Season Restart

[Sparks Rover]

18 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

We arent going to agree so I just leave it there now @roversfan99. 

 

Would you agree that the vote is skewed a bit though?

3 Promoted so they vote to ppg

4 play off vote ppg makes 7 altogether already definitely voting one way.

3 only relegated so only 3 definitely voting the other....+4 for the promotion teams....

It seems undemocratic would you agree?

[chaddyrovers]

1 hour ago, Sparks Rover said:

Would you agree that the vote is skewed a bit though?

2 Promoted so they vote to ppg

4 play off vote ppg makes 6 altogether already definitely voting one way.

3 only relegated so only 3 definitely voting the other....+4 for the promotion teams....

It seems undemocratic would you agree?

I would say Teams will voted for what suits them best as a club and financial. Clubs dont want unfurlough staff and players unless they have to. Clubs like Stanley are a prime example of this. 

No they had a democratic vote on different proposals and the majority voted for EFL proposal. Can I understand Peterborough, Ipswich and Sunderland position and point of view? Yes I can. 

 

[speeeeeeedie]

2 hours ago, CD_93 said:

Michael O’Neill has tested positive. He found out after Stoke arrived at Carrington ahead of a practice match against United.

This could be a messy few weeks,

Hopefully there will be a decent track and trace done on O'Neill which will give a decent indicator of where he got it or who could have passed it on to him.

Restarting football is a hot button item. I'm pretty sure that those within the game overwhelmingly want it to resume so they and those close to them should be adhering to the strictest precautions to lower their risk of catching the virus. If O'Neill had been essentially isolated and it's dumb luck then we are all screwed. If he spent his free time swanning around Waitrose then it's a whole different issue.

[RevidgeBlue]

7 hours ago, Sparks Rover said:

Would you agree that the vote is skewed a bit though?

3 Promoted so they vote to ppg

4 play off vote ppg makes 7 altogether already definitely voting one way.

3 only relegated so only 3 definitely voting the other....+4 for the promotion teams....

It seems undemocratic would you agree?

 The voting system is flawed as turkeys won't vote for Christmas and Clubs are obviously going to vote according to their own self interest.

However if Society as a whole is ordered to be overly cautious in emerging from lockdown and football in particular has to endure a stringent testing regime before it can even emerge BCD, then surely it would be even more undemocratic for the EFL to order the Clubs to return when they can't afford to do so.

The only other thing the EFL could have done imo is to secure a package of financial support from Government or the PL which would have enabled all their members to finish this season. Whether enough was done to explore that possibility I've no idea. 

Looking forward the EFL and the Clubs probably need to agree a rule to cater for what is to happen if something similar happens in future.

It would obviously be unfair if teams were to be promoted or relegated having played only five or six games but to my mind it's equally unfair to expunged records with around 80% of the season completed so Clubs will have to decide on a fair and reasonable point at which results should stand.

All subject to the proviso that if at all possible the season should be completed obviously.

[Guest]

11 hours ago, neophox said:

will be hard for Mowbray to pick a team

I think personally the team basically picks itself at this stage.

The defence is a no brainer with everyone fit. Then Travis has to play, got to get Holtby in, Armstrong has to start as well as Downing - fairly certain he'll start B. Johnson.

It's only that wide right slot that could be anyone out of Rothwell, Gallagher, Brereton, Bennett, Rankin-Costello etc... Besides RW the team picks itself for TM.

[K-Hod]

8 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

The outcome has been decided by the EFL clubs having a vote on how to end the season. Yes it is far from ideal just like null and voiding the season is unfair to the clubs who would have gone up without this coronavirus pandemic hitting the country. 

 

Chaddy, I think this is why people get frustrated with you. Because you keep repeating what has been decided. Everyone already knows what decision the EFL have made! You do this without giving a view of your own on why this decision has been made, then expect everyone to agree as that’s the decision that has now been made. 

[Mattyblue]

8 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

Chaddy, I think this is why people get frustrated with you. Because you keep repeating what has been decided. Everyone already knows what decision the EFL have made! You do this without giving a view of your own on why this decision has been made, then expect everyone to agree as that’s the decision that has now been made. 

Bet he was very well behaved at school 

[Hasta]

11 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

From Today EFL Statement 

Following a vote on each by all 71 Clubs, it was overwhelmingly agreed (by a majority of all Clubs and a majority in the Championship) to adopt the EFL Board’s proposal into EFL Regulations, which now means the following applies in the event a division curtails its 2019/20 season or it is ended by any other means.

1. Final divisional placings will be determined on unweighted points per game (if required).
2. Promotion and relegation should be retained.
3. Play-Offs will be played in all circumstances but will not be extended (beyond four teams). 

So the clubs have a vote and decided the proposal from EFL and rejected the proposals from Ipswich, Lincoln, Stevenage, Barnsley and Tranmere. 

Then clubs in league 1 and 2 had vote on the EFL proposals. And they voted on them and ended the season on PPG  

They were asked to vote on either throwing money they don't have down a pit in order to finish the season, or to end it now. Its blindingly obvious what the majority would vote for.

They were not asked to vote whether relegation or promotion was fair in this scenario (ending the season), which it isn't. The EFL took that decision out of their hands. Therefore Tranmere have been relegated unfairly by the EFL, not by a majority decision by the clubs. 

Edited June 10, 2020 by Hasta

[Sparks Rover]

7 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

I would say Teams will voted for what suits them best as a club and financial. Clubs dont want unfurlough staff and players unless they have to. Clubs like Stanley are a prime example of this. 

No they had a democratic vote on different proposals and the majority voted for EFL proposal. Can I understand Peterborough, Ipswich and Sunderland position and point of view? Yes I can. 

 

I'm wondering if you miss the point on purpose or not.....you're reply has no relevance to my point. You do know that dont you?

[JHRover]

How can it be right that Luton, Barnsley, Hull etc. have to conclude a 46 game tough Championship season and get relegated to League One at the end of it whilst being replaced by Coventry or Rotherham who have played less than a full season at a lower level?

[MarkBRFC]

9 hours ago, JPTSwindon said:

So no red button on Sky for any of the matches?

I was wondering if the midweek matches would still be on the red button?

[roversfan99]

1 hour ago, JHRover said:

How can it be right that Luton, Barnsley, Hull etc. have to conclude a 46 game tough Championship season and get relegated to League One at the end of it whilst being replaced by Coventry or Rotherham who have played less than a full season at a lower level?

Absolutely 100% on the money. And Coventry and Rotherham havent earnt promotion yet.

[Waggy76]

It would be interesting to see the League one league table on March 13th 2018....

Not sure we had had made the top 2 by then ...

 

[chaddyrovers]

Peterborough United's owner was on Sky Football Show. He was very unhappy with the League 1 clubs vote yesterday to end the season on PPG with playoffs but he said he knew before the vote that football wouldn't restart as he wanted. 

He said that his focus now is next season and winning the league whenever they returned. 

 

 

[MarkBRFC]

11 minutes ago, Waggy76 said:

It would be interesting to see the League one league table on March 13th 2018....

Not sure we had had made the top 2 by then ...

 

Saw somebody put this on facebook yesterday, it would have ended like this apparently...

1 - Wigan - 94.79

2 - Rovers - 94.48

3 - Shrewsbury - 93.31

Edited June 10, 2020 by MarkBRFC

[roversfan99]

14 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Peterborough United's owner was on Sky Football Show. He was very unhappy with the League 1 clubs vote yesterday to end the season on PPG with playoffs but he said he knew before the vote that football wouldn't restart as he wanted. 

He said that his focus now is next season and winning the league whenever they returned. 

 

 

Ultimately if what happened is what should have happened,ie the season was incomplete and therefore discarded, then he would have been in League 1 anyway.

Aside from finishing the season which was impossible there was no outcome that would have led to anything other than that, either the flawed PPG or null and void.

He is a right attention seeking idiot though to be fair. One silver lining for him will be the additional media attention.

[chaddyrovers]

4 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Ultimately if what happened is what should have happened,ie the season was incomplete and therefore discarded, then he would have been in League 1 anyway.

Aside from finishing the season which was impossible there was no outcome that would have led to anything other than that, either the flawed PPG or null and void.

He is a right attention seeking idiot though to be fair. One silver lining for him will be the additional media attention.

you don't like him cos he is willing to talk to the media and been open and honest with them. Sky have asked him to go on the show just like they have done with other League 1 owners like Burton and Tranmere for examples. Are they attention seeking or just be open and honest with fans of clubs? is that wrong for trying to open and honest for fans?

[roversfan99]

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

you don't like him cos he is willing to talk to the media and been open and honest with them. Sky have asked him to go on the show just like they have done with other League 1 owners like Burton and Tranmere for examples. Are they attention seeking or just be open and honest with fans of clubs? is that wrong for trying to open and honest for fans?

If you take a quick look at his twitter page, you will see how much of an attention seeker he is. Answers a million  tweets a day from people like yourself to Nixon about transfers teasing cryptic clues. 

[chaddyrovers]

26 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

If you take a quick look at his twitter page, you will see how much of an attention seeker he is. Answers a million  tweets a day from people 

I haven't look at his twitter page. clearly you were that interested his tweets. 

 

[Ewood Ace]

1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

Peterborough United's owner was on Sky Football Show. He was very unhappy with the League 1 clubs vote yesterday to end the season on PPG with playoffs but he said he knew before the vote that football wouldn't restart as he wanted. 

He said that his focus now is next season and winning the league whenever they returned. 

I thought that he was going to resign if they didn't make the playoffs?

[JacknOry]

oh no, not open and honest again.

[RevidgeBlue]

4 hours ago, JHRover said:

How can it be right that Luton, Barnsley, Hull etc. have to conclude a 46 game tough Championship season and get relegated to League One at the end of it whilst being replaced by Coventry or Rotherham who have played less than a full season at a lower level?

It's not difficult to understand.

The fairest outcome is for any League that can afford to do so to complete its fixtures. The Championship can afford to so, Leagues 1 and 2 have decided they can't. If Luton Barnsley or Hull finish bottom after 46 games they fully deserve to go down irrespective of what happens below them.

As far as the Leagues below are concerned, if needs must, it's much fairer to finish a season that has already been 80% completed on a PPG basis than ignore what has happened altogether.

Far from ideal, but by far the least worst solution imo. It's infinitely fairer to finish 2 Leagues fairly and take the next best solution for the other 2 Leagues through financial necessity than have an absolute travesty of justice in all 4 Leagues by scrapping them and completely ignoring what's gone on in a season that's already been 80% completed.

[Mashed Potatoes]

1 minute ago, RevidgeBlue said:

It's not difficult to understand.

The fairest outcome is for any League that can afford to do so to complete its fixtures. The Championship can afford to so, Leagues 1 and 2 have decided they can't. If Luton Barnsley or Hull finish bottom after 46 games they fully deserve to go down irrespective of what happens below them.

As far as the Leagues below are concerned, if needs must, it's much fairer to finish a season that has already been 80% completed on a PPG basis than ignore what has happened altogether.

Far from ideal, but by far the least worst solution imo. It's infinitely fairer to finish 2 Leagues fairly and take the next best solution for the other 2 Leagues through financial necessity than have an absolute travesty of justice in all 4 Leagues by scrapping them and completely ignoring what's gone on in a season that's already been 80% completed.

That's a good summary of the situation 

[roversfan99]

32 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

It's not difficult to understand.

The fairest outcome is for any League that can afford to do so to complete its fixtures. The Championship can afford to so, Leagues 1 and 2 have decided they can't. If Luton Barnsley or Hull finish bottom after 46 games they fully deserve to go down irrespective of what happens below them.

As far as the Leagues below are concerned, if needs must, it's much fairer to finish a season that has already been 80% completed on a PPG basis than ignore what has happened altogether.

Far from ideal, but by far the least worst solution imo. It's infinitely fairer to finish 2 Leagues fairly and take the next best solution for the other 2 Leagues through financial necessity than have an absolute travesty of justice in all 4 Leagues by scrapping them and completely ignoring what's gone on in a season that's already been 80% completed.

The option of completing the season may aswell be left out of the debate, clearly not an option.

It seems to have split people as to the fairest choice between PPG and scrapping a season. Here are the reasons why:

- None of the teams had fully earnt their promotions or relegations. 

- Things can change, if it had have been stopped a week or two before or after the situation would have been different. Things would have undoubtedly changed between now and the end of the season.

- Teams hadnt played the same amount of games. I appreciate that PPG factors that in but its crazy for example that Wycombes game in hand could have either put them level on points with 2nd or left them in 7th. Shows how flawed PPG is.

- Teams have massively different difficulties in terms of teams faced. Teams have therefore accumulated points against varying difficulties of teams which is totally unfair. I know the Championship is being finished but you look at the average position of teams remaining fixtures, Millwall are 2 points off 6th place PNE but have a far more favourable run in.

- Teams have also got different numbers of home and away games left.

- You mention that whichever 3 teams are relegated from the Championship deserve it and will have fully earnt it. But the 3 promoted teams wont have done. How you can have such inconsistency when the EFL claims one of their primary objectives was consistency beggars belief.

I appreciate that hard work goes to waste but thats not reason enough to use a formula to extrapolate results in an unfair and flawed way. Thats literally the only reason to use PPG and it not a valid or strong reason to do so. The season was not completed therefore it for me is as simple as that.

[chaddyrovers]

 

38 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Teams hadnt played the same amount of games. I appreciate that PPG factors that in but its crazy for example that Wycombes game in hand could have either put them level on points with 2nd or left them in 7th. Shows how flawed PPG is.

That's cos they are only 23 teams in league 1 so you cant have played the number of games. Wycombe would have played Bury that weekend before the season stopped. 

Edited June 10, 2020 by chaddyrovers