[Albion] Amex - preferred neutral venue

[LamieRobertson]

Indeed. We're all football fanatics but guess what a large portion of the population as shocking as it seems have zero interest in football at any level. Accordingly, they must be seriously thinking WTF with bells on!

Probably because over the last six or so weeks life has been a diet of staying in doors ..daily updates on cases/deaths etc etc and that has been hammered home wherever you turn ...maybe that will change over the next few weeks as it changes to an emphasis on loosening restrictions effecting businesses and our daily lives

 

[Diablo]

The fact that players can’t social distance and are being put in a position where they are at risk and so will their families and the wider public. When we go back to reaching normality there will be social distancing why is football an acceptable risk?
Emergency services will be needed to attend games. How do you think they will feel doing this? I’ve got an idea when they have been risking their lives over the last few months.
Obviously as I stated before the amount of testing that could be used elsewhere is an issue.
I’m all for normality resuming but this is not the way to go IMO.

We`ll have to agree to disagree.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Not sure I agree to be honest. I think it could possibly work. If you draw a line from Bournemouth to Watford to Tottenham to West Ham and then down to Brighton you've got 9 of the 20 clubs in that area. I expect its probably a similar sized area in the north and then you have Wolves, Villa, Norwich and Leicester in the middle of the country.

Why couldn't you have 2 grounds from each area that are the easiest to get to and from by road and they don't have to be prem grounds so any that are next to motorways so the likes of Reading, and Walsall are two I can think of right off the top of my head. If a team from the south plays a team in the north they play in the midlands. When teams from the same area play each other its in that area and then the midlands teams go where ever its practical.

Becomes a bit more a headache when you start going down the leagues but I'm sure something could be worked out.

Barber said in the week that there was still £3/4b in TV money to play for so the clubs and the league are going to want to get this finished.

It can't work like that because of the fixtures remaining, which effectiveley connect every part of the counry with every other part..

If we divide the PL into four groups to represent the four stadia (five clubs per group) we can colour code the four groups. The problem is they don't simply play each other. I have looked at the fixtures for Wolves, Arsenal, Palace, Everton, B'muff and West Ham. You can see that with each club colour coded to represent their nominal 'home' stadium, each team has a positive rainbow of colours for its fixtures. It doesn't matter how you slice it, with four venues and 20 clubs, each club will have to play in at least 3 of the stadia (only Bournmouth get to play in 3 stadia in my work up, the rest have to play in all 4). Now, I have made no attempt to group the order of fixtures to minimise the number of journeys each squad will need to make to the minimum of 3 (or 2 in Bournmouth's case). In fact it is impossible to group the fixtures usefully to achieve this because to make the order rational for one or two clubs will keep it irrational for the others. So we may as well look at the order in the figure below to get an idea of how much travelling each club would need to do. So, in the table below the number of journeys that Wolves, Arsenal, Palace, Everton, B'muff and West Ham will need to make is 7, 8, 8, 5, 5 and 6. This immediately extends the amount of time needed to complete the fixtures since teams can't travel every day to a new venue. I would estimate they would be able to play a game maybe once every three days but with travel, training and the stress of it probably a game every 5 days is more realistic. Thar's 45 days, not the fabled 2 weeks.

Remember, if you allow one club to play all their games in one venue, because only one in four of the rest of the division will be located at the same venue, 75% of the club's opponents will need to travel from their venue, on average, to play the lucky club. That is unfair to all the other clubs, and doesn't help, so my more randomized assignment of venues is the only process that is fair and workable (of a fashion - with loads of travelling involved).

Not sure there is any other way to model this.

 

[LamieRobertson]

It can't work like that because of the fixtures remaining, which effectiveley connect every part of the counry with every other part..

If we divide the PL into four groups to represent the four stadia (five clubs per group) we can colour code the four groups. The problem is they don't simply play each other. I have looked at the fixtures for Wolves, Arsenal, Palace, Everton, B'muff and West Ham. You can see that with each club colour coded to represent their nominal 'home' stadium, each team has a positive rainbow of colours for its fixtures. It doesn't matter how you slice it, with four venues and 20 clubs, each club will have to play in at least 3 of the stadia (only Bournmouth get to play in 3 stadia in my work up, the rest have to play in all 4). Now, I have made no attempt to group the order of fixtures to minimise the number of journeys each squad will need to make to the minimum of 3 (or 2 in Bournmouth's case). In fact it is impossible to group the fixtures usefully to achieve this because to make the order rational for one or two clubs will keep it irrational for the others. So we may as well look at the order in the figure below to get an idea of how much travelling each club would need to do. So, in the table below the number of journeys that Wolves, Arsenal, Palace, Everton, B'muff and West Ham will need to make is 7, 8, 8, 5, 5 and 6. This immediately extends the amount of time needed to complete the fixtures since teams can't travel every day to a new venue. I would estimate they would be able to play a game maybe once every three days but with travel, training and the stress of it probably a game every 5 days is more realistic. Thar's 45 days, not the fabled 2 weeks.

Remember, if you allow one club to play all their games in one venue, because only one in four of the rest of the division will be located at the same venue, 75% of the club's opponents will need to travel from their venue, on average, to play the lucky club. That is unfair to all the other clubs, and doesn't help, so my more randomized assignment of venues is the only process that is fair and workable (of a fashion - with loads of travelling involved).

Not sure there is any other way to model this.

View attachment 123030

Not much happening today?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

No because googling "how many Premier League games left" is so much more bothersome than making that batshit flawed calculation... If anyone else did that miscalculation it you'd be jumping up and down on that horse flashing your self-percieved superiority..

I do agree though that the plan is shit and close to impossible to carry out. They need to null the season, the faster the better since its hard to do any type of planning for 20/21 as long as they keep up the illusion of finishing the 19/20 season (at least anytime soon).

You have no idea what I self-perceive, you soppy tit.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I don't think having twice as many games makes it easier to schedule, I was just pointing out how many games were actually left, and showing how it was worked out. There is no way of avoiding the teams moving between neutral venues. Without studying the fixture list and looking for any patterns I wouldn't have a clue for the minimum number of stadiums each team would have to play at. My uneducated guess would be at least 4. There may be work arounds by not playing the fixtures in the order they were originally scheduled but in a way that works to reduce travel but I still don't think it would have that much of an impact.

Bloody good guess!

 

[Eeyore]

Can you imagine the state of the pitches with all these games played over a short period of time!

They are durable, and it won't be so bad in summer. It's nine matches. A World Cup appointed ground may see seven over 6 weeks.

 

[Hampster Gull]

Money, money, money

I’m out

 

[Arthur]

It can't work like that because of the fixtures remaining, which effectiveley connect every part of the counry with every other part..

If we divide the PL into four groups to represent the four stadia (five clubs per group) we can colour code the four groups. The problem is they don't simply play each other. I have looked at the fixtures for Wolves, Arsenal, Palace, Everton, B'muff and West Ham. You can see that with each club colour coded to represent their nominal 'home' stadium, each team has a positive rainbow of colours for its fixtures. It doesn't matter how you slice it, with four venues and 20 clubs, each club will have to play in at least 3 of the stadia (only Bournmouth get to play in 3 stadia in my work up, the rest have to play in all 4). Now, I have made no attempt to group the order of fixtures to minimise the number of journeys each squad will need to make to the minimum of 3 (or 2 in Bournmouth's case). In fact it is impossible to group the fixtures usefully to achieve this because to make the order rational for one or two clubs will keep it irrational for the others. So we may as well look at the order in the figure below to get an idea of how much travelling each club would need to do. So, in the table below the number of journeys that Wolves, Arsenal, Palace, Everton, B'muff and West Ham will need to make is 7, 8, 8, 5, 5 and 6. This immediately extends the amount of time needed to complete the fixtures since teams can't travel every day to a new venue. I would estimate they would be able to play a game maybe once every three days but with travel, training and the stress of it probably a game every 5 days is more realistic. Thar's 45 days, not the fabled 2 weeks.

Remember, if you allow one club to play all their games in one venue, because only one in four of the rest of the division will be located at the same venue, 75% of the club's opponents will need to travel from their venue, on average, to play the lucky club. That is unfair to all the other clubs, and doesn't help, so my more randomized assignment of venues is the only process that is fair and workable (of a fashion - with loads of travelling involved).

Not sure there is any other way to model this.

View attachment 123030

Why is the venue as important as you are making out? Why can't all 92 league clubs be a neutral venue?

Very much thinking out loud here so bare with me.

As I mentioned in my last message we have 9 of the 20 clubs in the south, 4 in the middle which must mean we have 7 in the north.

Why can't the games be like the old cup semis used to be?

Looking at our fixtures

Arsenal - play it at Crawley/Palace
Leicester - play it at Watford/Barnet
Man United - Villa/Walsall/Wolves
Norwich - West Ham/Orient/Colchester
Liverpool - Villa/Walsall/Wolves
Cithe - Villa/Walsall/Wolves
Saints - Pompey
Newcastle - Villa/Walsall/Wolves
Burnley - Villa/Walsall/Wolves

The games would have to be spread out because of the availability of the television crews.

The last day might be an issue as I'm guessing they'd all need to take part at the same time. But we should jump that hurdle when we get there and I'm guessing a lot would have been settled by then so maybe it could be staggered by teams playing for relegation/europe.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

Why is the venue as important as you are making out? Why can't all 92 league clubs be a neutral venue?

Very much thinking out loud here so bare with me.

As I mentioned in my last message we have 9 of the 20 clubs in the south, 4 in the middle which must mean we have 7 in the north.

Why can't the games be like the old cup semis used to be?

Looking at our fixtures

Arsenal - play it at Crawley/Palace
Leicester - play it at Watford/Barnet
Man United - Villa/Walsall/Wolves
Norwich - West Ham/Orient/Colchester
Liverpool - Villa/Walsall/Wolves
Cithe - Villa/Walsall/Wolves
Saints - Pompey
Newcastle - Villa/Walsall/Wolves
Burnley - Villa/Walsall/Wolves

The games would have to be spread out because of the availability of the television crews.

The last day might be an issue as I'm guessing they'd all need to take part at the same time. But we should jump that hurdle when we get there and I'm guessing a lot would have been settled by then so maybe it could be staggered by teams playing for relegation/europe.

If the league is going to try to finish fixtures as well, won't they need their grounds?

This idea of neutral grounds and finishing the season is the new king is in the altogether.

 

[Arthur]

If the league is going to try to finish fixtures as well, won't they need their grounds?

This idea of neutral grounds and finishing the season is the new king is in the altogether.

Well that is the beauty of it if you potentially use all 92 clubs then you can work it around the two clubs involved. I'm sure they'll be the odd edge case when Plymouth play Carlisle or similar but generally as a rule of thumb then teams shouldn't have to travel more than 150ish miles to play a game.

 

[METALMICKY]

This idea of neutral grounds and finishing the season is the new king is in the altogether.

Absolutely this!

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Why is the venue as important as you are making out? Why can't all 92 league clubs be a neutral venue?

Very much thinking out loud here so bare with me.

As I mentioned in my last message we have 9 of the 20 clubs in the south, 4 in the middle which must mean we have 7 in the north.

Why can't the games be like the old cup semis used to be?

Looking at our fixtures

Arsenal - play it at Crawley/Palace
Leicester - play it at Watford/Barnet
Man United - Villa/Walsall/Wolves
Norwich - West Ham/Orient/Colchester
Liverpool - Villa/Walsall/Wolves
Cithe - Villa/Walsall/Wolves
Saints - Pompey
Newcastle - Villa/Walsall/Wolves
Burnley - Villa/Walsall/Wolves

The games would have to be spread out because of the availability of the television crews.

The last day might be an issue as I'm guessing they'd all need to take part at the same time. But we should jump that hurdle when we get there and I'm guessing a lot would have been settled by then so maybe it could be staggered by teams playing for relegation/europe.

Mate, your list has seven changes of venue as you run through the sequence of games. The point of having only 4 venues is to preclude lots of travel. But....it doesn't.

The only way to limit the amount of movement is to have all games at one venue. Even with two venues there will be lots of movement.

 

[Jim in the West]

Very good point made above ref the last day....the convention is that all games kick off at the same time. To preserve this convention you’d obviously need 10 grounds. I presume the EPL are hoping that there are only four of the final matches with anything riding on them? It’s possible, but given CL and Europa League places, plus relegation, it could easily be more. What happens then?

 

[Arthur]

Mate, your list has seven changes of venue as you run through the sequence of games. The point of having only 4 venues is to preclude lots of travel. But....it doesn't.

The only way to limit the amount of movement is to have all games at one venue. Even with two venues there will be lots of movement.

You're missing my point, I think.....or am I missing yours?

I'm proposing we potentially use all 92 league grounds not cocooning all teams into one area. That has got to be a non starter from the off right?

We live in a country small enough that even the two teams at polar opposites of the country can meet somewhere in the middle and play each other without the need of an overnight stay, multiple coach drivers, flights etc etc.

 

[Weststander]

OK. I didn't bother checking. It has no effect on my analysis, though, apart from making it even more clear that the plan cannot work.

ps - Note to conspiracy theorist - don't sweat the small stuff.

Ickes! That's below the belt.

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

What a mucking fuddle !!

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

Why is the venue as important as you are making out? Why can't all 92 league clubs be a neutral venue?

Very much thinking out loud here so bare with me.

As I mentioned in my last message we have 9 of the 20 clubs in the south, 4 in the middle which must mean we have 7 in the north.

Why can't the games be like the old cup semis used to be?

Looking at our fixtures

Arsenal - play it at Crawley/Palace
Leicester - play it at Watford/Barnet
Man United - Villa/Walsall/Wolves
Norwich - West Ham/Orient/Colchester
Liverpool - Villa/Walsall/Wolves
Cithe - Villa/Walsall/Wolves
Saints - Pompey
Newcastle - Villa/Walsall/Wolves
Burnley - Villa/Walsall/Wolves

The games would have to be spread out because of the availability of the television crews.

The last day might be an issue as I'm guessing they'd all need to take part at the same time. But we should jump that hurdle when we get there and I'm guessing a lot would have been settled by then so maybe it could be staggered by teams playing for relegation/europe.

The Premier League's intention of playing at grounds a reasonable distance away from dwellings would rule out Orient and P*rtsm**th, while Watford is next to a hospital.

But although in theory there's no reason why Premier League matches would have to be played on Premier League grounds if they're behind closed doors anyway, the powers that be would no doubt insist on places where VAR is installed.

 

[happypig]

Mate, your list has seven changes of venue as you run through the sequence of games. The point of having only 4 venues is to preclude lots of travel. But....it doesn't.

The only way to limit the amount of movement is to have all games at one venue. Even with two venues there will be lots of movement.

Play all the games at Wem-ber-leeeee in a pub pool style "Winner stays on" rolling format.

 

[The Wookiee]

I wonder if there would be a whole day of football at one particular stadium ? Say 3 matches back to back ?? 1pm, 4pm and 7pm ??