Football 19/20

[eFestivals]

29 minutes ago, Wooderson said:

Okay Neil. Cancel the whole thing. You know best.

 

I'm not claiming to know best. I'm pointing out that there's no easy solution, because whichever way it's done one or more clubs have a valid reason to feel that solution is unfair to them.

[charlierc]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

can't be done, it's illegal. Restraint of trade.

It would need EU law changes, and those never happen fast even in the easy times. 

I honestly assumed this scenario could be enough of a force meajeure to be invoked and accordingly use it to be able to do this on a temporary basis just as the sporting calendar resets. Though I'm presuming there's a lot of lawyers lurking in the background to offer their expensive opinions on the matter.

That may need to be something FIFA and UEFA have to proceed to inquire to the EU about, however. I'm aware its a difficult one. In a perfect world, with the leagues being eager to restart ASAP, it could be done, but ofc in a perfect world we wouldn't have to worry about this sort of shite because covid-19 wouldn't be present and fucking shit up. 

[eFestivals]

6 minutes ago, charlierc said:

I honestly assumed this scenario could be enough of a force meajeure to be invoked and accordingly use it to be able to do this on a temporary basis just as the sporting calendar resets. Though I'm presuming there's a lot of lawyers lurking in the background to offer their expensive opinions on the matter.

Nah. You cannot force someone that they have to continue their work with Team A beyond their contract when they don't want to.

It sounds dramatic, but it would be a (very highly paid ) version of slavery.

It could be done by mutual agreement - including all of the affected players - but I reckon it would be almost impossible to get that agreement. There's too many individual interests in those players as well as for clubs.

 

6 minutes ago, charlierc said:

That may need to be something FIFA and UEFA have to proceed to inquire to the EU about, however. I'm aware its a difficult one. In a perfect world, with the leagues being eager to restart ASAP, it could be done, but ofc in a perfect world we wouldn't have to worry about this sort of shite because covid-19 wouldn't be present and fucking shit up. 

Even if FIFA managed to get the EU to change laws around employment, that would only deal with the legal problem within the EU and the same problem would exist in most other countries.

But to have that EU law change would also require all member states to agree and then all member states to ratify thru their own parliaments; the EU doesn't move that fast, and there's always at least one awkward member state that expects a pay-off somehow - and this is really about elite football, so what's in it for (say) Latvia?

 

[squirrelarmy]

There’s also the players on loan that need to know where they stand. A few of the key players for Leeds are here on loan, some with clauses stating that they need to be signed at the end of the season. 

[pink_triangle]

Any player who knows their contract will run out before the end of the season will use the power to negotiate in their interest. I think forcing players to work past contract would set a worrying precedent.

[Comfy Bean]

Hearts have asked everyone at the club to take a 50% pay cut from April. Only exemption is where any member of staff would then fall below the living wage.

Anyone not accepting will be offered the option of terminating their contract.

The season will play out to a finish I reckon. Clubs just need to survive the next few months without an income. No doubt good players will take advantage but the clubs are against the wall. Supporters want their club to still be there after this. Players come and go.

[Comfy Bean]

On 3/15/2020 at 10:59 AM, eFestivals said:

Sky have most people locked in via contracts, and probably for the moment most end-of-contracts will be renewed.

Plus of course they're going to refuse to pay for games they're not showing.

Sky are well-set to do well out of this.  

I don’t have Sky sports but see they have paused subscription payments until footy starts again.

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, Comfy Bean said:

I don’t have Sky sports but see they have paused subscription payments until footy starts again.

We have paused subscription for sports, but access hasn't been removed.

[Crazyfool01]

23 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

We have paused subscription for sports, but access hasn't been removed.

Ah good ... I’ve done the same .. was wondering if it had not gone through for some reason as mine is still showing ... it’s normally instantaneous I think  

[thetime]

2 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

We have paused subscription for sports, but access hasn't been removed.

You pay a month in advance, so be a few weeks I'd imagine. 

Took off sky sports, bt sports and MUTV and saving a fortune.

Edited March 21, 2020 by thetime

[priest17]

We got rid of any sports and replaced it with movies. 9 beers deep watching About A Boy alone currently, I don't know if it was the right decision at this point 

 

Edited to say About A Boy is a belter of a film.

Edited March 22, 2020 by priest17

[DareToDibble]

22 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

We have paused subscription for sports, but access hasn't been removed.

 

20 hours ago, thetime said:

You pay a month in advance, so be a few weeks I'd imagine. 

Took off sky sports, bt sports and MUTV and saving a fortune.

I'm pretty sure they've said that even when you pause your subscription to Sky Sports you will still have access anyway so I don't think it will be removed. They'll just start charging us again when live sport returns.

[charlierc]

Southampton's chief exec suggested the PL could resume before the restrictions are lifted - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/51990101

Not sure if that's being cavalier or anything.

[jyoung]

Mike Ashley, man 🤮

[kaosmark2]

3 hours ago, jyoung said:

Mike Ashley, man 🤮

Not exactly surprising

[charlierc]

The Olympics have officially been postponed by a year - only the 4th ever movement of dates, and the other 3 (1916, 1940 and 1944) were due to the wars.

I know its bigger than just its football tournament, which is often the least interesting part, but that's still huge. Not to mention a further consequence for how the calendar is gonna be sorted going forward, assuming domestic football can actually be restarted at any point coming up.

[charlierc]

4 hours ago, jyoung said:

Mike Ashley, man 🤮

 

1 hour ago, kaosmark2 said:

Not exactly surprising

Like anyone's surprised. Although would've been quite something if he'd continued to insist this after effectively being told by Michael Gove on live TV "Shut your shit down now"

[metallimuse]

Just thought to drop this in but today on a conference call with work, now we’re all working from home, a woman I work with her son is a groundskeeper at a championship club and he’s been told there will be no games until September.

[eFestivals]

9 hours ago, metallimuse said:

Just thought to drop this in but today on a conference call with work, now we’re all working from home, a woman I work with her son is a groundskeeper at a championship club and he’s been told there will be no games until September.

I'm guessing that's another guesser guessing.

I've recently discovered where many festivals are getting their confidence for August and September from - and that's a guy at a ticket agent, who's doing what's good for that ticket agent, but which isn't necessarily good for the festivals who go by what he's saying.

[kaosmark2]

Non-league season voided:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/mar/26/all-english-football-below-national-league-level-to-be-voided

[eFestivals]

2 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

Non-league season voided:

the clubs wanted that for financial reasons, so it doesn't mean the leagues above will do the same.

[jyoung]

https://theathletic.com/1702521/2020/03/27/coronavirus-premier-league-null-void-abandon?

The tide is turning.

[eFestivals]

8 minutes ago, jyoung said:

https://theathletic.com/1702521/2020/03/27/coronavirus-premier-league-null-void-abandon?

The tide is turning.

the longer the crisis goes on the more inevitable voiding seems to be. 

I still think it's the wrong way to go. Results over this part-season say more about a team for going forwards than results from last season do.

I saw a headline somewhere that said a league (I forget which, might have been outside the UK; might not have even been footie) had decided to go with the part-season results on an average-points-per-game basis, which deals with the problem of any difference in games played. I quite like that, it's a better solution than what I'd suggested of voiding the most recent results of the teams who've played more games.

[jyoung]

@eFestivals

Even points per game leaves West Ham, Watford and Bournemouth all joint on points third from bottom. Who goes down?

[eFestivals]

28 minutes ago, jyoung said:

@eFestivals

Even points per game leaves West Ham, Watford and Bournemouth all joint on points third from bottom. Who goes down?

Goal difference, etc - the normal ways of splitting teams on the same points.

I realise Bournemouth would probably scream 'unfair' and say they'd played tougher games to cause them to have a worse GD, but it is what it is - where there's no fair way to all teams to sort this mess, whatever they choose to do.