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

[sparkie]

Just read the Watford Chairman's statement in The Times. It's an extremely well-crafted set of arguments - possibly the key points are as follows:

"When at least six clubs — and I suspect more — are concerned about the clear downside and the devastating effects of playing in this kind of distorted nine-game mini-league, then I believe the Premier League has a duty of care to address those concerns. If we start and finish a whole season under these conditions and at neutral venues when everybody knows the rules when we start, not created in a time of crisis, then that is clearly fair. To be asked to finish a quarter of the season under new rules and conditions is an entirely different proposition. How can the long-term future of clubs be determined under these fundamentally changed conditions? How is there any semblance of fairness? To wave aside all the fears and concerns is too simplistic. Surely all 20 clubs must agree the fairest way forward to complete the season?"

I suspect Watford (and no doubt Albion, Villa and others) have had their lawyers crawl all over the EPL rules. That statement reads very much like Watford are preparing the grounds for legal action (which they obviously hope they will not have to take). And this is probably why the EPL is desperate to get something agreed by ALL clubs. If six are playing against their will, you can guarantee that the three who go down will be off to the courts. Whether they will have any grounds for complaint, of course I have no idea - but the choice of words by the Watford Chairman is (I think) interesting.

I agree entirely. Barber's statements also look like they are worded with a potential future legal case in mind.

 

[dsr-burnley]

Who at Brighton said pitch width was the worry ? I may have missed it as haven’t been reading everything.

Dan Ashworth.

https://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/s...-project-restart-neutral-ground-reservations/

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Just read the Watford Chairman's statement in The Times. It's an extremely well-crafted set of arguments - possibly the key points are as follows:

"When at least six clubs — and I suspect more — are concerned about the clear downside and the devastating effects of playing in this kind of distorted nine-game mini-league, then I believe the Premier League has a duty of care to address those concerns. If we start and finish a whole season under these conditions and at neutral venues when everybody knows the rules when we start, not created in a time of crisis, then that is clearly fair. To be asked to finish a quarter of the season under new rules and conditions is an entirely different proposition. How can the long-term future of clubs be determined under these fundamentally changed conditions? How is there any semblance of fairness? To wave aside all the fears and concerns is too simplistic. Surely all 20 clubs must agree the fairest way forward to complete the season?"

I suspect Watford (and no doubt Albion, Villa and others) have had their lawyers crawl all over the EPL rules. That statement reads very much like Watford are preparing the grounds for legal action (which they obviously hope they will not have to take). And this is probably why the EPL is desperate to get something agreed by ALL clubs. If six are playing against their will, you can guarantee that the three who go down will be off to the courts. Whether they will have any grounds for complaint, of course I have no idea - but the choice of words by the Watford Chairman is (I think) interesting.

I wonder what would happen if all 6 no showed on safety grounds

 

[dsr-burnley]

I'm glad Burnley players are immune from timidity.

Does that also protect them, their families, neighbours etc from Covid-19? No thought not, in which case any player raising a concern about returning to playing is perfectly valid and not showing some sort of meekness. Now **** off with the macho bullshit.

Yes, it is much more convenient for footballers to sit in their mansions and let the NHS workers, the supermarket workers, the garden centre workers, the buildres, the postmen, the binmen, go back to work first and get the economy running and face all the risks. Footballers have money and protected salaries - they don't want to take the risk when other people can take that risk for them.

Fair enough to argue that entertainment industries (TV included) should be shut down unless and until we all safe forevermore from dying. Covid will not go away. The already infinitesimal risk (for footballers) can be made smaller, but it cannot be eliminated. Do we ever restart, or just give up?

Brighton's reluctance to play is nothing to do with safety or sporting integrity. It is fear of losing. You are frightened you might lose, or at least your bosses are and you have bought into it, and you would rather no-oner plays at all because you are scared of getting beat.

 

[swindonseagull]

This is the future . Get your own cardboard cutout done and put on your seat.

View attachment 123358

Stupid idea ...... still paying for 2 season tickets not to pay extra to have cardboard cut out in my seat.

 

[swindonseagull]

Yes, it is much more convenient for footballers to sit in their mansions and let the NHS workers, the supermarket workers, the garden centre workers, the buildres, the postmen, the binmen, go back to work first and get the economy running and face all the risks. Footballers have money and protected salaries - they don't want to take the risk when other people can take that risk for them.

Fair enough to argue that entertainment industries (TV included) should be shut down unless and until we all safe forevermore from dying. Covid will not go away. The already infinitesimal risk (for footballers) can be made smaller, but it cannot be eliminated. Do we ever restart, or just give up?

Brighton's reluctance to play is nothing to do with safety or sporting integrity. It is fear of losing. You are frightened you might lose, or at least your bosses are and you have bought into it, and you would rather no-oner plays at all because you are scared of getting beat.

Do Burnley not have a forum where you can chat with likeminded people instead of polluting our little bit of the WWW?

 

[Jim in the West]

Yes, it is much more convenient for footballers to sit in their mansions and let the NHS workers, the supermarket workers, the garden centre workers, the buildres, the postmen, the binmen, go back to work first and get the economy running and face all the risks. Footballers have money and protected salaries - they don't want to take the risk when other people can take that risk for them.

Fair enough to argue that entertainment industries (TV included) should be shut down unless and until we all safe forevermore from dying. Covid will not go away. The already infinitesimal risk (for footballers) can be made smaller, but it cannot be eliminated. Do we ever restart, or just give up?

Brighton's reluctance to play is nothing to do with safety or sporting integrity. It is fear of losing. You are frightened you might lose, or at least your bosses are and you have bought into it, and you would rather no-oner plays at all because you are scared of getting beat.

I think you're mixing up the issues. Brighton, Villa and Watford have all come out against NEUTRAL VENUES. The Albion has been very clear that we are happy to play if we don't lose the advantage that playing at home brings. I'm pretty sure all clubs have said they will respect the choice of players who didn't want to play for safety reasons. And - much as it grates having to speak up for multi-millionaires - the difference between them and all the other workers you've listed is that FOOTBALLERS CANNOT WEAR PPE WHILE THEY ARE DOING THEIR JOB.

It's worth reading the Watford Chairman's statement in full. He sums everything up very well. And - as a reminder - the EPL said right at the start that their primary concern was respecting the integrity of the game.....

 

[neilbard]

Do Burnley not have a forum where you can chat with likeminded people instead of polluting our little bit of the WWW?

 

[atomised]

Yes, it is much more convenient for footballers to sit in their mansions and let the NHS workers, the supermarket workers, the garden centre workers, the buildres, the postmen, the binmen, go back to work first and get the economy running and face all the risks. Footballers have money and protected salaries - they don't want to take the risk when other people can take that risk for them.

Fair enough to argue that entertainment industries (TV included) should be shut down unless and until we all safe forevermore from dying. Covid will not go away. The already infinitesimal risk (for footballers) can be made smaller, but it cannot be eliminated. Do we ever restart, or just give up?

Brighton's reluctance to play is nothing to do with safety or sporting integrity. It is fear of losing. You are frightened you might lose, or at least your bosses are and you have bought into it, and you would rather no-oner plays at all because you are scared of getting beat.

I've said it before elsewhere. If the season can be completed safely under the regulations it started with then if relegation is the end result I will take it on the chin. Fundamental rule changes would render that impossible.

 

[Butch Willykins]

Yes, it is much more convenient for footballers to sit in their mansions and let the NHS workers, the supermarket workers, the garden centre workers, the buildres, the postmen, the binmen, go back to work first and get the economy running and face all the risks. Footballers have money and protected salaries - they don't want to take the risk when other people can take that risk for them.

Fair enough to argue that entertainment industries (TV included) should be shut down unless and until we all safe forevermore from dying. Covid will not go away. The already infinitesimal risk (for footballers) can be made smaller, but it cannot be eliminated. Do we ever restart, or just give up?

Brighton's reluctance to play is nothing to do with safety or sporting integrity. It is fear of losing. You are frightened you might lose, or at least your bosses are and you have bought into it, and you would rather no-oner plays at all because you are scared of getting beat.

Well that’s us told.

Now haven’t you got a whippet to be sucking off? Off you pop dickhead.

 

[Seasider78]

Yes, it is much more convenient for footballers to sit in their mansions and let the NHS workers, the supermarket workers, the garden centre workers, the buildres, the postmen, the binmen, go back to work first and get the economy running and face all the risks. Footballers have money and protected salaries - they don't want to take the risk when other people can take that risk for them.

Fair enough to argue that entertainment industries (TV included) should be shut down unless and until we all safe forevermore from dying. Covid will not go away. The already infinitesimal risk (for footballers) can be made smaller, but it cannot be eliminated. Do we ever restart, or just give up?

Brighton's reluctance to play is nothing to do with safety or sporting integrity. It is fear of losing. You are frightened you might lose, or at least your bosses are and you have bought into it, and you would rather no-oner plays at all because you are scared of getting beat.

You are either a bit simple or just trolling but of course Brighton are (like the other sides in and around us) pushing back on the latest proposals as they significantly reduce our chances of survival.

Our owners have spent tens of millions of pounds getting us to the premier league and staying there is worth hundreds of millions so the idea they would roll over and entertain the increasingly desperate ideas being thrown around and disadvantage us is hardly surprising is it. Sorry if that upsets cash strapped Burnley but to be honest we don’t really give a ****

 

[Finchley Seagull]

Yes, it is much more convenient for footballers to sit in their mansions and let the NHS workers, the supermarket workers, the garden centre workers, the buildres, the postmen, the binmen, go back to work first and get the economy running and face all the risks. Footballers have money and protected salaries - they don't want to take the risk when other people can take that risk for them.

Fair enough to argue that entertainment industries (TV included) should be shut down unless and until we all safe forevermore from dying. Covid will not go away. The already infinitesimal risk (for footballers) can be made smaller, but it cannot be eliminated. Do we ever restart, or just give up?

Brighton's reluctance to play is nothing to do with safety or sporting integrity. It is fear of losing. You are frightened you might lose, or at least your bosses are and you have bought into it, and you would rather no-oner plays at all because you are scared of getting beat.

You do realise it is only essential people who are actually at work at the moment. And they are imposing social distancing on people where physically possible. How do you suggest they do that in football. No marking at corners? Nobody is allowed to tackle? If not, football is different to other industries.

On top of that, you and your club's attempt to take the moral high ground is pathetic. I am sure I read that you will struggle financially if the season doesn't finish. So you have massive self interest in finishing the season. How many people are you willing to put at risk to finish the season so you can get your tv money?

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

Yes, it is much more convenient for footballers to sit in their mansions and let the NHS workers, the supermarket workers, the garden centre workers, the buildres, the postmen, the binmen, go back to work first and get the economy running and face all the risks. Footballers have money and protected salaries - they don't want to take the risk when other people can take that risk for them.

Fair enough to argue that entertainment industries (TV included) should be shut down unless and until we all safe forevermore from dying. Covid will not go away. The already infinitesimal risk (for footballers) can be made smaller, but it cannot be eliminated. Do we ever restart, or just give up?

Brighton's reluctance to play is nothing to do with safety or sporting integrity. It is fear of losing. You are frightened you might lose, or at least your bosses are and you have bought into it, and you would rather no-oner plays at all because you are scared of getting beat.

All of those professions can implement a degree of social distancing while working, some can try to protect themselves with PPE etc. All are essential services trying to keep the country running, food on your table etc while we battle this virus. Football is not an essential service, they can't play in PPE, and there is no way to enforce social distancing in a match, so any player isperfectly valid in raising concerns about returning to work. Money doesn't automatically protect you, their wages have no baring on their concerns for returning to work. What about the player who has an elderly relative living with them, the player who's wife might be battling cancer, should they just get on with it?

Lots of entertainment has shut down, where shows are taking place from within a studio its with social distancing in place, with a massively reduced crew and guests appearing via video link. Other shows have gone via video link entirely. They've taken steps to enforce social distancing. Impossible with a team sport, so again players are perfectly valid in raising concerns that they are expected to play when social distancing is being practiced as much as possible. That isn't being timid, it's being socially responsible. The argument about what they are paid etc is a separate argument, but I suppose you are one of those people who things rich people can't be depressed.

As I asked you yesterday show me anywhere Barber or Ashworth have said we won't play, the club have said they oppose the neutral grounds restart, but no where have they said they would refuse to play if that idea got voted in.

 

[neilbard]

West Ham: Karren Brady says return to training could involve clubs disinfecting grass.

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11685/11985546/west-ham-karren-brady-says-return-to-training-could-involve-clubs-disinfecting-grass

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I think you're mixing up the issues. Brighton, Villa and Watford have all come out against NEUTRAL VENUES. The Albion has been very clear that we are happy to play if we don't lose the advantage that playing at home brings. I'm pretty sure all clubs have said they will respect the choice of players who didn't want to play for safety reasons. And - much as it grates having to speak up for multi-millionaires - the difference between them and all the other workers you've listed is that FOOTBALLERS CANNOT WEAR PPE WHILE THEY ARE DOING THEIR JOB.

It's worth reading the Watford Chairman's statement in full. He sums everything up very well. And - as a reminder - the EPL said right at the start that their primary concern was respecting the integrity of the game.....

Yes. This is a game where innovations such as VAR are treated much like garlic and crosses are treated by vampires. VAR is trialled, changed, introduced and changed again. Why? Because referees are alowed to fiddle with it so it doesn't interfere with the integrity of their role as ultimate arbiters of decisions. The whole game could be refereed quickly and accurately using VAR, but only if the control were taken out of the hands of the wanker in black on the field. But that would undermine the integrity of the game. And it isn't just the Referees and Allied Trade Society saying this. And football, the EPL, EUFA and FIFA have all spent years cowtowing to the referees over this.

And yet, now, we are mooting a completely random idea of neutral grounds (and other even less explicable wheezes such as 30 minute halves). So much for the integrity of the game. Fie upon it. And bollocks to Burnley.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

And bollocks to Burnley.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

I expect that Burnley have a higher tv money/ match day money ratio than most, however, I think everyone would want to finish the season if it can be done safely and fairly.

Must do scrabbling along with crowds just over 10,000.

 

[Creaky]

Cowtowing



Sorry couldn’t resist.

 

[Mancgull]

Yes, it is much more convenient for footballers to sit in their mansions and let the NHS workers, the supermarket workers, the garden centre workers, the buildres, the postmen, the binmen, go back to work first and get the economy running and face all the risks. Footballers have money and protected salaries - they don't want to take the risk when other people can take that risk for them.

Fair enough to argue that entertainment industries (TV included) should be shut down unless and until we all safe forevermore from dying. Covid will not go away. The already infinitesimal risk (for footballers) can be made smaller, but it cannot be eliminated. Do we ever restart, or just give up?

Brighton's reluctance to play is nothing to do with safety or sporting integrity. It is fear of losing. You are frightened you might lose, or at least your bosses are and you have bought into it, and you would rather no-oner plays at all because you are scared of getting beat.

You are confusing issues here. Footballers should be treated no differently to any other profession in that reasonable steps must be taken to ensure safety. They aren’t ‘essential workers’ though. I do sympathise with your comments that they shouldn’t be cocooned from the realities that other people face though. Some of the behaviours of footballers have been poor. Kyle Walker, Jack Grealish for example.
In terms of our stance about neutral grounds being unfair, why are you stating it’s ‘Brighton’. Yes we disagree with it but we don’t stand alone on this issue. The Watford CEO has articulated the reasons why neutral grounds at this point in the season is unfair better than anyone else.
Why are you suggesting we simply don’t want to play. Where has anyone from BHA said that?
It seems as if you have an agenda.
I don’t dislike Dyche. Let’s be fair here, he and Burnley were up for it when they had ‘nothing to play for’ in their last game v Reading in the Championship and that didn’t go too badly for us.
I’ll say it again, we need a safe and fair way to finish the season and when one can be found then all clubs will buy into it.

 

[dsr-burnley]

You are confusing issues here. Footballers should be treated no differently to any other profession in that reasonable steps must be taken to ensure safety. They aren’t ‘essential workers’ though. I do sympathise with your comments that they shouldn’t be cocooned from the realities that other people face though. Some of the behaviours of footballers have been poor. Kyle Walker, Jack Grealish for example.
In terms of our stance about neutral grounds being unfair, why are you stating it’s ‘Brighton’. Yes we disagree with it but we don’t stand alone on this issue. The Watford CEO has articulated the reasons why neutral grounds at this point in the season is unfair better than anyone else.
Why are you suggesting we simply don’t want to play. Where has anyone from BHA said that?
It seems as if you have an agenda.
I don’t dislike Dyche. Let’s be fair here, he and Burnley were up for it when they had ‘nothing to play for’ in their last game v Reading in the Championship and that didn’t go too badly for us.
I’ll say it again, we need a safe and fair way to finish the season and when one can be found then all clubs will buy into it.

The Australian Rugby League has gone into 2 weeks isolation preparatory to starting up and the New Zealand Warriors, who play in that league, have flown in and are stopping in Australia (no home visits) for five months rather than miss it. 20% of the season has gone, TV money is 20% less, and the players have agreed a 20% across the board pay cut. Why can't we have more of that sort of attitude among English footballers?

(And they are playing on neutral grounds.)