Jump to content

Ending 2020/21 season early


fifexile
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Garscube Road End 2 said:

I thinkbthat has been their plan all along. Create a super division where this is no relegation . Leave a pile of clubs, including ours to die.

Agree, and some of those that think they are one of the big clubs just now better watch their backs as the real big clubs will ditch them as quick as you can say 'take your medicine'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/54791629

I'm surprised as many as 20 clubs would give the SPFL the ability to call the season. Unsurprised that 38 aren't willing to 'take their medicine' and take 3-0 defeat if a side cannot fulfill their fixture.

That would suggest that 38 clubs think that its important to play the fixtures no matter what. Don't think that tallies with the number of clubs who voted to end last season early.

With it looking even less likely that fans will be back at games this season you would have thought the SPFL and SFA would have by now came up with a plan that the clubs could sign up to. rather than presenting the same option that is voted  down each time.

Its unlikely that even with a lockdown the Scottish Government will force the season to close so it would appear the decision is firmly with the SPFL. What could go wrong there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, laukat said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/54791629

I'm surprised as many as 20 clubs would give the SPFL the ability to call the season. Unsurprised that 38 aren't willing to 'take their medicine' and take 3-0 defeat if a side cannot fulfill their fixture.

That would suggest that 38 clubs think that its important to play the fixtures no matter what. Don't think that tallies with the number of clubs who voted to end last season early.

With it looking even less likely that fans will be back at games this season you would have thought the SPFL and SFA would have by now came up with a plan that the clubs could sign up to. rather than presenting the same option that is voted  down each time.

Its unlikely that even with a lockdown the Scottish Government will force the season to close so it would appear the decision is firmly with the SPFL. What could go wrong there?

If Scotland goes into tier 4, how can football actually be deemed as essential and allowed to continue? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

If Scotland goes into tier 4, how can football actually be deemed as essential and allowed to continue? 

Scottish Government framework is here  https://www.gov.scot/publications/covid-19-scotlands-strategic-framework/pages/9/

Tier 4 guideline for sport & exercise has the following:

Level 4

  • (Indoor) Gyms closed
  • Outdoor non-contact sports only (professional permitted)

Lockdown in England which is I believe equivalent to tier 4 also allows professional sport. So SG isn't going to close the leagues which puts the decision in the hand of the SPFL.

Also probably rules out clubs utilising Furlough. Looks like a rock and hard place for most clubs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, laukat said:

Scottish Government framework is here  https://www.gov.scot/publications/covid-19-scotlands-strategic-framework/pages/9/

Tier 4 guideline for sport & exercise has the following:

Level 4

  • (Indoor) Gyms closed
  • Outdoor non-contact sports only (professional permitted)

Lockdown in England which is I believe equivalent to tier 4 also allows professional sport. So SG isn't going to close the leagues which puts the decision in the hand of the SPFL.

Also probably rules out clubs utilising Furlough. Looks like a rock and hard place for most clubs.

I understand the framework, and I know we all want the football to go on, but compared to other businesses that can’t operate it seems strange 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Norgethistle said:

I understand the framework, and I know we all want the football to go on, but compared to other businesses that can’t operate it seems strange 

I don't disagree. However I think both Governments didn't want to face the backlash of stopping football again partly because the leagues and clubs fought such a campaign to get football back on asap. There is also a marginal case to say that having sport to watch helps some people cope with lockdown.

The rush by the SPFL to get the season underway without knowing when fans could return looked like a poor decision. Stunts like Doncaster and Mulreany stating it was a "political decision" to not allow fans in football games looked politically naive at the time and they may well have walked into a trap.  They have now put themselves and clubs in a position where they can't access furlough but can't continue to lose money by playing games without fans.

It would be really interesting to know what the SPFL told the clubs about the likelyhood of fans returning before they agreed to start the new season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, laukat said:

It would be really interesting to know what the SPFL told the clubs about the likelyhood of fans returning before they agreed to start the new season.

Further to that, and always a dangerous assumption with that lot, you'd imagine they also discussed timescales re limited attendance and importantly the levels of such. You can have sympathy with the SPFL as the pandemic lies outside of their control (thank ****) but what's the point of paying Doncaster (and others) big bucks during a period when they can't make decisive judgment? I reckon it's very unlikely that fan return for all but the smallest clubs will be anything other than on a staged basis. So even when these baby steps are applied it will still be some time before gate money is in excess of expenditure. Worse still, and dependent on the level of ST holders at each club, the first steps are likely to be costing the clubs more than the present closed door situation.

All very depressing. Putting aside my antipathy towards certain clubs, mothballing must be having an increased appeal, particularly in Leagues One & Two. My sympathy lying in the fact that most of these clubs have forever been run under financial prudence.  It may well be a case that a club continuing on under the status quo for another 24 games will kill them, whereas mothballing now/soon could save them. Meantime in absence of all that, and trying not to think of our own predicament, but I can see our league further reduced to 18 fixtures.  Also senior football has not as yet been subject to local restrictions. Given that the public in general can't (or are strongly discouraged to) move area to area, perhaps it's only a matter of a short time till one local authority objects to a football team travelling to or away from their region. 

Edited by lady-isobel-barnett
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:

Further to that, and always a dangerous assumption with that lot, you'd imagine they also discussed timescales re limited attendance and importantly the levels of such. You can have sympathy with the SPFL as the pandemic lies outside of their control (thank ****) but what's the point of paying Doncaster (and others) big bucks during a period when they can't make decisive judgment? I reckon it's very unlikely that fan return for all but the smallest clubs will be anything other than on a staged basis. So even when these baby steps are applied it will still be some time before gate money is in excess of expenditure. Worse still, and dependent on the level of ST holders at each club, the first steps are likely to be costing the clubs more than the present closed door situation.

All very depressing. Putting aside my antipathy towards certain clubs, mothballing must be having an increased appeal, particularly in Leagues One & Two. My sympathy lying in the fact that most of these clubs have forever been run under financial prudence.  It may well be a case that a club continuing on under the status quo for another 24 games will kill them, whereas mothballing now/soon could save them. Meantime in absence of all that, and trying not to think of our own predicament, but I can see our league further reduced to 18 fixtures.  Also senior football has not as yet been subject to local restrictions. Given that the public in general can't (or are strongly discouraged to) move area to area, perhaps it's only a matter of a short time till one local authority objects to a football team travelling to or away from their region. 

What does mothballing mean ? And will that save clubs ? 
There will still be costs even if games aren’t played and assuming the majority of team members and staff are made redundant.(even if you can make contracted players redundant). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

What does mothballing mean ? And will that save clubs ? 
There will still be costs even if games aren’t played and assuming the majority of team members and staff are made redundant.(even if you can make contracted players redundant). 

Know what you mean, it may well be too late.

Cost savings in travel one week and matchday  expenditure the next.  Because of intransigence re league set ups you've the likes of Stranraer and Annan travelling to Elgin etc etc. daft enough at the best of times. You'd assume that kick off times on Saturdays will be brought forward but floodlighting will still be required, especially for part time clubs re midweek training. I haven't included additional expenditure regarding covid but I imagine that's a significant outlay. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's three times now that member clubs have rejected the SPFL exec. being given even limited powers to end the season.   The member clubs clearly don't trust the exec. and in view of the tricks and "pressure " put upon clubs to end last season, with us as one of the victims, who can blame them. 

Doncaster still collects his massive salary for doing nothing.  Cash from government? Promises of a statement outlining a deal more than a month ago now, but no such statement.  Silence - & zero cash. I hoped that he would be on his way to the EFL,& we could get a real exec. with integrity,  but no such luck.

The SPFL have now hacked off some more clubs with Covid discipline hearings, so hopefully the backlash will grow to give sufficient numbers for change. But we're not there yet. Get him & the board out, & a proper exec with real power in, who can treat all clubs with respect, not just the favoured few.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:

If I was charged by the Scottish Government to dish out funding, subsidies, loans grants whatever to the various applying sports bodies, I'd most likely not prioritise an organisation that pays its chief exec a £380K+ salary.

I understand where you're coming from,  but a substantial sum has been given to the arts, as outlined in a previous post.  Sport is included in that ministerial brief, and both an initial sum + Barnett knock on for EFL clubs getting a bail out was promised,  but so far not delivered.

Again, as previously mentioned,  to remove Doncaster or even amend his salary needs SPFL board members to fall in with us malcontents, & that won't happen  (yet).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, laukat said:

I don't disagree. However I think both Governments didn't want to face the backlash of stopping football again partly because the leagues and clubs fought such a campaign to get football back on asap. There is also a marginal case to say that having sport to watch helps some people cope with lockdown.

The rush by the SPFL to get the season underway without knowing when fans could return looked like a poor decision. Stunts like Doncaster and Mulreany stating it was a "political decision" to not allow fans in football games looked politically naive at the time and they may well have walked into a trap.  They have now put themselves and clubs in a position where they can't access furlough but can't continue to lose money by playing games without fans.

It would be really interesting to know what the SPFL told the clubs about the likelyhood of fans returning before they agreed to start the new season.

Bars, restaurants and gyms have all spent a fortune to allow reopening, so I can understand if they had a backlash at what seems special treatment of football clubs. Now with a new travel ban becoming law, it becomes even more like preferential treatment, with players traveling all over the country

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Norgethistle said:

Bars, restaurants and gyms have all spent a fortune to allow reopening, so I can understand if they had a backlash at what seems special treatment of football clubs. Now with a new travel ban becoming law, it becomes even more like preferential treatment, with players traveling all over the country

Maybe jumping the gun a little bit. I think it is only under consideration at the moment.

Another point is that other countries with restrictions still allow professional sport to continue. This doesn’t mean it should be ok here, but it is worth pointing out.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:

Further to that, and always a dangerous assumption with that lot, you'd imagine they also discussed timescales re limited attendance and importantly the levels of such. You can have sympathy with the SPFL as the pandemic lies outside of their control (thank ****) but what's the point of paying Doncaster (and others) big bucks during a period when they can't make decisive judgment? I reckon it's very unlikely that fan return for all but the smallest clubs will be anything other than on a staged basis. So even when these baby steps are applied it will still be some time before gate money is in excess of expenditure. Worse still, and dependent on the level of ST holders at each club, the first steps are likely to be costing the clubs more than the present closed door situation.

All very depressing. Putting aside my antipathy towards certain clubs, mothballing must be having an increased appeal, particularly in Leagues One & Two. My sympathy lying in the fact that most of these clubs have forever been run under financial prudence.  It may well be a case that a club continuing on under the status quo for another 24 games will kill them, whereas mothballing now/soon could save them. Meantime in absence of all that, and trying not to think of our own predicament, but I can see our league further reduced to 18 fixtures.  Also senior football has not as yet been subject to local restrictions. Given that the public in general can't (or are strongly discouraged to) move area to area, perhaps it's only a matter of a short time till one local authority objects to a football team travelling to or away from their region. 

We could have a McCreas Mortgages Player of the Moth Award.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

Talk on one of the other forums that the likelihood of fans being back in stadiums before end of next season (21-22) is almost none

I think the best Tier any area can get to without a vaccine delivered to most of the population is Tier 1. A vaccine won't be available until next year and a vaccination programme in Scotland will easily take 12 months assuming there is enough vaccine available.

ICT, Ross County and Highland Leagues are getting crowds of 300 back because there are in tier 1. They may increase that amount but its not going to be full crowds and probably not much more than those clubs season ticket holders which would mean tier 1 doesn't bring any extra finance to clubs.

In the central belt of Scotland we may get to tier 1 temporarily in April/May through to August/September next year but will probably be mainly in tier 3 until Summer 2022.

In my opinion there is now a solid argument for moving the football season to the summer and play from May to September. Those months are the best for lower levels of the virus and offer the best possibility of crowds attending.

I don't see how you can mothball the season until summer 2022 but mothballing now until May 2021 might be a way out. Complications arise with the Euro finals and the early rounds of the european competitions but thats not a realistic concern for 90% of Scottish clubs. However given the 10% contain the 2 cheeks guess what will happen?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...