comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 35 seconds ago
The way it goes and always has done, is the 3 relegated go down they get nice parachute payments now to help them financially transition too, and 3 from the championship come up to reap the rewards financially...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The way it goes and always has done is teams play each other home and away and the results of these games determine their position in the league table , relegated go down they get nice parachute payments now to help them financially transition too, and 3 from the championship come up to reap the rewards financially...
There fixed it for you
in my eyes the championship teams having good seasons take priority over the 3 prem ones having bad seasons, if it was to come to that game.
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 7 minutes ago
I think whatever solution is reached has to compromise these teams the least and be fairest on them, even if it is at the cost of fiarness on others (1, 2 & 3). For this reason cancelling and av. pts is not fair enough to them.
___
Couldnt disagree more, they arent called great escapes for nothing either ffs. Up until this point they've been performing the worst over 2/3rds into a season... yes theres a few factors that have contributed to this that come down to luck of the draw decided by a machine before the seasons begun for example, but everyone was in the same boat then and its as fair as its going to get.
Also when looking at relegated places theres 3 teams in the champs that deserve to come up and take their places too, its not like theyre just getting dumped out for nothing, its to make room as it always has been.
Again you fail to recognise or mention what voiding the entire season results it, as if it wipes the slate clean? nobody suffers? how is it fairest financially? you deny leeds and the championship teams that will get promoted all these financial benefits you are trying to keep the 3 prem clubs in relegation positions from losing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ignoiring Great escape....3 teams on the same points.
This isnt like your title where its in the bag. There is everything to play for at the bottom.
In one game week if result went a certain way, Brighton could go from 15 to 19. IN fact Borunemouth could lose their next game 1-0 Watford lose theirs 3-0 and thats enough to drop Watford in and push Bournemouth out.
It is fine margins. The consequences of relagtion are potentially massive. This should not be determined in such an arbitray way,
If the title was this tight and City were head i am sure youd be wanting a fairer solution than holding places or av. pts when (like these bottom teams) you had every chance to suceed.
Well said but 99% of the time these teams go down. We cant use one exception to influence our rationale, can we?
However, what I really feel you didn't consider is that your notion cuts both ways.
If you go down to the Championship what happens to teams who have invested millions and decades in a promotion push only to have that opportunity taken from them?
I don't think the financial impact of voiding the season should be a factor. Your suggestion is fundamentally unfair by the fact that it favours and gives the advantage to teams that are at the bottom.
The financial impact cannot be a factor when it comes to fairness. It cannot carry more weight than the effort, perspiration and work that has taken place on the pitch.
You're punishing teams for not being in the relegation zone and rewarding those that are. Fundamentally unfair IMO.
The most fair way is to reward teams based on what has been achieved up to the moment the league was called. Not the fairest but certainly fairer than what you said.
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 6 minutes ago
in my eyes the championship teams having good seasons take priority over the 3 prem ones having bad seasons, if it was to come to that game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed a difficult balance to call. But again there are no certain winners there. who says who goes up?
comment by Doggie Dog© (U22357)
posted 3 minutes ago
Well said but 99% of the time these teams go down. We cant use one exception to influence our rationale, can we?
However, what I really feel you didn't consider is that your notion cuts both ways.
If you go down to the Championship what happens to teams who have invested millions and decades in a promotion push only to have that opportunity taken from them?
I don't think the financial impact of voiding the season should be a factor. Your suggestion is fundamentally unfair by the fact that it favours and gives the advantage to teams that are at the bottom.
The financial impact cannot be a factor when it comes to fairness. It cannot carry more weight than the effort, perspiration and work that has taken place on the pitch.
You're punishing teams for not being in the relegation zone and rewarding those that are. Fundamentally unfair IMO.
The most fair way is to reward teams based on what has been achieved up to the moment the league was called. Not the fairest but certainly fairer than what you said.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My basis is simple. You cannot relegate teams that are mathematically not down Nor can you promote teams that are not mathematically certain of going up.
Sure Leeds may have spent a fortune but it still does not guarantee they will go up, even now if the league restarts.
In essence, fairer not to take something away from someone than not give something to someone that they havent yet earned. But i concede it's a very finely balanced argument.
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 6 minutes ago
in my eyes the championship teams having good seasons take priority over the 3 prem ones having bad seasons, if it was to come to that game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed a difficult balance to call. But again there are no certain winners there. who says who goes up?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sporting merit perhaps. Same way the CL places would be decided in the prem is the same way they decide promotion, assuming that's what happens.
My basis is simple. You cannot relegate teams that are mathematically not down Nor can you promote teams that are not mathematically certain of going up.
------
Is this not off the table now?
If they choose to use Sporting merit to decide the league, I assume this will not be the case. Also, if they use points per game then it won't be the case.
What I'm tryna say is this rule does not seem to be in the consideration of the football powers.
However, your suggestion is sound, it's your rationale that I disagreed with. You started with relegation teams but I agree with your conclusion except that perhaps we really should consider expanding the league temporarily.
I hope the season can just be played out. Avoids all the mess and gets us watching football again. Needs to get started soon though.
I find UEFAs position slightly alarming though. YEs they are rightly planning to complete their comps, but actually these should be the first things to go if its clear that holding them comprosies finishing this season and having a full 20/21 season. Their focus seems very self centred but then again they are a massive business.
comment by Doggie Dog© (U22357)
posted 1 minute ago
My basis is simple. You cannot relegate teams that are mathematically not down Nor can you promote teams that are not mathematically certain of going up.
------
Is this not off the table now?
If they choose to use Sporting merit to decide the league, I assume this will not be the case. Also, if they use points per game then it won't be the case.
What I'm tryna say is this rule does not seem to be in the consideration of the football powers.
However, your suggestion is sound, it's your rationale that I disagreed with. You started with relegation teams but I agree with your conclusion except that perhaps we really should consider expanding the league temporarily.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
UEFA are only referring to who qualifies for their competitions. That is their only focus and really the only control they have. The EPL can do what they want but whether the EPL action satisfies UEFA in respect of who goes into the UCL/Europa is a different matter.
Yeah but UEFA are still forcing clubs to chose one option which once chosen will automatically and immediately bind and force the clubs to apply the same rule chosen for top 4 throughout the league to maintain fairness, no?
comment by Doggie Dog© (U22357)
posted 2 hours, 13 minutes ago
Yeah but UEFA are still forcing clubs to chose one option which once chosen will automatically and immediately bind and force the clubs to apply the same rule chosen for top 4 throughout the league to maintain fairness, no?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dont think i know of what you seapk.
UEFA's last statement was entitled: Executive Committee approves guidelines on eligibility for participation in UEFA competitions.
It is exactly that - Guidelines relating to to how clubs are selected to compete in next seasons UEFA s club competitions
Its easy to say but
the procedure for selecting clubs should be based on objective, transparent and non-discriminatory principles. National Associations and Leagues, should otherwise have the ability to decide the final positions in their domestic competitions, having regard to the specific circumstances of each competition
UEFA reserves the right to refuse or evaluate the admission to any club proposed by a National Association from a prematurely terminated domestic competition
------
Statements like these found within the 'guidelines' make me think this is UEFA running the show and delegating powers to the leagues to award European places. Powers which can be taken away if the league fails to comply with the guidelines.
I think that's pretty conclusive.
Well the precedent has been set. No champions no promotions no relegations.
comment by Andy Grays cc... Deano and Dalian remember utv (U4819)
posted 1 hour, 26 minutes ago
Well the precedent has been set. No champions no promotions no relegations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yep. The Dutch have got it right.
UEFA have said nothing yet about how national leagues should deal with internal championships. All they have said is how they think leagues should approach putting teams forwards for the next international competitions. They might hope leagues would use the same approach for internal competitions, but they haven't said it outright and I don't think they have the authority to.
The PL might nevertheless be tempted to follow the UEFA approach, but I doubt if they'd get the backing.
Fact is, relegation is a huge minus for any club, and I reckon promotion is not quite the same bonus. Take Leeds. They're looking likely (but by no means certain) for promotion. They're entitled to feel unhappy if they're denied the chance of it. But if they don't get it they are still in a good place. I'd back them to have a very good chance of promotion next year. What's more, they might have an even better team, which in turn might give them a better chance of staying up if they do get promoted.
Teams getting relegated though take a big hit. They almost always lose players and have to rebuild to some degree. Finances can be difficult. Few teams bounce straight back.
Bottom line. If the season can't complete, then the criteria for establishing promotion and relegation can't be met. Declaring it void is the only fair solution.
Sign in if you want to comment
UEFA Directives
Page 3 of 3
posted on 24/4/20
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 35 seconds ago
The way it goes and always has done, is the 3 relegated go down they get nice parachute payments now to help them financially transition too, and 3 from the championship come up to reap the rewards financially...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The way it goes and always has done is teams play each other home and away and the results of these games determine their position in the league table , relegated go down they get nice parachute payments now to help them financially transition too, and 3 from the championship come up to reap the rewards financially...
There fixed it for you
posted on 24/4/20
in my eyes the championship teams having good seasons take priority over the 3 prem ones having bad seasons, if it was to come to that game.
posted on 24/4/20
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 7 minutes ago
I think whatever solution is reached has to compromise these teams the least and be fairest on them, even if it is at the cost of fiarness on others (1, 2 & 3). For this reason cancelling and av. pts is not fair enough to them.
___
Couldnt disagree more, they arent called great escapes for nothing either ffs. Up until this point they've been performing the worst over 2/3rds into a season... yes theres a few factors that have contributed to this that come down to luck of the draw decided by a machine before the seasons begun for example, but everyone was in the same boat then and its as fair as its going to get.
Also when looking at relegated places theres 3 teams in the champs that deserve to come up and take their places too, its not like theyre just getting dumped out for nothing, its to make room as it always has been.
Again you fail to recognise or mention what voiding the entire season results it, as if it wipes the slate clean? nobody suffers? how is it fairest financially? you deny leeds and the championship teams that will get promoted all these financial benefits you are trying to keep the 3 prem clubs in relegation positions from losing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ignoiring Great escape....3 teams on the same points.
This isnt like your title where its in the bag. There is everything to play for at the bottom.
In one game week if result went a certain way, Brighton could go from 15 to 19. IN fact Borunemouth could lose their next game 1-0 Watford lose theirs 3-0 and thats enough to drop Watford in and push Bournemouth out.
It is fine margins. The consequences of relagtion are potentially massive. This should not be determined in such an arbitray way,
If the title was this tight and City were head i am sure youd be wanting a fairer solution than holding places or av. pts when (like these bottom teams) you had every chance to suceed.
posted on 24/4/20
Well said but 99% of the time these teams go down. We cant use one exception to influence our rationale, can we?
However, what I really feel you didn't consider is that your notion cuts both ways.
If you go down to the Championship what happens to teams who have invested millions and decades in a promotion push only to have that opportunity taken from them?
I don't think the financial impact of voiding the season should be a factor. Your suggestion is fundamentally unfair by the fact that it favours and gives the advantage to teams that are at the bottom.
The financial impact cannot be a factor when it comes to fairness. It cannot carry more weight than the effort, perspiration and work that has taken place on the pitch.
You're punishing teams for not being in the relegation zone and rewarding those that are. Fundamentally unfair IMO.
The most fair way is to reward teams based on what has been achieved up to the moment the league was called. Not the fairest but certainly fairer than what you said.
posted on 24/4/20
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 6 minutes ago
in my eyes the championship teams having good seasons take priority over the 3 prem ones having bad seasons, if it was to come to that game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed a difficult balance to call. But again there are no certain winners there. who says who goes up?
posted on 24/4/20
comment by Doggie Dog© (U22357)
posted 3 minutes ago
Well said but 99% of the time these teams go down. We cant use one exception to influence our rationale, can we?
However, what I really feel you didn't consider is that your notion cuts both ways.
If you go down to the Championship what happens to teams who have invested millions and decades in a promotion push only to have that opportunity taken from them?
I don't think the financial impact of voiding the season should be a factor. Your suggestion is fundamentally unfair by the fact that it favours and gives the advantage to teams that are at the bottom.
The financial impact cannot be a factor when it comes to fairness. It cannot carry more weight than the effort, perspiration and work that has taken place on the pitch.
You're punishing teams for not being in the relegation zone and rewarding those that are. Fundamentally unfair IMO.
The most fair way is to reward teams based on what has been achieved up to the moment the league was called. Not the fairest but certainly fairer than what you said.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My basis is simple. You cannot relegate teams that are mathematically not down Nor can you promote teams that are not mathematically certain of going up.
Sure Leeds may have spent a fortune but it still does not guarantee they will go up, even now if the league restarts.
In essence, fairer not to take something away from someone than not give something to someone that they havent yet earned. But i concede it's a very finely balanced argument.
posted on 24/4/20
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 6 minutes ago
in my eyes the championship teams having good seasons take priority over the 3 prem ones having bad seasons, if it was to come to that game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed a difficult balance to call. But again there are no certain winners there. who says who goes up?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sporting merit perhaps. Same way the CL places would be decided in the prem is the same way they decide promotion, assuming that's what happens.
posted on 24/4/20
My basis is simple. You cannot relegate teams that are mathematically not down Nor can you promote teams that are not mathematically certain of going up.
------
Is this not off the table now?
If they choose to use Sporting merit to decide the league, I assume this will not be the case. Also, if they use points per game then it won't be the case.
What I'm tryna say is this rule does not seem to be in the consideration of the football powers.
However, your suggestion is sound, it's your rationale that I disagreed with. You started with relegation teams but I agree with your conclusion except that perhaps we really should consider expanding the league temporarily.
posted on 24/4/20
I hope the season can just be played out. Avoids all the mess and gets us watching football again. Needs to get started soon though.
I find UEFAs position slightly alarming though. YEs they are rightly planning to complete their comps, but actually these should be the first things to go if its clear that holding them comprosies finishing this season and having a full 20/21 season. Their focus seems very self centred but then again they are a massive business.
posted on 24/4/20
comment by Doggie Dog© (U22357)
posted 1 minute ago
My basis is simple. You cannot relegate teams that are mathematically not down Nor can you promote teams that are not mathematically certain of going up.
------
Is this not off the table now?
If they choose to use Sporting merit to decide the league, I assume this will not be the case. Also, if they use points per game then it won't be the case.
What I'm tryna say is this rule does not seem to be in the consideration of the football powers.
However, your suggestion is sound, it's your rationale that I disagreed with. You started with relegation teams but I agree with your conclusion except that perhaps we really should consider expanding the league temporarily.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
UEFA are only referring to who qualifies for their competitions. That is their only focus and really the only control they have. The EPL can do what they want but whether the EPL action satisfies UEFA in respect of who goes into the UCL/Europa is a different matter.
posted on 24/4/20
Yeah but UEFA are still forcing clubs to chose one option which once chosen will automatically and immediately bind and force the clubs to apply the same rule chosen for top 4 throughout the league to maintain fairness, no?
posted on 24/4/20
comment by Doggie Dog© (U22357)
posted 2 hours, 13 minutes ago
Yeah but UEFA are still forcing clubs to chose one option which once chosen will automatically and immediately bind and force the clubs to apply the same rule chosen for top 4 throughout the league to maintain fairness, no?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dont think i know of what you seapk.
UEFA's last statement was entitled: Executive Committee approves guidelines on eligibility for participation in UEFA competitions.
It is exactly that - Guidelines relating to to how clubs are selected to compete in next seasons UEFA s club competitions
posted on 24/4/20
Its easy to say but
the procedure for selecting clubs should be based on objective, transparent and non-discriminatory principles. National Associations and Leagues, should otherwise have the ability to decide the final positions in their domestic competitions, having regard to the specific circumstances of each competition
UEFA reserves the right to refuse or evaluate the admission to any club proposed by a National Association from a prematurely terminated domestic competition
------
Statements like these found within the 'guidelines' make me think this is UEFA running the show and delegating powers to the leagues to award European places. Powers which can be taken away if the league fails to comply with the guidelines.
I think that's pretty conclusive.
posted on 24/4/20
Well the precedent has been set. No champions no promotions no relegations.
posted on 24/4/20
OK then.
posted on 24/4/20
comment by Andy Grays cc... Deano and Dalian remember utv (U4819)
posted 1 hour, 26 minutes ago
Well the precedent has been set. No champions no promotions no relegations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yep. The Dutch have got it right.
UEFA have said nothing yet about how national leagues should deal with internal championships. All they have said is how they think leagues should approach putting teams forwards for the next international competitions. They might hope leagues would use the same approach for internal competitions, but they haven't said it outright and I don't think they have the authority to.
The PL might nevertheless be tempted to follow the UEFA approach, but I doubt if they'd get the backing.
Fact is, relegation is a huge minus for any club, and I reckon promotion is not quite the same bonus. Take Leeds. They're looking likely (but by no means certain) for promotion. They're entitled to feel unhappy if they're denied the chance of it. But if they don't get it they are still in a good place. I'd back them to have a very good chance of promotion next year. What's more, they might have an even better team, which in turn might give them a better chance of staying up if they do get promoted.
Teams getting relegated though take a big hit. They almost always lose players and have to rebuild to some degree. Finances can be difficult. Few teams bounce straight back.
Bottom line. If the season can't complete, then the criteria for establishing promotion and relegation can't be met. Declaring it void is the only fair solution.
Page 3 of 3