[Football] Premier League / Football League attempts to finish the season

[essbee1]

If behind-doors happens, which I hope it doesn't, a piece in the Times today will be of interest.

All PL teams except Wolves, Soton and Chelsea have (as expected) won more points per home game than per away game this season. Everton top the table in this respect with .99pts more. Palace achieved only .26pts more. The Albion are about halfway, with .56pts more per home game than away.

One of the many unfairnesses of behind-doors is that some clubs will be deprived of more home games than others. However, one possible crumb of comfort for the Albion is that, and I quote, "As a side near the bottom you would want your 'home' games to be against top teams, which you would be unlikely to win anyway, and your 'away' games to be against (lower) teams, where your opponents' loss of home advantage gives you a greater chance." No club has a fixture profile more like this than the Albion.

I am sure the chairman's statisticians have got it all in hand.

I liked that Imp. Ta.

 

[crodonilson]

https://www.espn.com/soccer/english...ourse-with-players-over-restart-plans-sources

Yet they still want to be paid their wages in full, something has got to give.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

5. They should just work out average points per game over the fixtures played then draw a line under it. This wouldn't change title winners, Champions League places or bottom 3 relegated anyway.

You'd have to work out what to do about playoffs. Just promote the third-place side?

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

You'd have to work out what to do about playoffs. Just promote the third-place side?

You can't change the rules of the competition halfway through it. Any teams threatened with relegation would not vote for it. Play or cancel there's no third option.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

Yet they still want to be paid their wages in full, something has got to give.

Exactly - its about time they realised they won't be playing (working) for a while and should adjust their salaries accordingly.

 

[blue-shifted]

Let's not also forget that we could all drown in the flood of scousers tears when the sensible decision to cancel the season is eventually made. Over the last week I've seen some incredible stuff including emotive exclamations that the premier trophy is being " stolen " from them! They just don't seem to appreciate that people dying and the economy are way more important than then winning the league.

Yeh, it's a good job the country has extra ventilator capacity at the moment, because if they do void the season there will be plenty laughing so hard at Liverpool that breathing could become a serious issue!

 

[WilburySeagull]

Once again the ridiculous anti liverpool element surfaces. I too would void the season but not to enjoy the best teams misfortune.

 

[METALMICKY]

You can't change the rules of the competition halfway through it. Any teams threatened with relegation would not vote for it. Play or cancel there's no third option.

Is the correct answer! But you try explaining that to a Liverpool fan. The stats about how far ahead they are irrelevant and if you hand them the trophy then you need to relegate the bottom three and promote Leeds and WBA. Which of course is ridiculous!

 

[Arkwright]

I presume a vote is required by PL clubs, what is the majority required?

 

[Springal]

Apparently Juventus player Paulo Dybala tested positive for COVID-19 on March 21st and still cannot give a negative swab - so therefore is not cured. All it takes is 1 PL player in the same situation and the whole season restarting thing is impossible

https://talksport.com/football/7003...for-coronavirus-for-fourth-time-in-six-weeks/

 

[southstandandy]

This would be wrong to restart until unlimited tests are available, each match would need say 100 tests, times 10 prem matches, times twice a week. So reckon the prem will need 2000 test kits per week. If by taking these 2000 tests from the total available in uk, it stops just one person in general public getting tested who then goes on to pass covid to someone who then dies it is wrong. It is guanteed by taking 2000 tests away that someone with covid will get missed who might have had one of the 2000 tests that week.

Also that would assume all tests taken are accurate. I know on another thread someone said yesterday that they had heard a figure of 30% as coming up as 'false negatives' (not sure how true this is) but ironically my sister is involved in testing down in the west country. When I mentioned the above figure to her she said the figures in the west are far lower than that and only show around 18% as 'false negatives' for those coming in showing possible symptoms, but it might also be lower as they've had far few cases down there.

Either way I'm not totally convinced that testing is the definitve answer. Even though a vaccine is some way off, I feel that any close contact sport may have to wait until such a point as to be considered reasonably safe to resume.

 

[Papa Lazarou]

Also that would assume all tests taken are accurate. I know on another thread someone said yesterday that they had heard a figure of 30% as coming up as 'false negatives' (not sure how true this is) but ironically my sister is involved in testing down in the west country. When I mentioned the above figure to her she said the figures in the west are far lower than that and only show around 18% as 'false negatives' for those coming in showing possible symptoms, but it might also be lower as they've had far few cases down there.

Either way I'm not totally convinced that testing is the definitve answer. Even though a vaccine is some way off, I feel that any close contact sport may have to wait until such a point as to be considered reasonably safe to resume.

Do they report any false positives?

 

[HalfaSeatOn]

I presume a vote is required by PL clubs, what is the majority required?

I think I recall PB saying it was 14 votes or more to carry the motion, adding ‘do the maths’.

 

[Arkwright]

I think I recall PB saying it was 14 votes or more to carry the motion, adding ‘do the maths’.

Thanks, if you were the owner of Norwich, Watford, Aston Villa, West Ham, Bournemouth and Albion (ie. the bottom six) you wouldn't vote to complete the season. Probably the same for Newcastle and Southampton who are still in the relegation mix. The potential loss is far too great.
That's the season finished then!

 

[WilburySeagull]

Thanks, if you were the owner of Norwich, Watford, Aston Villa, West Ham, Bournemouth and Albion (ie. the bottom six) you wouldn't vote to complete the season. Probably the same for Newcastle and Southampton who are still in the relegation mix. The potential loss is far too great.
That's the season finished then!

That depends on what follows from "finishing the season" means. You may be right if it just means voiding everything but other options are possible. The other options are probably, after the money , the reason why the PL would rather try and play the season out. Voting might be problamatic if options that changed possible relegation wete in play.

 

[GT49er]

My feelings:

1. I'm really looking forward to seeing an Albion side play with MacAllister, Lamptey, Molumby and Ben White.

2. In my mind season 2019/20 is done.

3. It feels disgusting and just plain wrong talking about playing Prem football when hundreds of people are still dying on a daily basis.

4. It's almost guaranteed one of the football people will get coronavirus and we're then back to square one.

5. They should just work out average points per game over the fixtures played then draw a line under it. This wouldn't change title winners, Champions League places or bottom 3 relegated anyway.

1 to 4, thoroughly agree. No.5 - no way - whether we void the season, average out the scores, whatever other twisted conundrum they decide to use, no relegation or promotion; not self-interest either - no-one has yet come up with a formula that sees us relegated anyway.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

You can't change the rules of the competition halfway through it. Any teams threatened with relegation would not vote for it. Play or cancel there's no third option.

But wouldn't cancelling (i.e. voiding) represent the biggest rule-change of all? Every single regulation regarding promotion, relegation, CL qualification and the Premier League Crown would be torn up.

Similarly playing behind closed doors - most of the established and accepted arrangements for actually playing games would be put in the bin, along with the ancient concepts of home and away advantage.

In many ways, the least disruptive answer is to end the season now, not voiding or cancelling but prematurely ending. The main practical difficulties of this involve (a) deciding the third promotion place if you're not having any more games and (b) the likelihood of legal action from relegated clubs. (b) is easily dealt with but (a) is the problem.

 

[Jeremiah]

1 to 4, thoroughly agree. No.5 - no way - whether we void the season, average out the scores, whatever other twisted conundrum they decide to use, no relegation or promotion; not self-interest either - no-one has yet come up with a formula that sees us relegated anyway.

Yes they have . Play the remaining fixtures.

 

[Arkwright]

That depends on what follows from "finishing the season" means. You may be right if it just means voiding everything but other options are possible. The other options are probably, after the money , the reason why the PL would rather try and play the season out. Voting might be problamatic if options that changed possible relegation wete in play.

Good points well made, it's not going to be a straightforward yes / no vote.

Any ideas of cut off dates and potential options on the table?

Really it needs FIFA or UEFA to come off the fence and make the decision.

 

[southstandandy]

Do they report any false positives?

Don't honestly know. I'll ask my sister next time I speak to her. I suspect the false negative figures are recorded but whether they are widely available I don't know. Plus she is only involved in her region, that being the south west but she did say yesterday the false negative figures have varied from as little as 5% to 30% from week to week, as there is no exact science as to who comes into a hospital purporting to have symptoms of the virus. Many have probably had a mild form and never been tested so would'nt know.