I don’t really sympathise with them either. They’ve gone into the season knowing three teams have to get relegated. Even in normal circumstances anyone can say that a team being relegated is harsh financially, but it is what it is. If they don’t want to get relegated then they should have done better upto this point and should back themselves to compete with other teams to avoid relegation if the competition returns.
If you were running one of these clubs, given the financial benefits of being in the PL, wouldn't you be doing everything you can to avoid relegation... using every trick in the book?
I don't see how anyone can blame them.
Brilliant idea, just need 14pl clubs to agree and vote on that.
As the fan of a club who is starting to see the financial effects relegation from the PL can have first hand, I don't blame them one bit. They should stick to their guns.
EPL and FA won’t want the flak if anyone gets Covid-19 due to them pressuring them into restarting, you can’t relegate teams on that basis
Pay them off.
I'm assuming this is their main fear of relegation so mitigate it and give the relegated teams extra money.
Just finish the season when it’s safe to do so, as yet it obviously isn’t
It is a disgrace. It's like City saying they won't restart as it isn't fair that Liverpool are about to win it. Get over it. Life isn't fair and nor is football.
The show must go on. Our economy needs it. Football, ultimately, is a business remember and it must restart.
Clubs go into the season knowing three teams will get relegated and the financial effects that could have though, it’s not new, it’s part of the competition. Removing or attempting to stop that part of the competition just doesn’t make objective (looking at whole picture not just one club) sense to me, especially if done at the expense of clubs getting promoted to get that financial benefit! Or especially if relegation/promotion is stopped but we still have clubs getting league titles / European places.
If clubs wanted to avoid relegation so much, they could/should have managed the club better such that they’re not in a relegation battle to begin with or are confident that they could escape the relegation battle if the season restarts.
It is strange how a "neutral" observer cannot see things from the perspective of these clubs.
Kunta says clubs knew 3 teams would get relegated before the season started. This is true, but that was on the basis of 19 home and 19 away games each, not 14 home, 15 away and 9 neutral.
Of course those in danger of relegation will fight for what is best for themselves. Taking away home advantage is massive for those clubs, Norwich for example have won 75% of their points at home. Brighton have a record of 10 points from 12 at home to Man Utd and Arsenal in recent seasons, compared to 4 from 18 away. Making them play those two home fixtures at a neutral ground is a massive disdvantage to them.
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 5 minutes ago
Pay them off.
I'm assuming this is their main fear of relegation so mitigate it and give the relegated teams extra money.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pay them how much?
And who foots the bill, if the bulk of the money comes from TV money?
Makes little sense imo.
Either all the clubs agree to finish all 38 games or the season is done.
But could the PL actually look to expel clubs that refused to finish a season?
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 4 minutes ago
It is strange how a "neutral" observer cannot see things from the perspective of these clubs.
Kunta says clubs knew 3 teams would get relegated before the season started. This is true, but that was on the basis of 19 home and 19 away games each, not 14 home, 15 away and 9 neutral.
Of course those in danger of relegation will fight for what is best for themselves. Taking away home advantage is massive for those clubs, Norwich for example have won 75% of their points at home. Brighton have a record of 10 points from 12 at home to Man Utd and Arsenal in recent seasons, compared to 4 from 18 away. Making them play those two home fixtures at a neutral ground is a massive disdvantage to them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There are very few "neutral" observers in any of this.
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 24 seconds ago
But could the PL actually look to expel clubs that refused to finish a season?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They wouldn’t dare
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 32 seconds ago
But could the PL actually look to expel clubs that refused to finish a season?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aren't all decisions voted on?
This thread feels a bit like listening to a multimillionaire celebrity telling the general population that we're all in it together and we all have to do our bit.
What do you guys think on the Championship promotion race then? Should they not get an opportunity for promotion, and the financial benefits that come with it? That is the implication if teams are trying to avoid relegation by whatever means necessary.
I'd be interested to see if there was any hard data that shows relegation threatened teams perform better at home. At the end of the season when every point matters I think there are times it could hinder the home players.
30 minutes remaining and needing a win and the fans turn on the players.. there aren't away goals and in ways neutral games could remove the possibility of fans making it harder to get a result.
Teams at the bottom are there because they lose the most games and collect the least points. Suggesting Brighton and others will be fine just cos they play at home seems a bit strange to me. Especially when u factor in Brighton playing at their home ground, but with no fans, as an example of what alternatives are available.
Just being devil's advocate. Just interested to know if home fans are actually an advantage when the pressie is highl at the tail end of the season. Fans can create support but also abuse and pressure.
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 11 minutes ago
It is strange how a "neutral" observer cannot see things from the perspective of these clubs.
Kunta says clubs knew 3 teams would get relegated before the season started. This is true, but that was on the basis of 19 home and 19 away games each, not 14 home, 15 away and 9 neutral.
Of course those in danger of relegation will fight for what is best for themselves. Taking away home advantage is massive for those clubs, Norwich for example have won 75% of their points at home. Brighton have a record of 10 points from 12 at home to Man Utd and Arsenal in recent seasons, compared to 4 from 18 away. Making them play those two home fixtures at a neutral ground is a massive disdvantage to them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But surely this can be argument can be used in their favour by removing the home advantage of the away teams they’re playing?
How can it be anything but scrapped?
3 month lay off
No home or away advantage
Form out the window
Injuries and fitness
Fundamental changes substitution rules
A random analogy but somewhat relevant. If a team in a relegation battle, under normal circumstances, had their stadium damaged or deemed unfit to use halfway through a season, would it be reasonable to say that team could ever be exempt for relegation for that season?
Surely, the teams need to know what they are voting for? If the season is null and void then the bottom 6 will vote not to play. If final standings then only the bottom 3 will vote to play. But then I presume CL challengers will vote to carry on.
Why can't they tell them what the decision will be if the season can't be completed?
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 40 seconds ago
How can it be anything but scrapped?
3 month lay off
No home or away advantage
Form out the window
Injuries and fitness
Fundamental changes substitution rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Huge amounts of money. Id be absolutely amazed if.they managed to get Prem and EFL clubs to agree to scrap it without numerous financial legal claims.
Decision this week apparently and behimd closed doors looks likely looking at other countries and thrre is nowhere near as much cash involved in their leagues.
Sign in if you want to comment
Embarrassing
Page 1 of 6
6
posted on 11/5/20
I don’t really sympathise with them either. They’ve gone into the season knowing three teams have to get relegated. Even in normal circumstances anyone can say that a team being relegated is harsh financially, but it is what it is. If they don’t want to get relegated then they should have done better upto this point and should back themselves to compete with other teams to avoid relegation if the competition returns.
posted on 11/5/20
If you were running one of these clubs, given the financial benefits of being in the PL, wouldn't you be doing everything you can to avoid relegation... using every trick in the book?
I don't see how anyone can blame them.
posted on 11/5/20
Burn them at the stake.
posted on 11/5/20
Brilliant idea, just need 14pl clubs to agree and vote on that.
posted on 11/5/20
As the fan of a club who is starting to see the financial effects relegation from the PL can have first hand, I don't blame them one bit. They should stick to their guns.
posted on 11/5/20
EPL and FA won’t want the flak if anyone gets Covid-19 due to them pressuring them into restarting, you can’t relegate teams on that basis
posted on 11/5/20
Pay them off.
I'm assuming this is their main fear of relegation so mitigate it and give the relegated teams extra money.
posted on 11/5/20
Just finish the season when it’s safe to do so, as yet it obviously isn’t
posted on 11/5/20
It is a disgrace. It's like City saying they won't restart as it isn't fair that Liverpool are about to win it. Get over it. Life isn't fair and nor is football.
The show must go on. Our economy needs it. Football, ultimately, is a business remember and it must restart.
posted on 11/5/20
Clubs go into the season knowing three teams will get relegated and the financial effects that could have though, it’s not new, it’s part of the competition. Removing or attempting to stop that part of the competition just doesn’t make objective (looking at whole picture not just one club) sense to me, especially if done at the expense of clubs getting promoted to get that financial benefit! Or especially if relegation/promotion is stopped but we still have clubs getting league titles / European places.
If clubs wanted to avoid relegation so much, they could/should have managed the club better such that they’re not in a relegation battle to begin with or are confident that they could escape the relegation battle if the season restarts.
posted on 11/5/20
It is strange how a "neutral" observer cannot see things from the perspective of these clubs.
Kunta says clubs knew 3 teams would get relegated before the season started. This is true, but that was on the basis of 19 home and 19 away games each, not 14 home, 15 away and 9 neutral.
Of course those in danger of relegation will fight for what is best for themselves. Taking away home advantage is massive for those clubs, Norwich for example have won 75% of their points at home. Brighton have a record of 10 points from 12 at home to Man Utd and Arsenal in recent seasons, compared to 4 from 18 away. Making them play those two home fixtures at a neutral ground is a massive disdvantage to them.
posted on 11/5/20
comment by Robbing Hoody - tell me I can't and I'll show you I can (U6374)
posted 5 minutes ago
Pay them off.
I'm assuming this is their main fear of relegation so mitigate it and give the relegated teams extra money.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pay them how much?
And who foots the bill, if the bulk of the money comes from TV money?
Makes little sense imo.
posted on 11/5/20
Either all the clubs agree to finish all 38 games or the season is done.
posted on 11/5/20
But could the PL actually look to expel clubs that refused to finish a season?
posted on 11/5/20
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 4 minutes ago
It is strange how a "neutral" observer cannot see things from the perspective of these clubs.
Kunta says clubs knew 3 teams would get relegated before the season started. This is true, but that was on the basis of 19 home and 19 away games each, not 14 home, 15 away and 9 neutral.
Of course those in danger of relegation will fight for what is best for themselves. Taking away home advantage is massive for those clubs, Norwich for example have won 75% of their points at home. Brighton have a record of 10 points from 12 at home to Man Utd and Arsenal in recent seasons, compared to 4 from 18 away. Making them play those two home fixtures at a neutral ground is a massive disdvantage to them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There are very few "neutral" observers in any of this.
posted on 11/5/20
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 24 seconds ago
But could the PL actually look to expel clubs that refused to finish a season?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They wouldn’t dare
posted on 11/5/20
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 32 seconds ago
But could the PL actually look to expel clubs that refused to finish a season?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aren't all decisions voted on?
posted on 11/5/20
This thread feels a bit like listening to a multimillionaire celebrity telling the general population that we're all in it together and we all have to do our bit.
posted on 11/5/20
What do you guys think on the Championship promotion race then? Should they not get an opportunity for promotion, and the financial benefits that come with it? That is the implication if teams are trying to avoid relegation by whatever means necessary.
posted on 11/5/20
I'd be interested to see if there was any hard data that shows relegation threatened teams perform better at home. At the end of the season when every point matters I think there are times it could hinder the home players.
30 minutes remaining and needing a win and the fans turn on the players.. there aren't away goals and in ways neutral games could remove the possibility of fans making it harder to get a result.
Teams at the bottom are there because they lose the most games and collect the least points. Suggesting Brighton and others will be fine just cos they play at home seems a bit strange to me. Especially when u factor in Brighton playing at their home ground, but with no fans, as an example of what alternatives are available.
Just being devil's advocate. Just interested to know if home fans are actually an advantage when the pressie is highl at the tail end of the season. Fans can create support but also abuse and pressure.
posted on 11/5/20
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 11 minutes ago
It is strange how a "neutral" observer cannot see things from the perspective of these clubs.
Kunta says clubs knew 3 teams would get relegated before the season started. This is true, but that was on the basis of 19 home and 19 away games each, not 14 home, 15 away and 9 neutral.
Of course those in danger of relegation will fight for what is best for themselves. Taking away home advantage is massive for those clubs, Norwich for example have won 75% of their points at home. Brighton have a record of 10 points from 12 at home to Man Utd and Arsenal in recent seasons, compared to 4 from 18 away. Making them play those two home fixtures at a neutral ground is a massive disdvantage to them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But surely this can be argument can be used in their favour by removing the home advantage of the away teams they’re playing?
posted on 11/5/20
How can it be anything but scrapped?
3 month lay off
No home or away advantage
Form out the window
Injuries and fitness
Fundamental changes substitution rules
posted on 11/5/20
A random analogy but somewhat relevant. If a team in a relegation battle, under normal circumstances, had their stadium damaged or deemed unfit to use halfway through a season, would it be reasonable to say that team could ever be exempt for relegation for that season?
posted on 11/5/20
Surely, the teams need to know what they are voting for? If the season is null and void then the bottom 6 will vote not to play. If final standings then only the bottom 3 will vote to play. But then I presume CL challengers will vote to carry on.
Why can't they tell them what the decision will be if the season can't be completed?
posted on 11/5/20
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 40 seconds ago
How can it be anything but scrapped?
3 month lay off
No home or away advantage
Form out the window
Injuries and fitness
Fundamental changes substitution rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Huge amounts of money. Id be absolutely amazed if.they managed to get Prem and EFL clubs to agree to scrap it without numerous financial legal claims.
Decision this week apparently and behimd closed doors looks likely looking at other countries and thrre is nowhere near as much cash involved in their leagues.
Page 1 of 6
6