SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )

[Rogue Daddy]

26 minutes ago, TheBigO said:

Was speaking to an L1 club this morning for work. He was saying they want 22 games (basically as many as poss so season means something) but the flipside is 20th March been thrust upon them and its too soon.

 

Felt with testing etc there was no reason training even once a week couldn't have happened for the last month.

 

Says if players need to play three times a week, it's really tough doing it with travel etc as they all have "real jobs" too.

 

Basically said they've had zero steer or communication from jrg or sfa and all decisions just chucked at them.

 

They've had testing facilities in place since last April!! Obv not been using them but budgeted and set up to do so. Says other teams similar.

 

SFA have hung all these teams out to dry. How crap for the likes of Falkirk and Partick in particular.

 

What the spfl/sfa/jrg is getting away with is absolutely criminal. They are being ALLOWED to treat our game this way.... why are they getting away with it?!

 

Why are these clubs not making a bigger stink of things?!... why is our media not taking this organisation/cabal to task?!

 

I know we've been repeatedly asking these questions for a year now, but surely, sooner or later, something has to give! Mud HAS to stick at some point.

[Saint Jambo]

4 hours ago, jambomjm74 said:

Just to be clear.

The region with the lowest rate of covid (virtually zero) and the only area where limited spectators were allowed, is not being allowed to restart their league... but forced to play in Scottish cup ties. 
How much serious thinking goes into these decisions. SFA/SpFL and Govt congratulations are due for stupidity and a repeat of what we had to endure vs Hibs (obviously we beat the wee team)

 

Is there any indication the Highland League actually wants to restart? The L1 and L2 clubs came together to agree a proposal for restarting. I haven't heard anything similar from the HL. I also haven't heard the HL complaining about not restarting. I may have missed it, but wouldn't be too surprised if the HL were happy enough to write off this season, similar to many teams in the lower levels of non-league football in England.

[Ari Gold]

Seemingly null and void is the decision. 

[Albert McFly]

Null and void being rumoured to be coming after the spfl board stepped in and certain clubs pushed for it 

[Albert McFly]

"The clubs have just received bad news from the SPFL board. Initially they had not rejected our proposal but after further consideration it has been completely rejected.

 

Not only has this proposal been rejected, but the SPFL have taken the 18 game solution off the table as well and told us that the season will be announced as null and void later tonight"

[Hungry hippo]

Surely needs to go to a vote. Members organisation etc...

[milky_26]

6 minutes ago, Hungry hippo said:

Surely needs to go to a vote. Members organisation etc...

or as donkey keeps saying they only follow the orders of the members

[Albert McFly]

Also getting info it's 18 games........who knows!

[kingantti1874]

If it has been given the go ahead you the government  I don’t think the governing bodies could N&V without a vote.

 

On a side note I’d feel sorry for none of them with the exception of PTFC, FFC and SFC

[willie wallace]

5 hours ago, davemclaren said:

Wouldn’t surprise me if Uefa want no other matches on during the tournament. 

Surely even UEFA can understand that these are exceptional circumstances and let them

complete the leagues.

Possibly player contracts could also be a problem if the season runs past its usual finish date.

A lot of the clubs operate on 1yr.deals.

 

 

[davemclaren]

25 minutes ago, willie wallace said:

Surely even UEFA can understand that these are exceptional circumstances and let them

complete the leagues.

Possibly player contracts could also be a problem if the season runs past its usual finish date.

A lot of the clubs operate on 1yr.deals.

 

 

I could imagine the UEFA tv deals demand exclusivity of audience. 

[Ari Gold]

56 minutes ago, Albert McFly said:

Also getting info it's 18 games........who knows!

I think you've seen the same emails I've seen. 

[DETTY29]

2 hours ago, Saint Jambo said:

 

Is there any indication the Highland League actually wants to restart? The L1 and L2 clubs came together to agree a proposal for restarting. I haven't heard anything similar from the HL. I also haven't heard the HL complaining about not restarting. I may have missed it, but wouldn't be too surprised if the HL were happy enough to write off this season, similar to many teams in the lower levels of non-league football in England.

Hope the HL and LL can in some way offer up Brora and Kelty for play off places.

Edited March 5, 2021 by DETTY29

[Albert McFly]

23 minutes ago, Ari Gold said:

I think you've seen the same emails I've seen. 

There's definitely some skulduggery going on like last season

 

[Mikey1874]

51 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

I could imagine the UEFA tv deals demand exclusivity of audience. 

 

Euro2020 starts June 11th. Seem to be planning to be finished by then. 

 

Though I can see how Italy v Turkey is undermined by Alloa v Falkirk being played at the same time. 

 

People all over Europe are excited at whether Alloa can survive. 

[Footballfirst]

15 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Euro2020 starts June 11th. Seem to be planning to be finished by then. 

 

Though I can see how Italy v Turkey is undermined by Alloa v Falkirk being played at the same time. 

 

People all over Europe are excited at whether Alloa can survive. 

I've no desire for Alloa to be involved in any play off games. I want them directly relegated by finishing bottom.

[true-jambo]

1 hour ago, Footballfirst said:

I've no desire for Alloa to be involved in any play off games. I want them directly relegated by finishing bottom.

Absolutely

[Newton51]

Edinburgh city rep was on sportsound. Did seem to want to continue but not 18 games. They wanted 27 but accepted would be difficult so 22 was a compromise to give teams a chance of reaching play offs or staying up

[Guest ToqueJambo]

If null and void the clubs will be paying back the government and James Anderson money intended to enable them to play I take it?

[Saint Jambo]

1 hour ago, ToqueJambo said:

If null and void the clubs will be paying back the government and James Anderson money intended to enable them to play I take it?

 

The government money wasn't ever intended to enable clubs to keep playing this season. Government really couldn't care less whether they complete the season, play a shortened season, or null and void. The money was intended to help them survive the pandemic, same as the billions pumped into other companies.

[Guest ToqueJambo]

1 minute ago, Saint Jambo said:

 

The government money wasn't ever intended to enable clubs to keep playing this season. Government really couldn't care less whether they complete the season, play a shortened season, or null and void. The money was intended to help them survive the pandemic, same as the billions pumped into other companies.

 

Did the other companies stop doing business despite being allowed to and able to? 

[Footballfirst]

12 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

Did the other companies stop doing business despite being allowed to and able to? 

In many cases yes.  Places like city centre bars, coffee shops, sandwich takeaways and dry cleaners.  Without the footfall with so many office workers working from home, it wasn't economic for them to open at various stages when they were allowed to open.

Edited March 5, 2021 by Footballfirst

[Guest ToqueJambo]

Just now, Footballfirst said:

In many cases yes.  Places like city centre bars, coffee shops, sandwich takeaways and dry cleaners.  Without the footfall will so many office workers working from home, it wasn't economic for them to open at various stages when they were allowed to open.

 

 

That doesn't apply to L1 and L2 clubs surely though as most seem to want to play, and it's been proven the leagues can play without fans. No fans affects the top teams much more than the smaller teams. The money was provided to offset the loss of fans form what I recall. The PT clubs could have stayed alive just by closing their doors at the start of this season and wouldn't have needed extra money.

[Footballfirst]

2 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

That doesn't apply to L1 and L2 clubs surely though as most seem to want to play, and it's been proven the leagues can play without fans. No fans affects the top teams much more than the smaller teams. The money was provided to offset the loss of fans form what I recall. The PT clubs could have stayed alive just by closing their doors at the start of this season and wouldn't have needed extra money.

I think you have answered the question yourself. The L1/L2 clubs could survive an extended shut down just by mothballing for a season. Given what we know now, I'm sure that would have been the majority view at the start of the season, if they knew that there was no chance of fans attending for the whole season.  However having started, there will now be a mix of those who want to finish the season  (those with something to play for) and others who have had enough and want to wait for next season (those struggling in the league).

[Beave1874]

5 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

 

That doesn't apply to L1 and L2 clubs surely though as most seem to want to play, and it's been proven the leagues can play without fans. No fans affects the top teams much more than the smaller teams. The money was provided to offset the loss of fans form what I recall. The PT clubs could have stayed alive just by closing their doors at the start of this season and wouldn't have needed extra money.

This is my take also. No expert but I reckon running costs were minimum (relative I appreciate) and could have mothballed. Not a fan of Gordon Strachan, but to be fair to him, he called these part time teams out for essentially being a nonsense in the grand scheme of things and should not have the same vote as full time teams.  

[Guest ToqueJambo]

2 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

I think you have answered the question yourself. The L1/L2 clubs could survive an extended shut down just by mothballing for a season. Given what we know now, I'm sure that would have been the majority view at the start of the season, if they knew that there was no chance of fans attending for the whole season.  However having started, there will now be a mix of those who want to finish the season  (those with something to play for) and others who have had enough and want to wait for next season (those struggling in the league).

 

Probably true, but them not being able to complete the league was foreseen by a lot of people. It's basically why PT went to court with us.  And I don't think L1 and L2 stopped because o financial reasons. They were all up for playing on. According to the SFA it was the gov that did it for health and safety reasons. As usual, it's a complete mess.

[davemclaren]

3 hours ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

Probably true, but them not being able to complete the league was foreseen by a lot of people. It's basically why PT went to court with us.  And I don't think L1 and L2 stopped because o financial reasons. They were all up for playing on. According to the SFA it was the gov that did it for health and safety reasons. As usual, it's a complete mess.

I think the two lower leagues were an offering from the SPFL to the government to allow the two leagues with tv contracts to continue. The championship would have been next if that wasn’t enough. 

[TheBigO]

Don't think it'll be null n void. The clubs have recommenced training, taken any staff off furlough as required and already paid out relatively large sums for testing.

[Newton51]

 

[SectionN]

36 minutes ago, Newton51 said:

 

Get the man a job back at Tynie after that comment. 

[DMR123]

46 minutes ago, Newton51 said:

 

Well said Craig Levein!

[Newton51]

 

[thehibsareintheirbeds]

6 minutes ago, Newton51 said:

 

Clubs looking out for their own interests again which I can understand but at the same time it just reinforces what we learned last year about the majority of clubs in scottish football.

 

Hard to feel sorry for some of them in leagues 1 and 2 but another real kick in the teeth for those impacted by last seasons skullduggery 

[Saint Jambo]

1 hour ago, Newton51 said:

 

 

Interesting to see a journalist reference what seemed obvious but was ignored in the initial 18 or 22 game coverage. It isn't about 4 extra games on pay per view, it is about teams wanting more games to change their current league position. The SPFL Board told the clubs they didn't think 22 games was practical, the clubs said they knew better, now the clubs are saying that actually 22 games isn't practical so could the Championship clubs now change things around. Ridiculous. 

 

If it would require Championship clubs to spread our existing fixtures out over another two weeks then we should be against it. Let's have maximum time over the summer to plan for next season. If it just means accepting that the 9th place team in the Championship has to twiddle their thumbs for an extra couple of weeks and then play in the play-offs, I'd be happy for Hearts to vote it through as the 9th place team is likely to be one that should be having a wee "take your medicine" moment, while the team they have to play could well be one of the good guys.

[Super_Hans]

Just making things up as they go along. The governance is utterly appalling. There should have been contingency plans in place for this sort of scenario happening during the season but instead they are scrambling around trying to come up with a solution a week before they are supposed to restart the leagues.

 

Absolute tinpot organisation.

[Saint Jambo]

3 minutes ago, Super_Hans said:

Just making things up as they go along. The governance is utterly appalling. There should have been contingency plans in place for this sort of scenario happening during the season but instead they are scrambling around trying to come up with a solution a week before they are supposed to restart the leagues.

 

Absolute tinpot organisation.

 

To be fair to the SPFL, they asked the clubs for the power to come up with contingency plans that they could then implement, but the clubs said no they would sort it out between themselves if required. Who could have predicted that would end badly? It's not like there is precedent from last year. To some extent the SPFL is right that the problem is the club (although on that basis they don't need a CEO on mega bucks).

[TheBigO]

1 hour ago, Super_Hans said:

Just making things up as they go along. The governance is utterly appalling. There should have been contingency plans in place for this sort of scenario happening during the season but instead they are scrambling around trying to come up with a solution a week before they are supposed to restart the leagues.

 

Absolute tinpot organisation.

Doncaster continually hides behind the "I just do what members tell me" when it suits.

 

So stop leagues, write resolutions, enforce changes when it suits, but when it's something he doesn't give a shiny about, the members have to fight it out.

 

The SPFL and SFA governance need lined up and shot, and replaced with pretty much anything.  Robert Mugabi and Joey Essex elected as new CEO and Chair.

[Newton51]

no news on the ply off dates yet

[Footballfirst]

8 hours ago, Saint Jambo said:

 

To be fair to the SPFL, they asked the clubs for the power to come up with contingency plans that they could then implement, but the clubs said no they would sort it out between themselves if required. Who could have predicted that would end badly? It's not like there is precedent from last year. To some extent the SPFL is right that the problem is the club (although on that basis they don't need a CEO on mega bucks).

Fair to the SPFL?  All the SPFL Board was looking for was to be able to control the outcome, as they saw fit, not one that was fair to all clubs.

 

Brechin City and Albion Rovers struggling again? We better dispense with the playoffs for a second season!  Who cares about the pyramid?

[Newton51]

 

[Tommy Brown]

3 minutes ago, Newton51 said:

 

So, they are going to manage to fit in about 13 more games each and play offs?

[Newton51]

Just now, Tommy Brown said:

So, they are going to manage to fit in about 13 more games each and play offs?

Seems like it but weird not been confirmed yet. Only given first few fixtures so far

[Tommy Brown]

3 minutes ago, Newton51 said:

Seems like it but weird not been confirmed yet. Only given first few fixtures so far

Kelty have played 13 out of 32.

Highland league has only played 3.

I cannot any play off getting played this year again.

[Newton51]

Just now, Tommy Brown said:

Kelty have played 13 out of 32.

Highland league has only played 3.

I cannot any play off getting played this year again.

gets more bonkers by the minute. No chance of a play off so brechin safe again

 

Agreement has been reached over a plan to complete the League One and Two seasons, with all teams to play a 22-game campaign to settle titles and other prizes.

Clubs and the SPFL have been in detailed discussions after the lower leagues were given the go-ahead to train and then resume playing, with proposals tabled to allow for a shortened season.

It had been generally accepted by clubs in League One and League Two that the planned 27-game season was no longer a viable option after the coronavirus pandemic halted action on January 12.

STV has learned that clubs have now settled on a return to playing from March 20 with a goal of completing 18 games each by April 23. That could involve some sides playing up to four games in the space of a week but there is belief that a strict schedule can be kept to.

ADVERT

 

If all clubs can reach that milestone, the leagues would then split into a top five and bottom five, playing the remaining four games to decide on final league positions.

From there, play-offs would be played to settle promotion and relegation between the Championship, League One and League Two.

If clubs can’t reach the 18-game mark by April 23 then the season will end at 18 games when all clubs complete their allocated fixtures.

All games will have to be played around the remaining Scottish Cup games, with the flagship cup competition to resume this month.

ADVERT

 

Second round ties will be completed on Tuesday, March 23 before the third round – featuring Premiership sides – takes place on April 3.

The final will be played at Hampden on May 22, after both semi-finals on the weekend of May 8.

[Hungry hippo]

April 23rd is a stupid date. The 30th would still allow plenty of time for the split and playoff fixtures and provide another 2 or even 3 dates to get the fixtures played. The SPFL board seems to be anti playing football.

[kila]

16 minutes ago, Hungry hippo said:

April 23rd is a stupid date. The 30th would still allow plenty of time for the split and playoff fixtures and provide another 2 or even 3 dates to get the fixtures played. The SPFL board seems to be anti playing football.

 

It's not about the football but about their egos. Run like a stereotype bowling club. This will be the compromise because the SPFL want to see 4 games in one week for some teams to really ruin them.

 

Edited March 12, 2021 by kila

[Mikey1874]

1 hour ago, Footballfirst said:

Fair to the SPFL?  All the SPFL Board was looking for was to be able to control the outcome, as they saw fit, not one that was fair to all clubs.

 

Brechin City and Albion Rovers struggling again? We better dispense with the playoffs for a second season!  Who cares about the pyramid?

 

I'm pleased to see there is an agreement. Some credit given to what the clubs want.

 

But its true the SPFL and SFA have adopted command and control as their way. Under pressure to ensure Champions League football for Celtic and influenced by board members with an interest in an easy outcome, they missed a great opportunity to bring the clubs with them.

 

As some people said they could have allowed a full discussion/ consultation a year ago. There was no rush. It might have led to promotion and relegation but it could have been done with consent. And I think Reconstruction could also have happened. 

 

Now it's just about saved the season. Possibly

 

[Guest ToqueJambo]

3 hours ago, Newton51 said:

gets more bonkers by the minute. No chance of a play off so brechin safe again

 

Agreement has been reached over a plan to complete the League One and Two seasons, with all teams to play a 22-game campaign to settle titles and other prizes.

Clubs and the SPFL have been in detailed discussions after the lower leagues were given the go-ahead to train and then resume playing, with proposals tabled to allow for a shortened season.

It had been generally accepted by clubs in League One and League Two that the planned 27-game season was no longer a viable option after the coronavirus pandemic halted action on January 12.

STV has learned that clubs have now settled on a return to playing from March 20 with a goal of completing 18 games each by April 23. That could involve some sides playing up to four games in the space of a week but there is belief that a strict schedule can be kept to.

ADVERT

 

If all clubs can reach that milestone, the leagues would then split into a top five and bottom five, playing the remaining four games to decide on final league positions.

From there, play-offs would be played to settle promotion and relegation between the Championship, League One and League Two.

If clubs can’t reach the 18-game mark by April 23 then the season will end at 18 games when all clubs complete their allocated fixtures.

All games will have to be played around the remaining Scottish Cup games, with the flagship cup competition to resume this month.

ADVERT

 

Second round ties will be completed on Tuesday, March 23 before the third round – featuring Premiership sides – takes place on April 3.

The final will be played at Hampden on May 22, after both semi-finals on the weekend of May 8.

 

 

Seems like there won't be relegation if it's 18 games but titles will be awarded, or are they suggesting no titles after 18 games and therefore no promotion? 

 

Wasn't a big deal made of how you can't award titles without also relegating the team at the bottom? It was used as an argument against reconstruction as I remember.

Edited March 12, 2021 by ToqueJambo

[Hungry hippo]

1 hour ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

 

Seems like there won't be relegation if it's 18 games but titles will be awarded, or are they suggesting no titles after 18 games and therefore no promotion? 

 

Wasn't a big deal made of how you can't award titles without also relegating the team at the bottom? It was used as an argument against reconstruction as I remember.

 

It doesn't really confirm what happens if the leagues are cut to 18 games but I can see how you've inferred that.

[Carl Fredrickson]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56405073

 

A vote. I wonder what could possibly go wrong.