Jump to content

Premier League 2019/20


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, 0wl18 said:

If the league is effectively called off with Liverpool crowned champions, and the Champions League places going to those currently occupying the spaces, he’d be absolutely correct to say everyone should finish on the same amount of games. 

 

How can something like that be decided when, you have teams with games in hand, through no fault of their own? 2 fixtures behind closed doors sorts it. If it wasn’t the pigs involved you wouldn’t feel a morale outrage about it. 
 

Would it be fairer to complete the league? Absolutely. Would it be safer in this current climate? No. 

 

What moral outrage?

 

I just thought it was hilarious, United or not.

 

You can't decide things such as relegation and European places on an incomplete set of fixtures.

 

Let's say Villa play United in the only remaining game to be played, and are deemed to have gone down: they could still quite understandably claim that they've got an easier run-in than Brighton, who still have Arsenal, Leicester, Man Utd, Liverpool and Man City to play, and would have quite conceivably overcome their current four point deficit.

 

Such things can only be decided after a full set of fixtures. If that can't be achieved, then they'll just have to remain undecided for this year.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

What moral outrage?

 

I just thought it was hilarious, United or not.

 

You can't decide things such as relegation and European places on an incomplete set of fixtures.

 

Let's say Villa play United in the only remaining game to be played, and are deemed to have gone down: they could still quite understandably claim that they've got an easier run-in than Brighton, who still have Arsenal, Leicester, Man Utd, Liverpool and Man City to play, and would have quite conceivably overcome their current four point deficit.

 

Such things can only be decided after a full set of fixtures. If that can't be achieved, then they'll just have to remain undecided for this year.

So, I’ll ask you again, how are the European places determined? There’s not a chance in hell that the Champions League won’t be played next season so, who takes part?

 

You can’t decide something based on what might happen 10 games down the line. It’s quite clear, those games can not be played, the fairest alternative is to finish the season with everyone having played the same amount of games and, formulating a relegation/promotion plan from there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 0wl18 said:

So, I’ll ask you again, how are the European places determined? There’s not a chance in hell that the Champions League won’t be played next season so, who takes part?

 

You can’t decide something based on what might happen 10 games down the line. It’s quite clear, those games can not be played, the fairest alternative is to finish the season with everyone having played the same amount of games and, formulating a relegation/promotion plan from there.

 

Well, assuming this season can't be completed, revert back to the previous entrants and start again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I put forward a proposal not long back in a thread. It was based on the season finishing after 29 games.

 

Liverpool win the Premier League.

 

The Champions League qualification is determined by league position after 29 games.

 

Relegation + Promotion candidates to play off against each other.

 

Bottom Prem v Top Championship

2nd bottom prem v 2nd place Championship

3rd bottom prem v play off winners
 

Winner of above games gets a place in the prem, loser in the Championship. Biggest issue is time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

Well, assuming this season can't be completed, revert back to the previous entrants and start again.

How’s that any fairer than deciding after 29 games? 
 

Who takes Manchester City’s place considering they’re banned from UEFA competitions for the next 2 years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 0wl18 said:

How’s that any fairer than deciding after 29 games? 
 

Who takes Manchester City’s place considering they’re banned from UEFA competitions for the next 2 years?

 

Because those four teams qualified for the Champions League after playing every other team twice in a league season.

 

As for Man City, just hand their place to the 5th placed team from last season: Arsenal.

 

None of this is fair, but to decide relegation and promotion etc. on an incomplete set of fixtures is less fair in my eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

Because those four teams qualified for the Champions League after playing every other team twice in a league season.

 

As for Man City, just hand their place to the 5th placed team from last season: Arsenal.

 

None of this is fair, but to decide relegation and promotion etc. on an incomplete set of fixtures is less fair in my eyes.


To an extent It works with regards to the Champions League. I don’t agree that Arsenal should take the place, it would probably be fairer to allow City to take it and, have their ban start the following year? That way the top 4 remains the same. 
 

The issue then moves onto promotion and relegation. It’s a bit of a mess really! The Scottish style play off seems a fair approach, at least every team then has their destiny In their own hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, 0wl18 said:

I put forward a proposal not long back in a thread. It was based on the season finishing after 29 games.

 

Liverpool win the Premier League.

 

The Champions League qualification is determined by league position after 29 games.

 

Relegation + Promotion candidates to play off against each other.

 

Bottom Prem v Top Championship

2nd bottom prem v 2nd place Championship

3rd bottom prem v play off winners
 

Winner of above games gets a place in the prem, loser in the Championship. Biggest issue is time.

 

How is it fair that the top 6 positions in the PL get decided after 29 games but those in the bottom 3 after 29 games get a 2nd chance to preserve their status in a relegation/promotion play-off?

 

Deciding the league is null and void is fairer than deciding places based on positions with a quarter of the season remaining.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 02/04/2020 at 21:01, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

Well, assuming this season can't be completed, revert back to the previous entrants and start again.

Less Man City cause they've been naughty. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 02/04/2020 at 21:01, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

Well, assuming this season can't be completed, revert back to the previous entrants and start again.

Or better still , dont have European comps next season then everyone qualifies on merit the season after 

 

Because of the money involved we have all been brainwashed in to thinking it's the be all and end all 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, the monk said:

Or better still , dont have European comps next season then everyone qualifies on merit the season after 

 

Because of the money involved we have all been brainwashed in to thinking it's the be all and end all 

 

Because of the money involved the clubs have all been brainwashed in to thinking it's the be all and end all 

 

Money talks, fans are ignored

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 02/04/2020 at 20:05, 0wl18 said:

It’s all theoretical. If it’s cancelled and, they use the league standings to determine who reaches the Champions league or, who’s relegated then, you’re wrong, the teams involved simply have to all have played the same amount of games. 
 

That way, you’ve got an outcome after a set number of games. It’s then a level playing field for all. You can’t relegate Aston Villa when they have a game in hand, which if they win, keeps them up.

 

in principle I agree with what you’re saying but, in practice, it doesn’t work, especially when you factor in the European element. 

 

It's not a level playing field if (e.g.) Villa have had to play Liverpool twice and lost, but whoever finished one place above them has only played them once but instead had Norwich twice or whatever. 

Edited by southportdc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎02‎/‎04‎/‎2020 at 20:55, 0wl18 said:

So, I’ll ask you again, how are the European places determined? There’s not a chance in hell that the Champions League won’t be played next season so, who takes part?

 

You can’t decide something based on what might happen 10 games down the line. It’s quite clear, those games can not be played, the fairest alternative is to finish the season with everyone having played the same amount of games and, formulating a relegation/promotion plan from there.

You are making something that is very simple very hard.

 

This season is void, it never happened, then qualification for all competitions, what league teams play in, have already been decided on a full seasons fixtures, in 2018 / 19, it really is that simple

 

anything thing else except completing the season is unfair, we cant complete the season, under the current terms, that is finished before the end of June, unless it starts in four weeks, which is not going to happen

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/04/2020 at 11:47, the third man said:

 

Because of the money involved the clubs have all been brainwashed in to thinking it's the be all and end all 

 

Money talks, fans are ignored

 

But which fans do you listen to? The fans of Liverpool, Leicester, Leeds, West Brom etc will have a different opinion to lots of other fans. Likewise Fulham, Forest and Villa fans will look at things differently.  We can afford to take a lofty stance. I think it's particularly an issue for teams like Leicester, Leeds, West Brom, Coventry and the pigs. Winning the Premier League without fans there to celebrate the occasion is a bit of a hollow victory. But being denied promotion after so many years out of the top flight or or being prevented from entering the Champions League or qualifying for Europe is a big deal because there's a tangible effect on next season too. Likewise you can see why Karen Brady was the first to advocate cancelling the season

 

I don't think our fans would be so keen to void the season if we were sitting top of the Championship. Maybe you could argue that gives us a more informed, dispassionate perspective.  But I personally don't think there's much between the season being voided or decided on current placings. They are both a bit poo. The balance of teams played makes the current placings unfair but wiping out a season after 75% of games have been played seems unfair too.  Having said that I am top of my work's Fantasy League so I'd be quids in if the season is cancelled. Even our ancestors were inconsistent.  In 1914 football continued. In 1939 it stopped - and then started again in a truncated way.

 

And as for money being an issue. Christ where have people been for the last 30 years? But if that money is used wisely and is partly used to prevent some clubs going to the wall then I think it's a reasonable criteria to take into account.  That would be a major issue for me.  And if it's the broadcasters holding the clubs over a barrel then surely they're ones to be attacked too. Plus of course I'll be wanting some of my ST money back too. 

 

Basically the clubs are going to have to come up with a way through this between them that doesn't wrap football up in court action for the foreseeable future. It's a right flipping mess but then that's pandemics for you.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, rickygoo said:

 

But which fans do you listen to? The fans of Liverpool, Leicester, Leeds, West Brom etc will have a different opinion to lots of other fans. Likewise Fulham, Forest and Villa fans will look at things differently.  We can afford to take a lofty stance. I think it's particularly an issue for teams like Leicester, Leeds, West Brom, Coventry and the pigs. Winning the Premier League without fans there to celebrate the occasion is a bit of a hollow victory. But being denied promotion after so many years out of the top flight or or being prevented from entering the Champions League or qualifying for Europe is a big deal because there's a tangible effect on next season too. Likewise you can see why Karen Brady was the first to advocate cancelling the season

 

I don't think our fans would be so keen to void the season if we were sitting top of the Championship. Maybe you could argue that gives us a more informed, dispassionate perspective.  But I personally don't think there's much between the season being voided or decided on current placings. They are both a bit poo. The balance of teams played makes the current placings unfair but wiping out a season after 75% of games have been played seems unfair too.  Having said that I am top of my work's Fantasy League so I'd be quids in if the season is cancelled. Even our ancestors were inconsistent.  In 1914 football continued. In 1939 it stopped - and then started again in a truncated way.

 

And as for money being an issue. Christ where have people been for the last 30 years? But if that money is used wisely and is partly used to prevent some clubs going to the wall then I think it's a reasonable criteria to take into account.  That would be a major issue for me.  And if it's the broadcasters holding the clubs over a barrel then surely they're ones to be attacked too. Plus of course I'll be wanting some of my ST money back too. 

 

Basically the clubs are going to have to come up with a way through this between them that doesn't wrap football up in court action for the foreseeable future. It's a right flipping mess but then that's pandemics for you.

 

 

If we were top 6 no way would I want the season to be void, as you say a view can be changed dependent on the vested interest. I would still be much more inclined to finish the season when the opportunity arises than call it now though. 

Liverpool will or would win the league this season regardless of how it pans out but teams in and around other critical places will have been expecting they could make things change in their favour in the last quarter of the season. The blunts would expect to get something from their game in hand against Villa which could push them past Man Utd. Villa would likewise hope to get something from that game which would get them out of the bottom 3. 

Some say play that game and the Man Coty Arsenal game then it is fair as everyone has played 29 but it isn't really is it. As has been said, some will have played the likes of Man City and other top teams twice while others will have played Norwich and other strugglers twice which skews the results.

Furthermore, teams made signings in January with a means to improving their results. Man Utd are a clear case in point and could legitimately expect to finish above Chelsea by the end of the season based on their respective recent form. Brighton are woefully out of form and those in and around the relegation zone could expect to go above them in the remaining games.

 

It is a difficult one to judge, I would prefer finishing the season whenever possible and even having a shorter 2020/21 season - at least then everyone would know the situation from the start. However, if that means playing games from this season after July 1st then player contracts come into play and they have all the power. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rickygoo said:

 

But which fans do you listen to? The fans of Liverpool, Leicester, Leeds, West Brom etc will have a different opinion to lots of other fans. Likewise Fulham, Forest and Villa fans will look at things differently.  We can afford to take a lofty stance. I think it's particularly an issue for teams like Leicester, Leeds, West Brom, Coventry and the pigs. Winning the Premier League without fans there to celebrate the occasion is a bit of a hollow victory. But being denied promotion after so many years out of the top flight or or being prevented from entering the Champions League or qualifying for Europe is a big deal because there's a tangible effect on next season too. Likewise you can see why Karen Brady was the first to advocate cancelling the season

 

I don't think our fans would be so keen to void the season if we were sitting top of the Championship. Maybe you could argue that gives us a more informed, dispassionate perspective.  But I personally don't think there's much between the season being voided or decided on current placings. They are both a bit poo. The balance of teams played makes the current placings unfair but wiping out a season after 75% of games have been played seems unfair too.  Having said that I am top of my work's Fantasy League so I'd be quids in if the season is cancelled. Even our ancestors were inconsistent.  In 1914 football continued. In 1939 it stopped - and then started again in a truncated way.

 

And as for money being an issue. Christ where have people been for the last 30 years? But if that money is used wisely and is partly used to prevent some clubs going to the wall then I think it's a reasonable criteria to take into account.  That would be a major issue for me.  And if it's the broadcasters holding the clubs over a barrel then surely they're ones to be attacked too. Plus of course I'll be wanting some of my ST money back too. 

 

Basically the clubs are going to have to come up with a way through this between them that doesn't wrap football up in court action for the foreseeable future. It's a right flipping mess but then that's pandemics for you.

 

Was being specific, just a general that fans don't matter in the PL anymore, and like it or not we are waiting to see what the PL do about the problem, before the EFL follow their leader

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

If we were top 6 no way would I want the season to be void, as you say a view can be changed dependent on the vested interest. I would still be much more inclined to finish the season when the opportunity arises than call it now though. 

Liverpool will or would win the league this season regardless of how it pans out but teams in and around other critical places will have been expecting they could make things change in their favour in the last quarter of the season. The blunts would expect to get something from their game in hand against Villa which could push them past Man Utd. Villa would likewise hope to get something from that game which would get them out of the bottom 3. 

Some say play that game and the Man Coty Arsenal game then it is fair as everyone has played 29 but it isn't really is it. As has been said, some will have played the likes of Man City and other top teams twice while others will have played Norwich and other strugglers twice which skews the results.

Furthermore, teams made signings in January with a means to improving their results. Man Utd are a clear case in point and could legitimately expect to finish above Chelsea by the end of the season based on their respective recent form. Brighton are woefully out of form and those in and around the relegation zone could expect to go above them in the remaining games.

 

It is a difficult one to judge, I would prefer finishing the season whenever possible and even having a shorter 2020/21 season - at least then everyone would know the situation from the start. However, if that means playing games from this season after July 1st then player contracts come into play and they have all the power. 

 

I think finishing this season and playing a shortened season next year makes most sense, but with European competitions it's hard to see how we can unilaterally decide that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...