COVID-19 In Scottish Football

[Moomintroll]

2 minutes ago, The Master said:

It’s not a window for UEFA nations. That’s not the same thing as not being a recognised window.

It’s essentially the same situation as clubs being required to release players for AFCON. 

And down here, they have a window to mitigate that. Clubs are now being told that if they have to play then to catch up, then it's happening, no matter who is missing, as long as they have the 13 recognised players and the senior goalkeeper.

[Moomintroll]

5 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

 

 

An individual league choosing to postpone games has nothing to do with UEFA or FIFA.

But influence can be brought to bear, especially if decisions can create precedents that have any sort of knock on effects to Continental Competitions. Good luck fielding a shan team in the Europa League because the OF game on Sunday matters more ( The Big 5 Leagues excepted of course, they can do what they want because money)

[craigkillie]

But influence can be brought to bear, especially if decisions can create precedents that have any sort of knock on effects to Continental Competitions. Good luck fielding a shan team in the Europa League because the OF game on Sunday matters more ( The Big 5 Leagues excepted of course, they can do what they want because money)

I'm afraid I have no idea what any of this means and what UEFA or their European competitions have to do with anything.

The only question here is whether the SPFL would grant a postponement of domestic fixtures due to international call-ups, and that is completely up to them and nobody else.

[Moomintroll]

1 minute ago, craigkillie said:

I'm afraid I have no idea what any of this means.

Sorry, I cannot really help you then.

[wastecoatwilly]

17 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

 

 

An individual league choosing to postpone games has nothing to do with UEFA or FIFA.

Postponing a game that has already been postponed into a international break is skullduggery of the highest order M8

[topcat(The most tip top)]

But influence can be brought to bear, especially if decisions can create precedents that have any sort of knock on effects to Continental Competitions. Good luck fielding a shan team in the Europa League because the OF game on Sunday matters more ( The Big 5 Leagues excepted of course, they can do what they want because money)

Given the exceptional circumstances of this season it’s questionable how binding any precedent would be.

[AJF]

1 hour ago, wastecoatwilly said:

Postponing a game that has already been postponed into a international break is skullduggery of the highest order M8

When casting their vote to bring forward the winter break, Celtic would’ve known when the Rangers game would’ve been rearranged for given the lack of available dates.

[wastecoatwilly]

1 hour ago, AJF said:

When casting their vote to bring forward the winter break, Celtic would’ve known when the Rangers game would’ve been rearranged for given the lack of available dates.

Interesting take but wrong,the Hibs game comes first, strange that it's being played on a Monday if it was played on the Sunday then the sevco game could've been played on the Wednesday before the Alloa game on the Saturday.
The same for the Aberdeen v sevco game and the Stirling game.

[AJF]

14 minutes ago, wastecoatwilly said:

Interesting take but wrong,the Hibs game comes first, strange that it's being played on a Monday if it was played on the Sunday then the sevco game could've been played on the Wednesday before the Alloa game on the Saturday.
The same for the Aberdeen v sevco game and the Stirling game.

The rearranged fixtures were announced at the same time the result of the vote was made public. The clubs would’ve been consulted beforehand to see if the new dates were suitable.

[wastecoatwilly]

Just now, AJF said:

The rearranged fixtures were announced at the same time the result of the vote was made public. The clubs would’ve been consulted beforehand to see if the new dates were suitable.

Shirley, if the 2 games that were postponed should come first after the winter break or is that too much common sense M8?
 

[AJF]

8 minutes ago, wastecoatwilly said:

Shirley, if the 2 games that were postponed should come first after the winter break or is that too much common sense M8?
 

No, because postponed games do not take precedent over fixtures that are already scheduled. They get fitted in to the schedule where there is space available.

The Hibs game could not be played on Sunday the 16th like you suggested, because the Governments restrictions on spectators is still in force that day. They are planned to end on the 17th, which is the day the game is scheduled for. If Celtic wanted to play Hibs on Sunday the 16th with a limit on fans then it would entirely defeat their argument of bringing the winter break forward.

Edited January 9, 2022 by AJF

[wastecoatwilly]

9 minutes ago, AJF said:

No, because postponed games do not take precedent over fixtures that are already scheduled. They get fitted in to the schedule where there is space available.

The Hibs game could not be played on Sunday the 16th like you suggested, because the Governments restrictions on spectators is still in force that day. They are planned to end on the 17th, which is the day the game is scheduled for. If Celtic wanted to play Hibs on Sunday the 16th with a limit on fans then it would entirely defeat their argument of bringing the winter break forward.

So it is too much common sense.

[AJF]

Just now, wastecoatwilly said:

So it is too much common sense.

What? You suggested Celtic play Hibs on Sunday the 16th which would’ve meant a restriction on the number of fans. Celtic’s whole reason (apparently) for supporting the idea of bringing the winter break forward was to give fans the chance to attend matches.

With that in mind, the first available date for matches to be played after the restrictions end, is Monday the 17th. This is what they voted for.

[kingjoey]

On 08/01/2022 at 11:40, wastecoatwilly said:

I'm pretty sure if Celtic are 4 or 5 players down,Sevco,Dundee utd and the tarts will want the games played with or without fans going back on their decision to bring the winter break forward.

Not so sure that Rangers decision was to bring the winter break forward.

[wastecoatwilly]

21 minutes ago, AJF said:

What? You suggested Celtic play Hibs on Sunday the 16th which would’ve meant a restriction on the number of fans. Celtic’s whole reason (apparently) for supporting the idea of bringing the winter break forward was to give fans the chance to attend matches.

With that in mind, the first available date for matches to be played after the restrictions end, is Monday the 17th. This is what they voted for.

There is no guarantee the restrictions will be lifted a day before or a day after the 17th. 

[AJF]

7 minutes ago, wastecoatwilly said:

There is no guarantee the restrictions will be lifted a day before or a day after the 17th. 

That is incorrect. The restrictions will absolutely not be lifted a day before the 17th because they were introduced for a period of 3 weeks as a minimum. That’s immaterial though. The fact is, Celtic voted to bring forward the winter break to give fans a chance to attend matches.

This meant that they were fully prepared to play no games until the 17th of January at the earliest, when the restrictions are planned to end. Which is why your suggestion that the first set of postponed fixtures could’ve been played on the 16th is nonsense.

So, to go back to my earlier point, Celtic knew fine well by voting the way they did, the first available date for postponed matches to be played would’ve been Monday the 17th. And given that they knew fixtures already scheduled in January would not be moved, the knows that the next available date for the Rangers match was the 2nd of Feb.

Edited January 9, 2022 by AJF

[wastecoatwilly]

2 minutes ago, AJF said:

That is incorrect. The restrictions will absolutely not be lifted a day before the 17th because they were introduced for a period of 3 weeks as a minimum. That’s immaterial though. The fact is, Celtic voted to bring forward the winter break to give fans a chance to attend matches.

This meant that they were fully prepared to play no games until the 17th of January at the earliest, when the restrictions are planned to end. Which is why your suggestion that the first set of postponed fixtures could’ve been played on the 16th

So, to go back to my earlier point, Celtic knew fine well by voting the way they did, the first available date for postponed matches to be played would’ve been Monday the 17th. And given that they knew fixtures already scheduled in January would not be moved, the knows that the next available date for the Rangers match was the 2nd of Feb.

The Government go on a week to week basis on restrictions this is not just a football thing,the SPFL wanted their winter break early.
The scheduling of the SPFL has nothing to do with Government with or without fans.
The SPFL made their decision to postpone 2 sets of fixtures and like I said is it not common sense to start with the 2 postponed fixtures making sure there is no change to the rest of the schedule.
 

[AJF]

7 minutes ago, wastecoatwilly said:

The Government go on a week to week basis on restrictions this is not just a football thing,the SPFL wanted their winter break early.
The scheduling of the SPFL has nothing to do with Government with or without fans.
The SPFL made their decision to postpone 2 sets of fixtures and like I said is it not common sense to start with the 2 postponed fixtures making sure there is no change to the rest of the schedule.
 

You can’t start with the 2 postponed fixtures first though because that would mean moving a fixture that is already scheduled in January! How hard is that to understand.

[welldaft]

44 minutes ago, AJF said:

That is incorrect. The restrictions will absolutely not be lifted a day before the 17th because they were introduced for a period of 3 weeks as a minimum. That’s immaterial though. The fact is, Celtic voted to bring forward the winter break to give fans a chance to attend matches.

Actually if you listen to exactly what Sturgeon said she actually said "for a period of up to 3 weeks". 

So as unlikely as it was she could have lifted restrictions this week.

It will be interesting as to when any announcement will be made and what they plan to do.

My concern is they come up with a half baked plan as totally removing restrictions may be seen as a climbdown. So probably 1000 fans 

[AJF]

11 minutes ago, welldaft said:

Actually if you listen to exactly what Sturgeon said she actually said "for a period of up to 3 weeks". 

So as unlikely as it was she could have lifted restrictions this week.

It will be interesting as to when any announcement will be made and what they plan to do.

My concern is they come up with a half baked plan as totally removing restrictions may be seen as a climbdown. So probably 1000 fans 

Thats fair. I’d still argue though even if it was framed as up to 3 weeks, it is still immaterial because Celtic still knew when the rearranged fixtures would be played because the purpose of the vote to bring forward the winter break was to give fans the chance to attend matches, meaning they knew that no matches would be rescheduled prior to the 17th.