I can't stand Liverpool.
But a tournament that doesn't allow the winners back in is absolutely ridiculous and needed amending.
I dare say no winners had ever not finished in a qualification position before that in the modern era?
Could they void the PL due to the Coronavirus? | No | Resuming June 17th
- Thread starter Tarrou
- Start date
I can't stand Liverpool.
But a tournament that doesn't allow the winners back in is absolutely ridiculous and needed amending.
I dare say no winners had ever not finished in a qualification position before that in the modern era?
Interesting accusation.
you said “If you are of the opinion (I think you are if I have interpreted correctly) that this season should be played to completion and then go from there that is fine, we just fundamentally disagree.”
To which I replied that your assumption of my opinion was wrong. showing that I clearly read your post.
I agree it was ridiculous to some extent, but lets not forget this was originally a competition for only the winners of the league, and then you could not get in if you won it last year. So they continued that format. but that should have been for the UEFA to sort out, not giving it to Liverpool as another exception out of the EPL.
Why are you focusing on Norwich? Why are you not focusing on Leicester? Liverpool? Sheffield United? Leeds? West Brom? Coventry? Rotherham? Crewe? Swindon? Plymouth?
In the current times clubs and communities being denied something they have gone a fair distance to earning is MUCH WORSE than offering some clubs and communities a reprieve!
BY far the most "bonkers" thing is in times of a pandemic and unprecedented situation is to think "You need one rule to apply to all". So ALL footballers should take the same paycut? Ozil should take 25% hit on his £350k per week and Joe Bloggs in League Two should take 25% hit on his €750 per week?
That makes no sense at all. If they don't go up then they have a big chance of going under. True if they play it out and lose they go under too. However if they win the last spot they go up and don't go under....
You said the goal is to fit in THE MOST games possible which I (I think logically) interpreted as you meaning to play out this season and next in full.
Null and voiding the season and ending it on a PPG basis result in the same number of games played being added to this season as it currently stands, zero if my maths is correct.
So, I don't think you are reading my posts or at least not doing so correctly.
Im fairly certain the old European cup was for league and European Cup winners.
That's how Forest managed to win back to back.
Ah you maybe right, apologies if I got that wrong, even so it still should have been they go the place via UEFA, not by skewing the rules so that another team missed out.
Right, so it makes perfect sense. They have, in your eyes and words, already put themselves in danger of going out of business by being dependant on a 20% shot coming in. So being denied that shot is not putting them in any danger they haven't already placed themselves in.
(for the record, i don't agree with the logic in the first place, no EFL club is going out of business because of missing promotion and in reality you should be agreeing with me because far more clubs risk going into financial trouble on the back of a relegation which my proposal completely eradicates)
You need rules to apply to all,yes. Otherwise you make a farce of things.
Your example of money is flawed. That's not a rule, that's a voluntary contribution.
I mention Norwich as they as "sure" to go down as Leeds and Wbrom are "sure" to go up.
You can't promote on that criteria but not relegate. Why let Norwich off but allow Leeds the promotion? This isn't some kids league where everyone gets what they want. It's a competition.
It may have been a flawed rule but they were the rules, that were set in stone, and in turn they were broken to accommodate the Dippers. I am just trying to prepare people for the inevitable voided league but the Dippers given the title anyway because 'they deserve it'.
While i think no more games is the smart money i just don't see voiding. I think they'll come up with some madcap scheme over that.
Why can't you? The main thing needed in times like this is flexibility. That applies across the board in terms of not only sport but life.
You are not "letting Norwich off". You are applying a policy that offers a reprieve to some sides while not denying a reward which has been 80% earned by others. Again, why are you against a good thing happening to some clubs and communities, and emphasis on communities here, in a time when people are almost universally struggling? It is far worse to deny something that has been to a large extent earned than it is to in your eyes deny a punishment that has been "earned" to the same degree. You say rules to apply to all but are focusing on and only mentioned one club repeatedly.
In the furlough scheme in the UK, some are availing of it that in truth do not need to, certainly not to the degree that others do. The policy was designed as such so as to ensure that nobody who qualifies for it would be left without. It would have been easy to make the rules strict but that ran the risk of cutting off people in need and the "price" of that policy is it being left open to benefiting more than ideally desired but that is BY FAR the lesser of two evils. Sometimes to ensure the maximum amount of good that can be done is achieved there are going to be some beneficiaries who in the eyes of some are not entitled, such is life.
Again, I would question why someone would be preoccupied with good things happening to some clubs and communities in catastrophically negative times.
If your policy is basically give every one what they want, who goes up in the playoff zones? Or who wins the cups?
Who goes up in league 1?Take a look at that table.
Last edited:
Finishing positions are given on a PPG basis according to current standings. Nobody from playoff spots goes anywhere, automatic spots only for promotion.
Cups either null and void or if a manageable amount of games remain can be played to a finish in the early stage of the 20/21 season. (which I outlined in my original post)
Why wouldn't you extend promotion to the 3rd team on ppg? I thought you wanted to do the most good to the most teams?
If you can't play playoffs and usually 3 go up (or 4 in league 2) why would you not keep to the same number?
What would you do with Bolton? They took a big points deduction due to financial issues. They'll do down..but under your scheme they wouldn't..basically getting away with their irregularities.
Should that be written off because it's a hard time and their community need good news?
Ha ha. You want PPG as it means you'd just about cling on to forth place!
I really hope the powers that be don't follow this chap's logic!
He totally epitomises the issue. Everyone will push for what suits their club and this is why the only way is to use and great leveller. Null and void.
3rd (or 4th in L2) doesn't get promoted because finishing 3rd (or 4th in L2) doesn't earn promotion, simple as.
You are plucking individual cases because your argument is weak. I am not looking at anything individual but from a holistic POV. I am fine with rewards being granted before fully earned, much less so with what amount to punishments being enforced without the maximum opportunity of escape having been offered.
You want universal rules apparently but are only mentioning "what about Norwich?" "what about Bolton?". If they are punished by calling the tables as they stand and relegating teams then so will Bournemouth despite being level on points with Watford and West Ham. And you realise if the season is null and voided the same teams you are crying "what about" will be in the same position as they are in my proposal? Null and void means Norwich are still in PL, Bolton still in L1.
You have no reason to believe me but I genuinely couldn't care less if Chelsea are playing in Champions League or Europa League or nether of the two.
this is a pathetic reply. Jesus H.Christ - clearly I read your reply. If you don’t think so, I couldn’t care less.
don’t bother replying to this as you are being purposefully argumentative.
We get CL in any circumstances bar play on, which even then we're in the driver's seat.
Interestingly and I didn't think of this till earlier, given City's ban and going back on last season's placing's, the Europa final in Baku would be what costs you a place in the event of a void.
Losing the will here and i think others are too.
Let's see whether you're right in a few weeks or months eh
That is what you said the goal was, if you can't keep up with what you are saying then that's your issue.
Not only did you say playing the most games possible is the ultimate goal but you then argued against my solution which sees MORE games being played next season and the same amount (zero) in the remainder of this.
I will bother replying as long as I feel it worthy of doing so. You are free to do the same.
There certainly has to be a blanket approach.
Be that play out all games bcd, apply ppg or void it.
You can't pick and choose bits and pieces to apply.
Very doubtful there will be any European football next season so can't say I'm all that fussed. It would benefit United to continue the season given we are in form and look very likely to finish top four and win at least one trophy. That said I fully understand why null and void is fair irrespective as to how we lose out.
Arguing with another member
You're losing the argument, rather than the will. Which is going some as there isn't really a right or wrong, just a matter of opinion. But your opinion is built on sand, at least as you're putting it across.
So your claim that I am arguing for PPG from a biased point of view as a Chelsea fan because it means we get into the CL when null and void achieves the same thing from a Chelsea POV was....
Yes but you didn't know that did you?
So what is the likely scenario, are we getting into Champions league in case of Null and Void of EPL, CL and EL ?
Of course I did but it was irrelevant. I genuinely couldn't care if it's CL or EL and certainly not to the point of it influencing how I think about an issue so impactful on the game as a whole. Some of us are capable of removing bias when debating wider issues.
The rule might be bad or not, but still they were the rules. They could have changed it to the following season shouldn't have made an exception for whatever reason.
Bullshiter by name bullshiter by nature.
Took me a while to realise what BCD means. Jesus, there's already some lingo forming around the whole situation.
Same old kicking the can down the road.
He explained his preferred solution and you immediately attacked him with "of course you'd want that because your team would finish 4th", which made no sense at all. Fourth, fifth, void, the consequences for Chelsea would be exactly the same.
Some people can just form an opinion on something without their club preference clouding it, you know. I know you wouldn't believe that coming from me anyway, but it's true.
Well it would make sense when you consider prize money etc
The point is everyone is going to push what best suits their club.
Surely the easiest thing at this stage will be to forget that last season existed and, when safe to do so in front of full stadia, prepare for (pre-season etc) for a fresh start and new season.