouldn't be allowed to tender it to other companies. It's not even clear that, as it stands, clubs would be allowed to stream games live. In ordinary circumstances they certainly wouldn't be, but the hope is that whilst they are BCD it will be permitted as an exception.

The other way you get sky to take in more games is by playing them at any time that suits their schedule. You dont have to worry about fans attending matches so if sky want a game at 10am on a saturday morning or 9pm on a sat night then why not if it's only for a season and it gets more money in.

[stuartcraig]

We just want to play a full season. We'll play in whatever league the spfl can put us in to do that.

And if that league is the Championship you’ll promise to never ever again keep banging on about sporting integrity.

Sounds like a fair trade.

[Shadwell Dog]

Just now, stuartcraig said:

 

And if that league is the Championship you’ll promise to never ever again keep banging on about sporting integrity.

Sounds like a fair trade.

 

Nothing to do with us it's the spfl that have to provide us with a league to play in.  Not much sporting integrity in relegating partick who are 2pts behind with a game in hand into a league where they may not be able to play in any games.

[stuartcraig]

Nothing to do with us it's the spfl that have to provide us with a league to play in.  Not much sporting integrity in relegating partick who are 2pts behind with a game in hand into a league where they may not be able to play in any games.

But there is sporting integrity in promoting teams just because they are rich enough that they can afford to play on a closed door basis.

Thanks for clearing that up. I was a bit confused there. I thought sporting integrity meant being promoted after actually winning something.

[vikingTON]

2 hours 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.

The SPFL has to do nothing of the sort and are under no such nonsense 'restriction of trade' obligation to its members. As you might already have discerned from the fact that the 19/20 season was wrapped up early despite the howls of protest from Hearts and an irrelevant rump of clubs.

Falkirk are of course free to resign their SPFL membership and try to find a league that will play competitively from August 2020 instead. Good luck with that.

1 hour ago, AGPar said:

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.

No, they will be deciding that their division cannot take place until restrictions are eased. Which of course is the only sensible course of action until Scottish football agrees a set of protocols with the government to allow its paying customers attend the match.

Quote

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.

What are you going to do about it? You have as much power over this decision as a family living in a Cuban slum.

52 minutes ago, Ecosse83 said:

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

It'd require a 7/3 vote in favour of sacking off the scheduled league and forming some tinpot 'temporary' version instead. Thanks for playing anyway.

Edited May 26, 2020 by vikingTON

[Shadwell Dog]

4 minutes ago, stuartcraig said:

 

But there is sporting integrity in promoting teams just because they are rich enough that they can afford to play on a closed door basis.

Thanks for clearing that up. I was a bit confused there. I thought sporting integrity meant being promoted after actually winning something.

 

No that went out the window this year I'm afraid with clubs going up and down without completing a season.  You're basically saying you're not allowed to play no matter how badly that hits you financially.

 

[stuartcraig]

No that went out the window this year I'm afraid with clubs going up and down without completing a season.  You're basically saying you're not allowed to play no matter how badly that hits you financially.
 

So, coming back to my original proposition, since sporting integrity “went out the window” it shouldn’t be too much of a personal sacrifice for you to promise to not complain about its absence in future SPFL decisions, even the ones that don’t offer Falkirk an advantage.

[Shadwell Dog]

9 minutes ago, stuartcraig said:

 

So, coming back to my original proposition, since sporting integrity “went out the window” it shouldn’t be too much of a personal sacrifice for you to promise to not complain about its absence in future SPFL decisions, even the ones that don’t offer Falkirk an advantage.

 

It went out the window this year. Who knows it may come back next year you never know.

[stuartcraig]

It went out the window this year. Who knows it may come back next year you never know.

I suppose it’ll depend heavily on whether it suits your argument.

[Shadwell Dog]

1 minute ago, stuartcraig said:

 

I suppose it’ll depend heavily on whether it suits your argument.

 

I just think if clubs are able to play then it's stupid to say to clubs no you're not playing you need to sit doing nothing apart from losing money. Crazy to maybe have clubs going to the wall because the spfl wont allow then to play football when they are able to. You could easily have the bottom clubs  depending on the numbers playing going back into league 1 or 2 or whatever the leagues are once this season finishes.

[Guest Ecosse83]

1 hour ago, virginton said:

 

It'd require a 7/3 vote in favour of sacking off the scheduled league and forming some tinpot 'temporary' version instead. Thanks for playing anyway.

The vote will be about playing the 20/21 season, not what you suggest. 

I don't think there will be any vote, it will get to the point that the spfl will ask clubs if they want to play the season or not and those that do want to play will kick on with the season. 

Budge's 14/14/14 might just actually get voted through!

[Sergeant Wilson]

2 hours ago, Ecosse83 said:

No idea what league we will be in Stuart, it just seems like the club want to play so that's good enough for me. 

http://m.centralscottishafl.co.uk 

 

[Hank von Hell]

6 hours ago, TxRover said:

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.

I take your points on the mechanics but I still believe it's workable , and should be explored as the alternative of playing behind doors is clearly a non starter. I also think hibernation is dangerous and many clubs would simply not resurface. 

I don't agree it "has the feel of Trump"- I'm clearly not proposing supporters are packed into stadiums. I have seen crowd control and social distancing work very well at places like supermarkets and garden centres which have single entry points, a large stadium with multiple gates could  be controlled in the same manner plus obviously the seating can be planned appropriately.

I seriously can't see how this is beyond the wit of man in Scotland,   it's not like Australia is another planet with super intelligent beings (well maybe we are compared to Trump's America)     

[TxRover]

18 minutes ago, Hank von Hell said:

I take your points on the mechanics but I still believe it's workable , and should be explored as the alternative of playing behind doors is clearly a non starter. I also think hibernation is dangerous and many clubs would simply not resurface.   

I agree, but it’s not quite simple.

18 minutes ago, Hank von Hell said:

I don't agree it "has the feel of Trump"- I'm clearly not proposing supporters are packed into stadiums. I have seen crowd control and social distancing work very well at places like supermarkets and garden centres which have single entry points, a large stadium with multiple gates could  be controlled in the same manner plus obviously the seating can be planned appropriately.

I understand we aren’t packing in, but the highest means of transmission is aerosol droplets, and a crowd cheering produces exactly that. While being outdoors helps, there really isn’t enough room to keep a decent number of fans apart.

20 minutes ago, Hank von Hell said:

I seriously can't see how this is beyond the wit of man in Scotland,   it's not like Australia is another planet with super intelligent beings (well maybe we are compared to Trump's America)     

Given the results so far, I suspect we’d do better with a woman working on the plans.

As for Australia, you have the advantage that Mexico and Canada don’t, as they are both bordering on stupid.

[DA Baracus]

Clubs have a far better chance of surviving by 'hibernating' for a while than they do from playing games in empty stadiums.

[Hank von Hell]

3 hours ago, DA Baracus said:

Clubs have a far better chance of surviving by 'hibernating' for a while than they do from playing games in empty stadiums.

I wasn't saying empty stadiums , I was saying as near their current crowd levels as possible in large stadiums.

And I'm talking about clubs outside of the Premiership.