Scottish lower league football locked down for 3 weeks

[Skyline Drifter]

1 hour ago, pleslie99 said:

Pretty sure transfer windows won't and can't be extended. However for lower league clubs is it that much of an issue? We have an extended period where we can sign loan players, and free agents (as long as released prior to 31st Jan) will be fair game. Considering those deals make up 99% (not been factually checked) i don't think the transfer window will be that much of an issue. I cant see Dumbarton being raging that the game was shut down in the transfer window therefore stopping them forking out a few hundred grand for a rivals player! 

Whilst all of this is true, it is a little different when the guys you want to be signing as free agents aren't rushing to get themselves released by their existing club with no certainty as to when or if they'll be able to sign for anyone else. In normal circumstances players will arrange a release if not in someone's plans and pick up another club at their leisure. Right now why would you give up a guaranteed income sitting in the stand for a bigger club and potentially getting a chance due to Covid shortages if nothing else to make yourself a free agent just in case Dumbarton or someone else is willing to sign you without being able to play or furlough you and will start playing in the relatively near future. Risky approach.

[jagsfan57]

I've no idea where you are going with this. There wasn't an "offer", there was a decision / decree. Who are you thinking they made "an offer" to? The Govt? I've no idea what the conversation was. I've no idea if Neil Doncaster argued vehemently against it or agreed entirely. Nobody who wasn't in the meeting will do.
The SFA are in charge of deciding to what extent football can be played at the moment though subject to the guidelines of the Govt exemption for "elite" football or any age restrictions. The Government could of course over-ride them but haven't done so formally. Whether they made suggestions or argued for restrictions I've no idea. I do know that most of the teams below SPFL level were already called FOR football to be suspended.. Those for whom football is effectively a hobby weren't happy at being asked to play football and jeopardise their families / other work, etc. I'm unsure what the general opinion of Highland League clubs was but they had only just started their leagues. South of Scotland clubs were pretty much unanimously voting to cease and certainly at Lowland level some clubs had made it clear they didn't want to play on. The SFA already made it quite clear in their public statement that the decision to include the two lower SPFL leagues was made on the basis that those league were majority part time and the two above predominantly are not. You can see a tv money decision in there if you want but given the buttons the BBC pay for the Championship coverage I doubt that was a factor. It would certainly be relevant to the Premiership I expect but not to the Championship and yet the Championship is still playing. That might be because nobody has the stomach for another toys out of the pram dispute with Hearts but it's far more likely to be as they said because the clubs are majority full time and can afford the testing regime for the foreseeable future thanks to the Govt grants they just received.
I'd imagine any tv funding the women's game gets is pretty miniscule..

I am not going anywhere with it, although I admit to being a bit cynical where football decisions in Scotland are concerned.

I am just thinking about the decision making process and the difference between last year and now.

I know it was the Scottish Govt that stopped all football. As far as I can recall the SFA had no part in the decisions around stopping the championship downwards and waiting a wee bit before deciding on the Premiership, whereas this time they are front and centre in the decision on which leagues play and which don’t.

Why don’t we know what went on at the meeting or who argued one way or another. What’s so secret about it ?

[Skyline Drifter]

16 minutes ago, jagsfan57 said:

 

I am not going anywhere with it, although I admit to being a bit cynical where football decisions in Scotland are concerned.

I am just thinking about the decision making process and the difference between last year and now.

I know it was the Scottish Govt that stopped all football. As far as I can recall the SFA had no part in the decisions around stopping the championship downwards and waiting a wee bit before deciding on the Premiership, whereas this time they are front and centre in the decision on which leagues play and which don’t.

Why don’t we know what went on at the meeting or who argued one way or another. What’s so secret about it ?

It wasn't the Govt. It was the SFA. I imagine the Govt would have taken the decision out of their hands within the week but it was the SFA who stopped football last year. The SFA suspended all football at all age levels with immediate effect on Friday March 13th 2020 (when we were due to have a televised match with Ayr United that night). The Government did not declare a general business lockdown and close gyms, indoor pitch hires, etc, until Friday March 20th, a whole 7 days later.

The decision on how to finish the Leagues with no end in sight to the lockdown at that stage was made by the SPFL. It's not up to anyone else to make that decision for them, it's up to the League how to operate its own competitions. But whether it can play at all is up to the SFA subject to overrules from the Government of course. Had the SFA not already stopped football then the Government lockdown announced on March 20th would have meant it stopped anyway.

You seem very confused about who does what here. It is and always has been the SFA's responsibility to decide whether football can safely be played, in consultation with the Scottish Government. It's also their decision what protocols need to be put in place to allow exempt operation for those levels they do deem suitable to carry on. None of that has anything directly to do with the SPFL though clearly they will be able to make representation and Neil Doncaster sits on the JRG group that made the decision whilst various club reps such as Mike Mulraney at Alloa are office bearers at the SFA.

It is not the SFA's responsibility having made a decree that football could not be played, to then decide what the league does about it in practical terms (ie call it, suspend it, abandon it null and void, etc). The SPFL decided that for itself last summer and the SPFL is responsible for deciding now what happens to lower divisions if they don't return to playing any time soon.

[jagsfan57]

It wasn't the Govt. It was the SFA. I imagine the Govt would have taken the decision out of their hands within the week but it was the SFA who stopped football last year. The SFA suspended all football at all age levels with immediate effect on Friday March 13th 2020 (when we were due to have a televised match with Ayr United that night). The Government did not declare a general business lockdown and close gyms, indoor pitch hires, etc, until Friday March 20th, a whole 7 days later.
The decision on how to finish the Leagues with no end in sight to the lockdown at that stage was made by the SPFL. It's not up to anyone else to make that decision for them, it's up to the League how to operate its own competitions. But whether it can play at all is up to the SFA subject to overrules from the Government of course. Had the SFA not already stopped football then the Government lockdown announced on March 20th would have meant it stopped anyway.
You seem very confused about who does what here. It is and always has been the SFA's responsibility to decide whether football can safely be played, in consultation with the Scottish Government. It's also their decision what protocols need to be put in place to allow exempt operation for those levels they do deem suitable to carry on. None of that has anything directly to do with the SPFL though clearly they will be able to make representation and Neil Doncaster sits on the JRG group that made the decision whilst various club reps such as Mike Mulraney at Alloa are office bearers at the SFA.
It is not the SFA's responsibility having made a decree that football could not be played, to then decide what the league does about it in practical terms (ie call it, suspend it, abandon it null and void, etc). The SPFL decided that for itself last summer and the SPFL is responsible for deciding now what happens to lower divisions if they don't return to playing any time soon.

I appreciate the explanation. You are absolutely right I was confused about who does and did what.
I guess when you say the SPFL decides what happens next, you mean the clubs ?

[jagsfan57]

It wasn't the Govt. It was the SFA. I imagine the Govt would have taken the decision out of their hands within the week but it was the SFA who stopped football last year. The SFA suspended all football at all age levels with immediate effect on Friday March 13th 2020 (when we were due to have a televised match with Ayr United that night). The Government did not declare a general business lockdown and close gyms, indoor pitch hires, etc, until Friday March 20th, a whole 7 days later.
The decision on how to finish the Leagues with no end in sight to the lockdown at that stage was made by the SPFL. It's not up to anyone else to make that decision for them, it's up to the League how to operate its own competitions. But whether it can play at all is up to the SFA subject to overrules from the Government of course. Had the SFA not already stopped football then the Government lockdown announced on March 20th would have meant it stopped anyway.
You seem very confused about who does what here. It is and always has been the SFA's responsibility to decide whether football can safely be played, in consultation with the Scottish Government. It's also their decision what protocols need to be put in place to allow exempt operation for those levels they do deem suitable to carry on. None of that has anything directly to do with the SPFL though clearly they will be able to make representation and Neil Doncaster sits on the JRG group that made the decision whilst various club reps such as Mike Mulraney at Alloa are office bearers at the SFA.
It is not the SFA's responsibility having made a decree that football could not be played, to then decide what the league does about it in practical terms (ie call it, suspend it, abandon it null and void, etc). The SPFL decided that for itself last summer and the SPFL is responsible for deciding now what happens to lower divisions if they don't return to playing any time soon.

I was re reading some of the reports in the few days leading up to the suspension of football last March.

On 11th, the Scottish Govt issued advice that events should have a maximum of 500 to be effective from 16th.

On 12th the SFA aid that they had no plans to cancel Scottish games.

On 13th, the BBC ran the report that the SPFL had suspended football until further notice.

Is it any wonder I am confused about who does what ?

[Skyline Drifter]

2 hours ago, jagsfan57 said:

 

I was re reading some of the reports in the few days leading up to the suspension of football last March.

On 11th, the Scottish Govt issued advice that events should have a maximum of 500 to be effective from 16th.

On 12th the SFA aid that they had no plans to cancel Scottish games.

On 13th, the BBC ran the report that the SPFL had suspended football until further notice.

Is it any wonder I am confused about who does what ?

If the BBC really said the SPFL had suspended football until further notice then they are, to absolutely no surprise whatsoever, equally confused about who is responsible for what. Do you have a link to this report?

Otherwise I'm not sure what you think in there contradicts anything I said? The Govt is entitled to set maximum attendances. It didn't actually suspend the game. It would have done eventually no doubt on the 20th if it hadn't already been suspended but it never had to. The SFA suspended it on 13th March. See below the statement issued by the JRG on 13th March and circulated to member clubs just after 11:30am.

Quote

The Joint Response Group can confirm the decision of the Scottish FA Board to suspend ALL domestic professional and grassroots football under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA until further notice.

As a result, the SPFL has announced the postponement of this weekend’s and following midweek’s fixtures, starting with tonight’s Premiership match between Motherwell and Aberdeen and the Championship match between Queen of the South and Ayr United.

The Scottish FA and SPFL will continue to liaise with governments and UEFA in relation to domestic, European and International fixtures in the coming days and more information will be communicated at the appropriate time.

The Scottish FA Board made its decision in the interests of the health and safety of players, match officials, staff, supporters and the general public.

Ian Maxwell, Scottish FA Chief Executive: “Since the guidance outlined by governments last night we have been engaged in extensive dialogue to clarify the position and implications of that guidance for Scottish football.

“Today’s announcement is made in the interests of public health but, equally, the health and safety of players, match officials, and staff across the game. This is of paramount importance as the country enters the ‘delay’ phase of the coronavirus pandemic.
“It is also why the Scottish FA is compelled to ensure that the suspension is cascaded through the non-professional and grassroots games until further notice.”

Neil Doncaster, SPFL chief executive, said: “As everyone knows, this is a fast-moving and unprecedented situation for the entire country.
“We have been in intensive and detailed discussions since last night and have also been taking on board the experience of our counterparts in England and across Europe. As a result, the board of the SPFL has agreed this morning that all league fixtures this weekend and next midweek will be postponed until further notice.

“The health and safety of fans, players and officials is absolutely paramount. We have not yet had any confirmed cases of Coronavirus amongst players in Scotland, but, given the nature of this outbreak, it seems only a matter of time.

“We realise that many people will be bitterly disappointed, and we would obviously prefer to be in a position where we can continue as normal, but that’s neither realistic nor possible.”

To be fair the statement does go on to quote Neil Doncaster who sits on the JRG and was clearly in agreement and says the SPFL has agreed to postpone fixtures until further notice. However, that's a little misleading as they didn't actually have any choice in the matter. As the opening paragraph makes absolutely clear, it was a decision of the SFA Board to suspend football nationwide. The SPFL adding its voice of agreement did not change anything.

Edited January 28, 2021 by Skyline Drifter

[bairn88]

Looks like we’ll be playing again from 2 March.
 

So thats around 8/9 weeks to fit in 16 games or so if they want to do the full 27 games. Wonder if they’ll shorten it to just 18. 

Edited January 28, 2021 by bairn88

[DA Baracus]

£15k a month?! How are clubs affording that? The recent government cash will help to cover the huge drops in income playing in empty stadiums has meant for clubs, but will it also be enough to pay for this testing?

[bairn88]

3 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

£15k a month?! How are clubs affording that? The recent government cash will help to cover the huge drops in income playing in empty stadiums has meant for clubs, but will it also be enough to pay for this testing?

That’s 30/40k for rest of the season, and the government grant was 150k, as well as the James Anderson money at the start of the season. 

Definitely a whack more than I expected but think clubs will be fine with it.

[Sergeant Wilson]

22 minutes ago, bairn88 said:

Looks like we’ll be playing again from 2 feb.
 

So thats around 8/9 weeks to fit in 16 games or so if they want to do the full 27 games. Wonder if they’ll shorten it to just 18. 

You haven't even copied the date over correctly never mind interpret the content.

[bairn88]

11 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

You haven't even copied the date over correctly never mind interpret the content.

2 March, apologies*

[The Moonster]

1st March to 1st May (current expected end of the season) is 9 weeks. Dumbarton, East Fife and Clyde have 18, 18 and 19 games to play, as well as Scottish Cup ties. The majority of League 2 have 18 or more games to play as well. No chance we're getting that done as there will be call offs and with testing there will likely be isolations. Even putting it to 18 games is a tight schedule with not much room for things going wrong. 

[falkirkthebigclub]

32 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

£15k a month?! How are clubs affording that? The recent government cash will help to cover the huge drops in income playing in empty stadiums has meant for clubs, but will it also be enough to pay for this testing?

Home teams get all our PPV receipts, mate.

[DA Baracus]

44 minutes ago, bairn88 said:

That’s 30/40k for rest of the season, and the government grant was 150k, as well as the James Anderson money at the start of the season. 

Definitely a whack more than I expected but think clubs will be fine with it.

Just about every club is operating at a loss (obviously, given income is massively down yet running costs remain pretty much the same).

Is the money given over enough to cover those losses and pay for testing? 

Given teams are saying they'll do it then it must be, but it can't be sustainable for any longer than this season.

[banditjag]

20 hours ago, The Moonster said:

Fans do have a voice and it makes a difference. Fans of every club wrote to their chairmen/women and told them they wouldn't be back if they voted Rangers into any division other than the 3rd when they went bust. That caused the then SPL clubs to vote them out, before asking the SFL clubs to vote them into tier 2, which again was roundly kyboshed by fans saying they wouldn't be back if that happened. 

The fact that fans like yourself are happy paying money to the club and not making your concerns known is why clubs and the league body continue to bumble along as they are. If enough fans say they won't be back until things change then things will change. 

Great points, don't disagree. The rangers analogy, yes, I expect fans voices had a bearing on how clubs responded but that wasn't the only reason, but old ground. Let's not go there.

I've no doubt you are right but I'd just make a single point. It would require fans being of the same voice, a collective movement. I just doubt that at any club, barring something like rangers happening again, that would galvanise many supports. A single voice in this game changes nothing, and consensus is nigh on impossible. And as we have seen over my lifetime, clubs are, in the main, self absorbed and all about themselves. But it's a great point nonetheless.

[The Moonster]

16 minutes ago, banditjag said:

Great points, don't disagree. The rangers analogy, yes, I expect fans voices had a bearing on how clubs responded but that wasn't the only reason, but old ground. Let's not go there.

I've no doubt you are right but I'd just make a single point. It would require fans being of the same voice, a collective movement. I just doubt that at any club, barring something like rangers happening again, that would galvanise many supports. A single voice in this game changes nothing, and consensus is nigh on impossible. And as we have seen over my lifetime, clubs are, in the main, self absorbed and all about themselves. But it's a great point nonetheless.

If you don't put your concerns across to your club, how do you know others don't feel the same as you?

Just seems folk have been saying for years that change is needed but nobody can be arsed actually doing the things that bring about change. 

[Sergeant Wilson]

1 hour ago, badgerthewitness said:

Home teams get all our PPV receipts, mate.

I know Falkirk have a global following to rival Manchester United, but how much do you think other clubs lower down will be taking from PPV?

[Guest The Phoenix]

The monthly bill for testing shouldn't be anywhere near £15k.

I'd estimate (based on actual costs) no more than £2k (excluding VAT) per week to test 25 players/staff. 

[banditjag]

1 hour ago, The Moonster said:

If you don't put your concerns across to your club, how do you know others don't feel the same as you?

Just seems folk have been saying for years that change is needed but nobody can be arsed actually doing the things that bring about change. 

I'm not at the wind up, have you ever tried to engage with your own club? And if so how was their response?

In the past, yesteryear, I have sent letters, yes, hand written letters, to my club about subjects covering from pricing, takeaway food, fan experience, board engagement and never received any reaponse. In more modern times I have sent e mails covering management concerns, club governance concerns, questioning decisions made by previous and current boards and chairs and never received any replies. I am just an ordinery fan, I've no deluded aspirations, am not offering money or expertise, just a fan offering polite constructive feedback and respectfully asking questions about the way the club I support and pay to watch is run. I have many friends who have done likewise at the club I support and friends at other like sized clubs and all tell the same story. Most, not all, but most club boards are not interested in fans butting into what they see as their kingdom. So, for those reasons I haven't done as you suggested, as constructive and as sensible as the suggestion is, it is pointless at my club, unless you are acolytes of the chair on Twitter and want to discuss such silly matters as banners☹

[The Moonster]

13 minutes ago, banditjag said:

I'm not at the wind up, have you ever tried to engage with your own club? And if so how was their response?

In the past, yesteryear, I have sent letters, yes, hand written letters, to my club about subjects covering from pricing, takeaway food, fan experience, board engagement and never received any reaponse. In more modern times I have sent e mails covering management concerns, club governance concerns, questioning decisions made by previous and current boards and chairs and never received any replies. I am just an ordinery fan, I've no deluded aspirations, am not offering money or expertise, just a fan offering polite constructive feedback and respectfully asking questions about the way the club I support and pay to watch is run. I have many friends who have done likewise at the club I support and friends at other like sized clubs and all tell the same story. Most, not all, but most club boards are not interested in fans butting into what they see as their kingdom. So, for those reasons I haven't done as you suggested, as constructive and as sensible as the suggestion is, it is pointless at my club, unless you are acolytes of the chair on Twitter and want to discuss such silly matters as banners☹

I have, yes. At the time I got in touch with the Supporters Trust rep on our board and from that point on I had his ear. He'd explain decisions to me and give it a bit more info than was generally in the public domain, without giving me anything confidential obviously. He has since stepped down but I'd have no qualms in contacting the person who replaced him.

I concede this is probably easier at smaller clubs but if Thistle have a fan rep on the board then its bad craic if concerns are going without reply.