"I can't get a haircut until mid-July but I can go and get in a box with 19 people and go and jump for a header and nobody could answer the questions, not because they didn't want to, just because they don't know the information." This was a quote that showed how illogical it all is.

Fair play to Troy Deeney as well who has refused to go back to training because he has a little boy with breathing difficulties and carrying the further risk of being from a BAME background. He has said that his families health is more important than the financial side and I am sure he isnt the only player with such a stance.

According to gossip we have yes. Experience may be preferable but amongst many other key criteria, notably quality. If you want an experienced keeper, surely David Seaman would be a good addition? Or less jokingly, someone like Lee Camp, Jason Steele or Adam Federeci, all experienced but all shite? Just because he is experienced doesnt mean he is the one. Interestingly, even during last season when he was supposed to have impressed most for Sunderland, he missed out on the League team of the season to Adam Davies who has since collected dust as third choice at struggling Stoke. I am just pointing out that his calibre is hardly one that in normal circumstances, would have a promotion chasing side jumping for joy. That doesnt mean that he isnt up to it, players that I have been skeptical about in the past who I have had more knowledge about have flourished for Rovers, and conversely players that I have been excited about have underwhelmed or crashed and burned. As it is, my main point that we could be signing anyone and it would be difficult to be overly excited simply because there is a good chance we wont see them play for a long while. With income very limited for the forseeable and money presumably scarce, being pro-active and agreeing to sign a freebie such as this to fill a void considering that we dont have any contracted goalkeepers signed up for next season may be a shrewd move. My main opinion was not a negative one regarding the player, it was about the overall situation and how it may make the signing a better one than expected. In regards to your fanciful ideas about vaccines, this isnt really the thread but it remains to be seen whether a vaccine will ever be created and indeed whether it isnt a judgement call regarding the current rate of infection rather than the full closure of a vaccine as to when the players no longer need to go through the motions behind closed doors. No matter how many speculative and optimistic articles you post about vaccine progress at this stage, I suspect that before the turn of the year, never mind September, for the vaccine to have been created, trialled and tested and then mass produced would be an incredibly welcome but unexpected pleasant surprise.

If there is any chance of that being true, then it would show I think the way expectations may change due to the current situation. In normal circumstances, the signing of a soon to be 33 year old goalkeeper who was dropped earlier in the season by Sunderland and who was released by Burton following his only season at Championship level would be seen maybe as a downgrade on Walton and a very underwhelming signing to be number 1 for a club supposedly with promotion aspirations. As it is, you cant imagine that we will sign any more than maybe a couple of low key free signings such as this to cover the losses of the loan players who will leave, so you would somewhat understand the signing. I suspect that much of if not all of next season will be behind closed doors so it is hard to be enthusiastic about any signing anyway!

Unsurprising considering the lack of interest so far in player welfare from the powers that be.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/growing-number-premier-league-stars-22039746.amp?__twitter_impression=true Seems quite a few players arent happy to play.

I dont know what to make of it really. Obviously there is the novelty of watching live football, a league I wouldnt normally watch much of. I watched the first half of Dortmund, the second half of Leipzig and am now watching Frankfurt v Moenchengladbach and in all 3 games the technical ability and tempo has made all 3 games watchable. That being said, I think once English football and Rovers come back my reaction is something im unsure of. I suspect that I will struggle to be overly enthused about the chances of us getting an unlikely shot at a play offs in front of an empty stadium anyway, I would almost view the games as friendlies I suspect.

Or lets realise that the risk is still too high at the moment and that many players are unhappy/unwilling and seemingly havent been consulted due to the men in suits lust to meet TV obligations. And instead of forcing an unethical, compromised and unfair end to an unprecedented season just call it off for a few months. Health aside, even having a situation whereby 3 teams will be relegated (probably Championship onto League 1) having played only certain fixtures behind closed doors and replaced by 3 teams promoted on the premise of a flawed mathematical formula is absolutely stupid. I think the chances of having a vaccine in place in 3 months readily available is minimal and fanciful in the extreme. But ultimately the risk may be far less than it is now.

For all those who have repeatedly put forward the flawed view that playing football is needed to save football clubs lower down financially, they are close to agreeing to stop the season. Ultimately they will seemingly have to use a quite frankly ridicilious PPG system because of the supposed and apparent "need" to have promotions and relegated from a season cut short in a pandemic.

Perhaps but suppose thats a further problem with teying to finish a season whereby teams and players have biased self interests and agendas in terms of league positions.

Although he does usually talk bollocks, if theres truth in that, I just dont see how a large chunk or perhaps all of next season if necessary can go ahead in the football league next season financially. 5m for one league only over the space of an intended 5 or 6 weeks.

Troy Deeney, Glenn Murray, Aaron Cresswell, Curtis Davies and Tammy Abraham (who lives with his dad who has asthma) are the latest players to suggest that their welfare is perhaps not being considered and they are being expected to play without being asked of their opinion. I definitely think there should be scope for players to be able to refuse to play and indeed I think some of the negative feedback on account of the amount they (at the top) get paid is a little distasteful really, earning more money does not absolve them from being human beings fearful of a pandemic like the rest of us and with vulnerable family members or indeed themselves. I have seen interviews and comments from players from BAME background for example or a couple (I think Curtis Davies said as such yesterday) with conditions such as asthma. I am not sure it should be that they should be not paid at all but I definitely think there should be agreements in place whereby not playing leads to a heavily deducted wage. It does raise even further questions about the integrity of the game, say Watford go down and their captain isnt playing... I think a lot of people are thinking far too rigidly in black and white terms, ie either start now or you cant until a vaccine is created. Obviously there is a good chance a vaccine will never be successfully made, but it isnt as simple as that, at the moment the risk is still high, whereby as time passes (obviously recent government steps will not necessary help this) the risk we hope will reduce, the rate of infection will reduce, the number of deaths each day will reduce, and thus the overall risk of catching and even dying from coronvirus will go down. Not finishing the season is not ideal but its just becoming an incredibly expensive, rushed and flawed process to squeeze in the last few games in a quick period of time with still high risk. Will a vaccine be available in 3 or 4 months? Almost certainly not but we can hope that the risk is less even if it never becomes totally nil.

Im not saying that at that time England werent mis managed but the reason that Lampard and Gerrard were always in the team is because like Scholes they were all world class midfielders, as good as Dunn was he wasnt as good as them 3. Indeed out of the 3 I felt that Scholes was just about the best and should have played central but you can understand the desire to get them all in. Indeed Scholes retired not because he was played left where he said he did play on occasion for United but because he felt he underperformed. Heskey certainly lingered a little too long but he was a perfect foil for Owen.

To be honest he is similar to Josh King in terms of going on to play at a good level following his departute, indeed King much more consistently and impressively (but perhaps lacking quite the same glamour and intrigue for whatever reason) so I suppose it is understandable that people look back and think they were unfortunate but they both flattered to deceive in the main aside from the odd flash. Both were more gifted than Rhodes or Gestede but failed to show anything like similar output. Rochina would score a worldy or do a clever trick (I remember away at Yeovil people marvelled at a rabona shot he did when it was easily tipped over and indeed a normal shot or pass may have been wiser!) but for the following 6 games he would do nothing but frustrate and obviously that made the fact that he was unwilling to graft a big problem. And King was often injured and almost exclusively ineffective. I am not saying that either benefitted from being at the club in perfect circumstances by any means but I dont think either made a particularly compelling case when they did play that they could feel hard done by. Rhodes consistently performed at that time and then Gestede when he came.

We seemingly have different standarda on whats safe and whats not. Just because a hypothetical scenario could lead to a rise in deaths doesnt mean that its safe now or that we should have played now.

Chaddy if a second wave means that around September the situation is worse then the situation is simple. Still no football is played.

You could say that about our owners and many others too even before all of this. I dont believe that solely the TV money covering 9 games (baring in mind there is no ticket money for these games and that full player wages will need to resume, in some instances past their existing contract expiry dates) will make a huge difference for a club like Reading. The main thing is that the financial situations around football clubs are not as important as peoples lives so ultimately it shouldnt be a primary consideration anyway. Under my suggestion of at least ruling out playing any football in the next month or two, no you dont need a plan. Essentially now would be considered the off-season and rather than creating needless dates for potentially resumptions, essentially we would wait and see what the situation was like in a couple of months. With the decision then made as to whether to train and then play or wait further. I think its incredibly fanciful to suggest that the Premier League will play these fixtures, be far better off simply based on the small remaining chuck on TV money they may receive and filter it all back into the lower leagues. All on BT sport.

Will be watching the Bundesliga this weekend as im sure many others will. Of course I am delighted to have some football back on but I am also incredibly skeptical that it will be anything other than an inferior and heavily diluted substitute that lacks the usual competitive edge that makes it so great. Obviously the lack of supporters are an understandable difference, I did watch Juventus v Inter Milan just before the lockdown over there which was behind closed doors but the game was still competitive and decent to watch. But now I suspect that there will be an overall wave of fear and also I am unsure if the Bundesliga has any rules similar to the ones @Tom mentioned that the Premier League have considered which would make it an unwatchable farce.

But what I am saying is there is absolutely no option or logistical way for Leagues 1 and 2 to restart so regardless of the decision that is made in regards to the top 2 leagues, it wont make a difference because the only options available to the lower teams are ones absent of playing any football, ie null and void or a farcical points per game extrapolation. Because playing at all for Leagues 1 and 2 isnt an option, never mind in front of a paying crowd, the decision as to whether to push through the leagues makes absolutely no difference to their ability to survive.

But why will 40 or 50 clubs go out of business if the season doesnt finish? My point is that the only 2 leagues that can possibly finish and to which any debate is open doesnt contain the teams primarily at risk financially. Surely scrapping next srason would be even more financially disruptive. Ultimately finance isnt the primary issue to be honest but the decision revolves around only the top 2 leagues but League 1 teams and below genuinely at risk cannot finish their seasons regardless.

Where has been all the pitying of footballers having to take a cut? You say get back whilst there is something left to get back to but in terms of the logistical side of things, only the Premier League and maybe Championsip could possibly be finished and none of those clubs will be in danger of going out of business anytime soon so its a moot point. Rushing through the top 2 leagues now will in no way prevent clubs potentially folding. And ultimately, that isnt as important as health. You have been fairly dismissive of the nature of the pandemic throughout but there are too many deaths at the moment and there is too much risk to be playing at the moment. There are also the reprocussions of any positive tests and the following cancellations and there are a number of players who have already highlighted their concerns publically and of course their co operation is essential There is a sense of logic behind the idea of prioritising this season at the potential cost of next season and I appreciate that. I would rather have a full new season personally with the blank canvas of clubs potentially arranging the potential for a mid season return to crowds if at all possible pre fixture release without the conflict of interest regarding current league positions. But one thing I would rule out now is the possibility of finishing this season AND having a full next season. It is not possible. There is no need for an urgent decision aside from that no football can be played immediately. For me finishing this season would only be become a viable option if it wasnt possible to start playing even in August/September.

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11684/11986747/lee-bowyer-relegating-charlton-from-championship-on-points-per-game-would-be-scandalous

Should be a simple thing really. Question 1. Is the situation (deaths per day etc) low risk enough to consider having games in front of fans? Yes - Go ahead with precautions. No - Wait. Question 2. Is the situation low risk enough to consider having games behind closed doors? Yes - Go ahead with precautions. No - Wait. Delay and/or null and void where appropriate. Obviously the question all falls around what the guideline is in regards to low risk. Maybe under x amount of deaths and infections for x period of time. Maybe when far enough down the chart out of 5. Maybe when either of these are in place and players are willing to co-operate. But dont consider legalities and finances until these 2 questions are answered.

I can see how that may be the case from now in terms of new contracts but I dont see how players on current (especially long term) contracts "are going to have to accept" wage cuts, says who? How can that be enforced? Aside from a potential temporary drop whilst players are not requested to come into work, however if the Premier League (and Championship) do enforce that the season starts again in June against all logic then even that wont be happening as they will be back in training imminently. 5 years is a very specific and quite random duration to pick though, as I suspect (and hope) that it will be much before then that supporters can attend games. Its hard to have too much sympathy with Premier League clubs and their finances to be honest. Last summer saw a spend of £1.4bn incredibly. Surely the first thing to expect is that surely no transfer fees will be spent this summer. I dont get this insistence that promotions and relegations HAVE to be enforced regardless of how unfairly and in terms of risk to health how imorally they are decided upon. Ive yet to see a valid reason. I also understand the need for clarity amd transparency but not for a plan ie deciding on everything now. Null and void is the most sensible way to buy time in a very fluid and unprecedented time. A plan is not needed right now because we dont know the situation in say 2 months. At that point, deaths may have gone down significantly enough to start the new season at a normal start date and the teams can agree to open games up to fans if and when possible during the season with a blank canvas in terms of positions and before fixtures are arranged. If not, the season can be further delayed. For me, the sensible thing would be to cancel the European competitions including Euro 2020(or 2021) to allow the domestic calendar to be delayed even further anyway, buying more time.

None of your reasons are good enough to prompt a season being rushed through. Couldnt give a shite what Greg Clarke has said to be honest, I just know that there is no way that considering that (weekend lag affects weekend figures) that there were consistently 500-700 deaths a day last week, that football should be being played. End of. Players are publically coming out and saying as such too. Each time a player gets a positive reading a huge spanner is put in the works. Even if the League or teams pay for the testing themselves, to get games on, other vital resources will be used. Its not going to be fair whatever happens, there will be legal consequences whatever happens, and the clubs from League 1 below are totaly unaffected by the decision anyway, ie the most vulnerable because their season re-start isnt under consideration. All your hot air about player wages, that can be discussed, but it is NOT AS IMPORTANT AS HEALTH. If you also saw 500-700 daily deaths as good enough reason to not be able to play football in the next month or 2. And it was points per game v null and void and the former was deemed fairer, that would be absolutely crazy. I think you are just desperate to see football that you cannot look past the main fact staring in front of you.