EFL clarify the rest of the season

[MackworthRamIsGod]

21 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Lots of variables but even the most die hard Derby fan would struggle to argue that we have as good a chance of finishing in the play offs as the teams currently in them places. 

Really?

5 points off top 6 with 9 games to go, if we were 5 points off top 6 with only 5 games to go I'd say it was game on...9 games to go, win the next game and results go our way and we are 1 game from top 6.

We were a couple of top players away from having a team that could have a right go this season, Bird and Sibley could be those players!

I'm confident, I think we would make the top 6 and win the whole damn thing!

 

[G STAR RAM]

3 minutes ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

Really?

5 points off top 6 with 9 games to go, if we were 5 points off top 6 with only 5 games to go I'd say it was game on...9 games to go, win the next game and results go our way and we are 1 game from top 6.

We were a couple of top players away from having a team that could have a right go this season, Bird and Sibley could be those players!

I'm confident, I think we would make the top 6 and win the whole damn thing!

What about the other 5 teams between us and the play off places?

[Andicis]

7 minutes ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

Really?

5 points off top 6 with 9 games to go, if we were 5 points off top 6 with only 5 games to go I'd say it was game on...9 games to go, win the next game and results go our way and we are 1 game from top 6.

We were a couple of top players away from having a team that could have a right go this season, Bird and Sibley could be those players!

I'm confident, I think we would make the top 6 and win the whole damn thing!

 

It's a weird one. Back in March after our last game, I still thought it was unlikely but we were one of the form teams so we still were in with a shot. Now, we have no idea how teams will start after the 2 month break. We could pick up where we left off, or we could start up slow. Incredibly tough to call.

[Curtains]

The thing that would annoy me most if Forest do get in the playoffs is the fact they haven’t been to our place. 

[G STAR RAM]

1 minute ago, Andicis said:

It's a weird one. Back in March after our last game, I still thought it was unlikely but we were one of the form teams so we still were in with a shot. Now, we have no idea how teams will start after the 2 month break. We could pick up where we left off, or we could start up slow. Incredibly tough to call.

Over a 15 game period Fulham and Forest were both above us in the form table, Brentford one place below in 4th.

Millwall in decent form before the season was halted.

We had a slim chance I would say.

[CWC1983]

At most, I can see 10 clubs wanting to carry on, 3 bottom clubs and 7th to 13th. The rest will be happy to either stay up or take their chances through the play offs in their current positions. 

However, it depends on how much money clubs will lose or gain depending on carrying on or starting. That will decide their stance. 

I may of missed it, but has there been anything said about tv contract money / prize money if the season stops now, and how often tests will need to be done and the cost of testing if they carry on?

Tv money has to be the driver surely? No gate revenue, no sponsor or corporate revenue. Putting valuable assets at a health risk. Wage deferrals will stop I guess if the players are back playing. 

I cant see the benefit of completing the season unless theres a pot of gold at the end. 

 

[Andicis]

1 minute ago, G STAR RAM said:

Over a 15 game period Fulham and Forest were both above us in the form table, Brentford one place below in 4th.

Millwall in decent form before the season was halted.

We had a slim chance I would say.

That's a quarter of the season, that doesn't reflect recent form (at the time). In smaller game periods we were in better form than those two before it was stopped. Using such a big sample is wrong to judge current form. Obviously this is null now, since who knows what form will be two months down the line. 

[Andicis]

2 minutes ago, CWC1983 said:

At most, I can see 10 clubs wanting to carry on, 3 bottom clubs and 7th to 13th. The rest will be happy to either stay up or take their chances through the play offs in their current positions. 

However, it depends on how much money clubs will lose or gain depending on carrying on or starting. That will decide their stance. 

I may of missed it, but has there been anything said about tv contract money / prize money if the season stops now, and how often tests will need to be done and the cost of testing if they carry on?

Tv money has to be the driver surely? No gate revenue, no sponsor or corporate revenue. Putting valuable assets at a health risk. Wage deferrals will stop I guess if the players are back playing. 

I cant see the benefit of completing the season unless theres a pot of gold at the end. 

 

How can you not see the benefit? Are footballers at risk at all? Will they be tested regularly and self isolating should they test positive? Why is 30 of the lowest risk individuals playing a sport outside higher risk than everyday people going to an enclosed supermarket? It's about competitive integrity. It will also help people stick to lockdown if there is something inside for them to watch. 

[Curtains]

3 minutes ago, CWC1983 said:

At most, I can see 10 clubs wanting to carry on, 3 bottom clubs and 7th to 13th. The rest will be happy to either stay up or take their chances through the play offs in their current positions. 

However, it depends on how much money clubs will lose or gain depending on carrying on or starting. That will decide their stance. 

I may of missed it, but has there been anything said about tv contract money / prize money if the season stops now, and how often tests will need to be done and the cost of testing if they carry on?

Tv money has to be the driver surely? No gate revenue, no sponsor or corporate revenue. Putting valuable assets at a health risk. Wage deferrals will stop I guess if the players are back playing. 

I cant see the benefit of completing the season unless theres a pot of gold at the end. 

 

I think I can recollect all players have to be tested twice a week for Covid 19 

[Sith Happens]

hmm starting to wonder, forest challenge top two, fall away, look like a play off position but hit appalling form, owner turns into super spreader of covid19 forest make play offs by default...hmmmm

[MackworthRamIsGod]

21 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

What about the other 5 teams between us and the play off places?

Balls to them, 1 of those is Millwall, dont we play them next?

To be honest you are right, it's a tough call, but I say screw the EFL, give us our 9 games (plus 3) and let's ruffle a few feathers mighty ducks style!!!

[CWC1983]

8 minutes ago, Andicis said:

How can you not see the benefit? Are footballers at risk at all? Will they be tested regularly and self isolating should they test positive? Why is 30 of the lowest risk individuals playing a sport outside higher risk than everyday people going to an enclosed supermarket? It's about competitive integrity. It will also help people stick to lockdown if there is something inside for them to watch. 

These footballers will have to go to the supermarket as well.

Are we asking players and staff to take a risk to their health to ensure we have something to watch on tv while we stay at home risk free. Danny Rose said the same earlier this week. 

Anyway, the question I was trying to ask was about the £ side of it. Are clubs going to play behind closed doors, carry out testing and lose even more money just for compeditive integrity? Self interest will kick in.  

Like I said, ive probobly missed it. There maybe cash to be paid out on finishing the season.  

 

[Mucker1884]

1 hour ago, Tamworthram said:

In terms of agreeing a way forward if the season cannot be completed I think, on the whole, it's a clear proposal for the club's to vote on. The one thing I can't remember seeing is, what happens if they can't complete the play offs either. It obviously wouldn't affect Derby under this proposal but it would impact teams 3 - 6. 

It will be interesting to see if they manage to get the required 51%. Presumably the top 6 will be in favour and the bottom 3 against. It's anyone's guess how the other 15 would vote. Mel said he'd vote in favour of West Brom and Leeds getting promoted but didn't comment on the play off places. 

2. This means that, in the event of an early curtailment:

a. Final divisional placings should be determined on unweighted points per game (if required).

b. Promotion and relegation should be retained.

c. Play-Offs should be played in all circumstances but should not be extended (beyond four teams).

3. If a scenario arises whereby the Play-Offs cannot be played, the EFL Board will determine the appropriate course of action.

 

So, to translate...
Play-Offs must be played, WITHOUT EXCEPTION... unless they can't be played!
If they don't get played, then we will... erm... cross that bridge when we get to it... if we get to it... but rest assured, we will come up with something... just not sure what that will be, just yet!

 

?

[Andicis]

18 minutes ago, CWC1983 said:

These footballers will have to go to the supermarket as well.

Are we asking players and staff to take a risk to their health to ensure we have something to watch on tv while we stay at home risk free. Danny Rose said the same earlier this week. 

Anyway, the question I was trying to ask was about the £ side of it. Are clubs going to play behind closed doors, carry out testing and lose even more money just for compeditive integrity? Self interest will kick in.  

Like I said, ive probobly missed it. There maybe cash to be paid out on finishing the season.  

 

They won't lose more than they get, they'd lose the TV money, they'd be much better off playing the games than not. A lot of people aren't staying home risk free, they're doing their much higher risk jobs. 

[Carnero]

25 minutes ago, CWC1983 said:

These footballers will have to go to the supermarket as well.

I believe footballers get priority delivery slots.

[Mckram]

2 hours ago, CWC1983 said:

These footballers will have to go to the supermarket as well.

Are we asking players and staff to take a risk to their health to ensure we have something to watch on tv while we stay at home risk free. Danny Rose said the same earlier this week. 

Anyway, the question I was trying to ask was about the £ side of it. Are clubs going to play behind closed doors, carry out testing and lose even more money just for compeditive integrity? Self interest will kick in.  

Like I said, ive probobly missed it. There maybe cash to be paid out on finishing the season.  

 

I’ll be honest, I really don’t agree with Danny Rose.

They’re getting tested twice a week so have such a minimal risk.

There’s many other people such as construction workers etc that are back at work that won’t get tested unless they have symptoms.

Many football club employees will be relying on them playing so that clubs can keep going and not start laying people off.

Look at League 1 and 2, 10 teams going bust unless they’re bailed out. These Premier League clubs should be doing everything they can to getting back out there, get some TV deals done for all matches to be shown and get some money fed down the leagues.

Highly doubt they’ll save the lower league clubs though...also think Bury will have a word to say if anyone is bailed out! 

[EtoileSportiveDeDerby]

I must say I am a bit mystified by all the convoluted plans, discussions, arguments to complete the various leagues. To be clear for me football isn't essential, there is a risk so no need to persevere with the season, points per game if need be, job done. However if the authorities, governments, clubs, players really want to complete the season in the safest possible way why don't they isolate all staff involved.

There are carers who have locked themselves in care homes to protect the residents, NHS staff staying in hotel rooms to protect their families. On the news you see family members staying away or in caravans on the drive to isolate themselves from their loved ones. Those people are doing real jobs living in the real world so it should not be too tricky to transpose the idea to the parallel universe we all love to watch on a Saturday afternoon (unless Sky ducks it up for us of course) 

[Sparkle]

12 hours ago, CWC1983 said:

At most, I can see 10 clubs wanting to carry on, 3 bottom clubs and 7th to 13th. The rest will be happy to either stay up or take their chances through the play offs in their current positions. 

However, it depends on how much money clubs will lose or gain depending on carrying on or starting. That will decide their stance. 

I may of missed it, but has there been anything said about tv contract money / prize money if the season stops now, and how often tests will need to be done and the cost of testing if they carry on?

Tv money has to be the driver surely? No gate revenue, no sponsor or corporate revenue. Putting valuable assets at a health risk. Wage deferrals will stop I guess if the players are back playing. 

I cant see the benefit of completing the season unless theres a pot of gold at the end. 

 

Pots of gold for some 

i cant see wage deferrals stopping as the money is not coming in 

[Sparkle]

9 hours ago, EtoileSportiveDeDerby said:

I must say I am a bit mystified by all the convoluted plans, discussions, arguments to complete the various leagues. To be clear for me football isn't essential, there is a risk so no need to persevere with the season, points per game if need be, job done. However if the authorities, governments, clubs, players really want to complete the season in the safest possible way why don't they isolate all staff involved.

There are carers who have locked themselves in care homes to protect the residents, NHS staff staying in hotel rooms to protect their families. On the news you see family members staying away or in caravans on the drive to isolate themselves from their loved ones. Those people are doing real jobs living in the real world so it should not be too tricky to transpose the idea to the parallel universe we all love to watch on a Saturday afternoon (unless Sky ducks it up for us of course) 

Excellent points made there, yet from now on it seems the government are going down a road  weather we like it or not that everybody goes back to your daily business but they should be aware of the risks of the virus and in all jobs there will be a reconsideration from employees if they are prepared to do their chosen occupations and in footballs case - do you want to be a footballer and if so you have to play or find another occupation in the long term.

my personal point of view is that this season should be voided as it’s been a very bad time, and proper preparations and rules should be put in place for next season with special attention about what happens if the season can’t be completed as everyone would know before a ball is kicked 

[Black ('n' White) Sheep]

12 hours ago, CWC1983 said:

These footballers will have to go to the supermarket as well.

Are we asking players and staff to take a risk to their health to ensure we have something to watch on tv while we stay at home risk free. Danny Rose said the same earlier this week. 

Anyway, the question I was trying to ask was about the £ side of it. Are clubs going to play behind closed doors, carry out testing and lose even more money just for compeditive integrity? Self interest will kick in.  

Like I said, ive probobly missed it. There maybe cash to be paid out on finishing the season.  

 

Health workers and retail workers have been expected to carry on as normal, risking their's and their family's health on a lot less money and in a higher risk environment... Get footballers back out on the pitch.