BREAKING NEWS - EFL's 7 point plan to save this season

[nbupperthongowl]

45 minutes ago, Dagmeister's Shadow said:

Yes, on this I fully agree with you. I don't envy the decision makers within the EFL; being classically stuck between a rock and a hard place. Yes there is much that is wrong with the business model of football in this country but that's an argument for another day IMO.

As I've said previously I expect this season to be voided eventually however given the real uncertainty of how long this crisis will last it might even be that a resumption of play will only be possible late in the year or early next. In that case a much delayed finish this of season's competitions might be the only option left with the 20/21 season not being played at all.

Isn't it a worse scenario to void a whole season rather than just part of this season?

With no income for a whole season every team including the premier League would go bust....I just don't understand how that could be an option

[owlinexile]

17 hours ago, torres said:

A bin man or a footballer?? Seriously??
 

Football came through 2 world wars I think it will be able to get through having 4 months off 

 

 

 

Football was suspended during both World Wars.

 

A lot of the footballers signed up and went off to fight (and didn't come back).

[the third man]

1 hour ago, Bulgaria said:

With respect, one highly doubts they would have been so generous if 100 million pounds was at stake with numerous monetary windfalls coming their way.

 

So peoples health is irrelevant if a lot of money is at stake, its a good job that most industries and people are not taking that stance at the moment

 

 

[Dick_Turpin]

9 hours ago, DJMortimer said:

 

Your analogies regarding other companies are relevant when it comes to ethics, finance, forward planning and long term survival. All of them are clearly concerned at returning to something like normal as quickly as practically possible for many reasons that are entirely obvious. I'm not suggesting football is seeking to disregard government and scientific guidelines or that formulating future options is anything other than logical. It's actually informative and relevant to see how long they think they would need for the current season to be concluded.

 

But none of those other organisations mentioned are publicising models that are primarily dependent on artificial and unrealistic schedules for the sake of it's own convenience (outside of the pre-existing constrictions of the outbreak that apply to everybody), and potentially jeopardising the health of hundreds of people in the first instance; and growing exponentially. And many of these businesses are doing this knowing full well that their very future existence is at stake.

 

There is simply no answer to the football related problems that will be satisfactory or not cause widespread damage in one way or another and the authorities are in an unenviable position with so many ramifications for any decision they take. But putting this out there on the same day as the country experienced it's highest death rate from the virus yet and most projections are that social isolation in some form will probably be necessary for a period that extends beyond even the end of this optimistic timetable seems regrettable at best.

I think the plans are highly unlikely to come to fruition but a short sharp end of season before restrictions are put back into place might be the only hope for serious football when the current lockdown ends. 

 

As for the rest of it you’re making moral and ethical impositions on a sport when it’s simply doing what every other business will be doing - contingency planning. 

 

In none one of this has football said it’s more important than any other sector.  They’ll play if they can. They won’t if they can’t. And the decision to try and finish this season is no more or less moral than voiding it.

 

If we were top of the Championship we’d have more of a vested interest in finding a way to finish the season. Anyway at the moment it seems that’s what most clubs want to do and you can see why that’s the neatest option. 

 

The football authorities are poo. The game is ruined. But I just happen to think that there’s a lot of faux outrage and pomposity about this particular issue. It’s not football that didn’t plan properly for this whole pandemic, run the NHS down, fail to provide sufficient PPE, send out mixed messages, fail to test and contact trace. 

 

Just chill - they’ll play when they can. They won’t while they can’t. They really aren’t going to “jeopardise the lives of hundreds of people” any more than the rest of us will be doing when the restrictions end.  Inherent risks will remain when we come out of this thing - the legality of having large gatherings will decide whether football with crowds can resume.

 

Fair enough slag them for naivety or wishful thinking but attacking them for uniquely putting peoples lives at risk is only justified if you assume they will break the law or ignore government recommendations. I simply cannot see that happening. 

[Guest]

 

[the third man]

2 minutes ago, rickygoo said:

 

 

Just chill - they’ll play when they can. They won’t while they can’t. They really aren’t going to “jeopardise the lives of hundreds of people” any more than the rest of us will be doing when the restrictions end.  Inherent risks will remain when we come out of this thing - the legality of having large gatherings will decide whether football with crowds can resume.

 

 

Liverpool played their CL match when people were asked to stay at home and a few days before a lockdown because they saw the money and the glory

 

Cheltenham was run with loads of experts saying it shouldn't be, because of the money they would lose if it wasn't run

 

Football cant wit to start because of the money it will lose if it doesn't

 

So I am afraid your statement doesn't stand up to scrutiny

 

[Dick_Turpin]

8 minutes ago, the third man said:

 

So peoples health is irrelevant if a lot of money is at stake, its a good job that most industries and people are not taking that stance at the moment

 

 

Football is not threatening people’s health. They did the opposite and cancelled games before the lockdown. 

[the third man]

2 minutes ago, Grandad said:

 

This cant happen with the current restrictions in place, and one they are lifted there will be no need to do it

[Dick_Turpin]

Just now, the third man said:

Liverpool played their CL match when people were asked to stay at home and a few days before a lockdown because they saw the money and the glory

 

Cheltenham was run with loads of experts saying it shouldn't be, because of the money they would lose if it wasn't run

 

Football cant wit to start because of the money it will lose if it doesn't

 

So I am afraid your statement doesn't stand up to scrutiny

 

Football isn’t racing -  they cancelled the games pre lockdown when crowds weren’t banned. 

 

 

[the third man]

2 minutes ago, rickygoo said:

Football is not threatening people’s health. They did the opposite and cancelled games before the lockdown. 

 

Just to repeat

 

Liverpool played their CL match when people were asked to stay at home and a few days before a lockdown because they saw the money and the glory

 

And the comment wasn't about risking peoples lives, it was about money

[Dick_Turpin]

2 minutes ago, the third man said:

This cant happen with the current restrictions in place, and one they are lifted there will be no need to do it

You mean they’ll finish the season in front of crowds? 

[the third man]

1 minute ago, rickygoo said:

Football isn’t racing -  they cancelled the games pre lockdown when crowds weren’t banned. 

 

 

Again

 

Liverpool played their CL match when people were asked to stay at home and a few days before a lockdown because they saw the money and the glory

 

Yes only against advice, not regulations

 

[scram]

2 minutes ago, rickygoo said:

Football isn’t racing -  they cancelled the games pre lockdown when crowds weren’t banned. 

 

 

 

They initially cancelled a weekends worth of games because it was increasingly clear that many teams couldn't take part from having had to self-isolate

 

Not out of concern from crowds gathering

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, the third man said:

This cant happen with the current restrictions in place, and one they are lifted there will be no need to do it

 

I think the EFL 7 point plan was based on a relaxing of the lockdown rules based around more readily available testing - rather than the rules being lifted completely

[Dick_Turpin]

5 minutes ago, the third man said:

 

Just to repeat

 

Liverpool played their CL match when people were asked to stay at home and a few days before a lockdown because they saw the money and the glory

 

And the comment wasn't about risking peoples lives, it was about money

The Johnson press conference telling us to stay home and advising us not to go into pubs etc was a few days .after the Madrid  game.

 

In retrospect it would have been better if the game hadn’t been played but there were no restrictions in place - football acted ahead of the formal government restrictions and wasn’t flouting any government advice. 

[owlinexile]

6 hours ago, Mr. Tom said:

Bottom line is, football is the very definition of non-essential. It exists purely for our entertainment, because we invented it FOR FUN, and should be one of the very LAST areas of society being given any priority whatsoever in terms of financial support or logistical planning.

 

I appreciate that there are livelihoods involved for people other than just wealthy high-level playing staff, and to those people I am very sorry if I sound harsh or callous.

 

But some form of prioritisation is going to have to be the new reality as we reboot our economy and society after all this. We simply cannot justify putting spectator sports anywhere other than at the very bottom of the pile, along with other equally non-essential industries like fast fashion, indulgence foods and luxury goods.

 

The amount of waste, greed and utter frivolity that we’ve come to accept as normal across the board is absolutely shocking and I for one will be rethinking how I prioritise my own life and spending after this. Football plays a role in society that goes beyond the game itself, undoubtedly, and for that reason I will still gladly participate as a fan when the time is right to do so. But I could do that anywhere, for a lot less than £35 a time, and not have to be supporting grotesque wages at the upper echelons of a supposedly grassroots industry that’s lost its damn mind.

 

There will need to be a massive rethink of the whole thing after this. It cannot carry on the way it has been since the 1990s - this horrible worldwide situation has totally highlighted the utter visibility of the emperor’s dangly bits. Well, about time.

 

Absolutely.

 

Football is the very definition of something that is utterly pointless with no fans watching.

 

By starting up again, clubs are signalling that the needs (and wallets) of gambling addicts in China and the Middle East are more important to them than their own fans, the health of their own staff and that of all the medical staff, broadcasting crews, etc etc that they will have to bring in to run this behind closed doors scheme.

 

Which we already know they are, but they bloody shouldn't be.

[Dick_Turpin]

12 minutes ago, scram said:

 

They initially cancelled a weekends worth of games because it was increasingly clear that many teams couldn't take part from having had to self-isolate

 

Not out of concern from crowds gathering

The initial impetus globally was to play behind closed doors which was never going to work.

 

Football was slow to act but so was the whole of the world just about - especially the British government. Before the first weekend of cancellations I was umming and aahing about going. I was really glad they took the decision out of my hands. 

[happy bunny]

The 7 point plan doesn't address the problem of player contracts

 

Or have I missed something?

[Dick_Turpin]

3 minutes ago, happy bunny said:

The 7 point plan doesn't address the problem of player contracts

 

Or have I missed something?

FIFA are looking at that. 

[scram]

9 minutes ago, rickygoo said:

FIFA are looking at that. 

 

 

They are taking legal advice - so will be legions of player lawyers

 

This is not straightforward and the players always have the option to not play

 

My guess is that the law will be in their side too - they signed contracts in good faith and fixed-term contracts are pretty water tight

 

FIFA are not the law