Tbh, they really need to abandon any relegation if they are not playing 38 games.Average points is the logical explanation for calling the league as it is now. It's probably the right and only answer. Only a few changes (I'm WFH and a little bored) as follows:
1. Liverpool [107]
2. Man City [77] (presumably banned from Europe for next season)
3. Leicester [69]
4. Chelsea [63]
5. Man Utd [59]
----
6. Sheffield United [58]
7. Wolves [56]
8. Arsenal [54]
----
9. Spurs [54]
10. Burnley [51]
11. Palace [51]
12. Everton [48]
13. Newcastle [46]
14. Southampton [45]
15. Brighton and Hove Albion [38]
16. West Ham [35]
17. Watford [35]
---
18. Bournemouth [35]
19. Villa [34]
20. Norwich [28]
N.B. There are obviously decimal points separating certain sides and this is taken into account without being shown.
So the only changes are Sheffield United and Wolves switch but both would qualify for Europe as City are crooks.
Arsenal would leapfrog Spurs in probably the most controversial change getting the last Europa league spot.
The other VERY harshdecision is for Watford to stay up and Bournemouth to go down on current GD. However, you could solve this by doing head-to-head in which Watford would stay up anyway, having drawn 0-0 at home and won 3-0 away.
Though obviously, the fairest option is for Covid to disappear and finish the season as it would have been, this is probably the fairest alternative based on real results across a season.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] The Times: Paul Barber didn't see the point of merely suspending Premier League matches
- Thread starter Wozza
- Start date
Average points is the logical explanation for calling the league as it is now. It's probably the right and only answer. Only a few changes (I'm WFH and a little bored) as follows:
1. Liverpool [107]
2. Man City [77] (presumably banned from Europe for next season)
3. Leicester [69]
4. Chelsea [63]
5. Man Utd [59]
----
6. Sheffield United [58]
7. Wolves [56]
8. Arsenal [54]
----
9. Spurs [54]
10. Burnley [51]
11. Palace [51]
12. Everton [48]
13. Newcastle [46]
14. Southampton [45]
15. Brighton and Hove Albion [38]
16. West Ham [35]
17. Watford [35]
---
18. Bournemouth [35]
19. Villa [34]
20. Norwich [28]
N.B. There are obviously decimal points separating certain sides and this is taken into account without being shown.
So the only changes are Sheffield United and Wolves switch but both would qualify for Europe as City are crooks.
Arsenal would leapfrog Spurs in probably the most controversial change getting the last Europa league spot.
The other VERY harsh
Though obviously, the fairest option is for Covid to disappear and finish the season as it would have been, this is probably the fairest alternative based on real results across a season.
With an Albion bias, I like the idea of average points.
Every solution is harsh to someone. Even completing the season next autumn, allows ManC and ManU to embark on their huge summer 20 transfer binges, giving them a new playing advantage over the other CL place chasing clubs.
With an Albion bias, I like the idea of average points.
Every solution is harsh to someone. Even completing the season next autumn, allows ManC and ManU to embark on their huge summer 20 transfer binges, giving them a new playing advantage over the other CL place chasing clubs.
Better harsh on 'Muff than anyone else tbh.
On July 1st, Man Utd and Man City etc. can buy up ( cash to agents and players ) any players from other teams who are out of contract, simply to prevent them playing for the rest of the season.With an Albion bias, I like the idea of average points.[emoji2]
Every solution is harsh to someone. Even completing the season next autumn, allows ManC and ManU to embark on their huge summer 20 transfer binges, giving them a new playing advantage over the other CL place chasing clubs.
The Bosman ruling makes this impossible to stop, so at that point league integrity goes.
I don't see how the season can finish - unless you want to write off the entire 20/21 season.
It sounds like the earliest football will resume is in the autumn. Say we start in early October and finish in early December. Clubs would need a month, at least, to sort out squads, so we resume in mid-January. We could scrap the cups, the CL and Europa league but would still have to fit in international fixtures. Even playing two games a week, would take us to June ... and then it's the Euros.
I think the only way it could be done would be to write off the Euros too and reduce the size of each division - but I can't see clubs nor natinonal FAs going for that.
It seems to me there are three options:
Merge this season and next by giving all teams a handicap for next season based on current points totals. Norwich start on zero points and all teams have the extra points over and above Norwich's current total. 2019/20 expunged but rolled into 20/21
End the season now, no relegation, promote the top 2 as it stands all the way down the pyramid.
Finish 19/20 in the autumn, then have a condensed 20/21 where teams only play each other once, perhaps ruling out one or more of the cup competitions to make it happen.
On balance, I think the third option is the least worst.
Merge this season and next by giving all teams a handicap for next season based on current points totals. Norwich start on zero points and all teams have the extra points over and above Norwich's current total. 2019/20 expunged but rolled into 20/21
End the season now, no relegation, promote the top 2 as it stands all the way down the pyramid.
Finish 19/20 in the autumn, then have a condensed 20/21 where teams only play each other once, perhaps ruling out one or more of the cup competitions to make it happen.
On balance, I think the third option is the least worst.
GOM
living vicariously
I reckon might be a 22 team league next season with 5 relegated
Papa Lazarou
Living in a De Zerbi wonderland
I can't see them having a league with odd numbers - we have enough free weekends as it is without adding to them
I just don't see how there can be any football unless the league force teams to play with potentially decimated squads.
The suppression measures put in place are designed to dramatically reduce the spread of the virus. If successful, this will mean small numbers of people (relative to the whole population) will be catching it all the time. I don't see how this can't mean that players, coaching staff and others at clubs won't be catching it here and there (or showing enough symptoms to self-isolate).
Unless leagues just state that clubs have to field a side no matter what, drawing from first team squads, U-23s and even youth ranks if needs be then there's going to be a near-continual disruption due to infections/suspected infections.
The suppression measures put in place are designed to dramatically reduce the spread of the virus. If successful, this will mean small numbers of people (relative to the whole population) will be catching it all the time. I don't see how this can't mean that players, coaching staff and others at clubs won't be catching it here and there (or showing enough symptoms to self-isolate).
Unless leagues just state that clubs have to field a side no matter what, drawing from first team squads, U-23s and even youth ranks if needs be then there's going to be a near-continual disruption due to infections/suspected infections.
symyjym
Banned
With the 2022 World Cup being played during winter time, the football seasons will have to shift anyway, so this could be managed to an advantage.
We might as well just suspend the season until June/July and play the season out then, and start the new season in Oct/Nov. Then in 2022 shift it further to start the season in January and finish November and then the break for the World Cup in Qatar. Then start the new season in 2023.
We have been moaning for years about a winter break, and with this virus it could force the winter break to happen.
We might as well just suspend the season until June/July and play the season out then, and start the new season in Oct/Nov. Then in 2022 shift it further to start the season in January and finish November and then the break for the World Cup in Qatar. Then start the new season in 2023.
We have been moaning for years about a winter break, and with this virus it could force the winter break to happen.
There's no way that we'll be playing football in June or July. The talk is of a six-month shutdown (possibly longer)
Agree - there's bound to be a steady stream of football club staff/players infected, so at any point in the next several weeks at least (and probably much longer) there will be clubs who can't field teams (even assuming they resume training etc). Do we reach a point where the strategy becomes one of just letting the virus run and isolation etc stops ? If not, struggling to see how we're ever going to get things moving again.
People with a nice neat season 2020/21 in their sights, should rethink.
Many are now talking about 12 to 18 months for the threat of COVID-19 to pass.
There’s an increasingly remote chance that the players of Brighton and other European clubs will be reporting back for pre season training mid June 2020.
When they football world gets back to normal, it’s a moot point whether it will be for season 2019/20, 2020/21 or 2021/22.
Besides, Chris Waddle and CPFC fans will want Brighton to complete its full 38 matches, to seal our relegation.
drew
Drew
First of all, we have had a winter break, unless of course you are proposing that football becomes a summer sport.
Secondly, as Bozza indicates, there can't be anyway that football will resume in June. All football is on a shutdown, the government are talking about 3 months isolation for the over 70s so that is an indication of probably when things will start up again. However, footballers will effectively need a pre season training to get match fit so that's probably about another 4 weeks at least. On this basis, this season is effectively over. Any attempt to play it to a conclusion will have knock on effects for future seasons one of which is badly affected by the stupid world cup in qatar.
People seem to be trying to suggest things that are effectively accommodating Liverpool winning the league and Leeds and WBA getting promoted. If you accommodate them you have to do the same for every team down the league. Those fighting for european places, play offs etc
I did see a suggestion from Kenny Dalglish that teams could play every second day, ensuring that the league was over in three weeks. Throw in the play-offs and we could have the whole shebang finished in five weeks.
If that were the case, we could possibly finish the next season in autumn and start again in December and, with the cancellation of all cup competitions, complete a season in six months.
It will be a tough call for the clubs though - and those in Europe would want to play those games. It would be rather unusual but just about possible to do
drew
Drew
And why do you think he is suggesting that? Purely to accommodate liverpool winning the premier league for the first time. Look how much the clubs complain about fixture congestion at xmas! I bet he would be happy to void the season if the positions were reversed with City 25 pts ahead. Why should the football pyramid sacrifice the fa cup just for Liverpools benefit?
Hampster Gull
Well-known member
- Dec 22, 2010
- 13,465
symyjym
Banned
I haven't been keeping up to date with all the scenarios. The talk was April or longer as far as I was aware, and I plucked June/July out of my head, but what I said still works if we finish the season in Sept Oct. This season has to be played out regardless, and we have to shift the season for the 6 week World Cup Nov 2022.
All I'm suggesting is that embracing the season shift in advance and managing it to fall in line with 2022 doesn't have to be seen as a disaster.
His is just one voice from 1000’s giving their two penny’s worth about football just now, his will have zero impact.