EFL to end season this week - City likely to be promoted (6 Viewers)

CCFC88

Well-Known Member
It was said on radio yesterday or suggested that clubs play their games in hand which would mean us playing Wycombe then going ppg, sounds far fetched but the Premiership is kicking off with Villa for one playing their game in hand. Apparently Premiership clubs are also meeting soon to discuss what should happen if the season cannot finish, sounds ominous that but they are saying at the moment no relegation is not on the table but I’m wary of that. That all brings us back to the original no relegation and possible increasing the Prem idea from weeks ago.
We wont be paying for testing, bringing our payers and staff off furlough, extending loans/contracts and training for 3 weeks just to play one game against Wycombe.

Prem are doing it as they plan to finish the season, starting with the "games in hand" so that PPG is easier to sort if things get worse and play has to be curtailed
 

tisza

Well-Known Member
It was said on radio yesterday or suggested that clubs play their games in hand which would mean us playing Wycombe then going ppg, sounds far fetched but the Premiership is kicking off with Villa for one playing their game in hand. Apparently Premiership clubs are also meeting soon to discuss what should happen if the season cannot finish, sounds ominous that but they are saying at the moment no relegation is not on the table but I’m wary of that. That all brings us back to the original no relegation and possible increasing the Prem idea from weeks ago.
1. Don't see us coming back for 1 game to sort out PPG issues. Prohibitive costs for a one-off game.
2. Don't see no relegation from PL as well as adding 3 clubs from Championship. Already too many fixtures for those involved in Europe etc. But probably more importantly is the financials. Suddenly TV contracts split amongst 23 clubs, then there would be the cost of 6 parachute payments from the following season as the PL went back to 20 clubs. - assuming it would be 3 up 6 down which just seems cumbersome in the extreme (although can be sure teams 4th-6th from bottom would be bleating how unfair it is)
 

tisza

Well-Known Member
We wont be paying for testing, bringing our payers and staff off furlough, extending loans/contracts and training for 3 weeks just to play one game against Wycombe.

Prem are doing it as they plan to finish the season, starting with the "games in hand" so that PPG is easier to sort if things get worse and play has to be curtailed
seems the way they are scheduling fixtures over so many days for TV means that (if there was a 2nd spike) chances are all teams wouldn't finish on same number of games played anyway.
 

CCFC88

Well-Known Member
seems the way they are scheduling fixtures over so many days for TV means that (if there was a 2nd spike) chances are all teams wouldn't finish on same number of games played anyway.
True but rounds of games are only spread over what 2-3 days. They will see a second spike coming and be able to finish a round of games. We won't wake up on a Tuesday and be back into immediate lockdown because of what happened on a Monday.
 

Ccfcsj

Well-Known Member
It was said on radio yesterday or suggested that clubs play their games in hand which would mean us playing Wycombe then going ppg.

It wouldn't be just a couple of games. Ipswich and Sunderland have both played 36 games, most teams have played 35 and a few 34 so to even it up most teams would have to play at least 1 game and some 2 games. Alternative would be to remove any points Ipswich and Sunderland gained in their last game (if any) which could cause more issues

Edit - just checked and both Sunderland and Ipswich lost their last game so possibly wouldn't complain if they were scratched from the records
 

Magwitch

Well-Known Member
1. Don't see us coming back for 1 game to sort out PPG issues. Prohibitive costs for a one-off game.
2. Don't see no relegation from PL as well as adding 3 clubs from Championship. Already too many fixtures for those involved in Europe etc. But probably more importantly is the financials. Suddenly TV contracts split amongst 23 clubs, then there would be the cost of 6 parachute payments from the following season as the PL went back to 20 clubs. - assuming it would be 3 up 6 down which just seems cumbersome in the extreme (although can be sure teams 4th-6th from bottom would be bleating how unfair it is)
I think it’s all still very much in the melting pot and certain scenarios possibles and probables have been discussed, the Prem bottom six and maybe a couple above that I’m sure would go no relegation given the chance, and distribution of future tv money taken into consideration, as for European football not sure if that will happen as it used to next season the logistics of that is massive. Whatever they decide won’t effect our promotion so in a way who cares
 

Sky Blue Harry H

Well-Known Member
The idea of us playing the outstanding game against Wycombe to even things up and then apply PPG is stupid. We would go up as Champions if we lose, so (sad as it is) Wycombe would be up for it and why would ours bother with a dead rubber ( not going to risk pre season injury etc ). Walsh, O'Hare wouldn't even turn out for it. Anyway - not going to happen.
 

CCFC88

Well-Known Member
I think it’s all still very much in the melting pot and certain scenarios possibles and probables have been discussed, the Prem bottom six and maybe a couple above that I’m sure would go no relegation given the chance, and distribution of future tv money taken into consideration, as for European football not sure if that will happen as it used to next season the logistics of that is massive. Whatever they decide won’t effect our promotion so in a way who cares
They've already moved the Champions League from Turkey to Portugal so expect that to happen. As with the Prem too expensive not to. Likely to happen over a 2 week period in August
 

steve cooper

Well-Known Member
My understanding is that Tranmere's proposal has made it onto the EFL voting paper next week. This is why I think it has a good chance of winning the vote.
Currently the following 8 teams have declared their desire to finish the season.
Oxford
Portsmouth
Peterborough
Fleetwood
Sunderland
Ipswich
Gillingham
Tranmere
The following 4 teams have given mixed messages and some or all could vote to play on.
Wycombe
Doncaster
Lincoln
Bristol Rovers
And there are one or two teams who have not, as far as I know, declared their preference and will probably vote with the majority.
That's incredibly tight and could go either way, and one vote could swing it.
The teams on that list that would likely vote for Tranmere's proposal are Tranmere and Doncaster (who are currently 5 points off a playoff place). In addition Peterborough have declared their support for it, but may actually prefer to play on. Either way, there is a good chance Peterborough or Sunderland, or both would be happy with a guaranteed playoff slot, and would vote for it, considering 2 promotion slots would be up for grabs.
Rotherham wouldn't be happy because they would be moved into the playoffs, but they are not voting to play on anyway.
By my thinking, Tranmere's proposal, as ridiculous as it sounds, makes a vote to play on very unlikely.
 

Colin Steins Smile

Well-Known Member
My understanding is that Tranmere's proposal has made it onto the EFL voting paper next week. This is why I think it has a good chance of winning the vote.
Currently the following 8 teams have declared their desire to finish the season.
Oxford
Portsmouth
Peterborough
Fleetwood
Sunderland
Ipswich
Gillingham
Tranmere
The following 4 teams have given mixed messages and some or all could vote to play on.
Wycombe
Doncaster
Lincoln
Bristol Rovers
And there are one or two teams who have not, as far as I know, declared their preference and will probably vote with the majority.
That's incredibly tight and could go either way, and one vote could swing it.
The teams on that list that would likely vote for Tranmere's proposal are Tranmere and Doncaster (who are currently 5 points off a playoff place). In addition Peterborough have declared their support for it, but may actually prefer to play on. Either way, there is a good chance Peterborough or Sunderland, or both would be happy with a guaranteed playoff slot, and would vote for it, considering 2 promotion slots would be up for grabs.
Rotherham wouldn't be happy because they would be moved into the playoffs, but they are not voting to play on anyway.
By my thinking, Tranmere's proposal, as ridiculous as it sounds, makes a vote to play on very unlikely.

Interesting analysis.
Given that Lincoln have announced their released players list, I doubt they are in any position to play on. Doncaster & Wycombe have questioned the costs of playing on and Bristol Rovers are clearly nuts as only wanting to play on, so they can assess their squad.....seems a pretty expensive way of doing that!
Therefore, I think it'll be a close vote, of 12 - 11 or 13 - 10 in favour of curtailing the season.
 

JimmyHillsbeard

Well-Known Member
Interesting analysis.
Given that Lincoln have announced their released players list, I doubt they are in any position to play on. Doncaster & Wycombe have questioned the costs of playing on and Bristol Rovers are clearly nuts as only wanting to play on, so they can assess their squad.....seems a pretty expensive way of doing that!
Therefore, I think it'll be a close vote, of 12 - 11 or 13 - 10 in favour of curtailing the season.

I don’t think we can rely on clubs to behave consistently or sincerely here. Several clubs will want to be seen as voting to continue the season but hope that the proposal loses or that it’s not possible to implement.
 

CCFC88

Well-Known Member
I think when it comes down to it the majority will realise that 52 days is nowhere near enough time to perform the requisite testing, train for 3 weeks minimum and play, in Wycombe's case, potentially 13 games.
 

Liquid Gold

Well-Known Member
My understanding is that Tranmere's proposal has made it onto the EFL voting paper next week. This is why I think it has a good chance of winning the vote.
Currently the following 8 teams have declared their desire to finish the season.
Oxford
Portsmouth
Peterborough
Fleetwood
Sunderland
Ipswich
Gillingham
Tranmere
The following 4 teams have given mixed messages and some or all could vote to play on.
Wycombe
Doncaster
Lincoln
Bristol Rovers
And there are one or two teams who have not, as far as I know, declared their preference and will probably vote with the majority.
That's incredibly tight and could go either way, and one vote could swing it.
The teams on that list that would likely vote for Tranmere's proposal are Tranmere and Doncaster (who are currently 5 points off a playoff place). In addition Peterborough have declared their support for it, but may actually prefer to play on. Either way, there is a good chance Peterborough or Sunderland, or both would be happy with a guaranteed playoff slot, and would vote for it, considering 2 promotion slots would be up for grabs.
Rotherham wouldn't be happy because they would be moved into the playoffs, but they are not voting to play on anyway.
By my thinking, Tranmere's proposal, as ridiculous as it sounds, makes a vote to play on very unlikely.
Why would the teams who say they want to finish the season vote for a proposal that ends it? I get why Posh and Sunderland might but if the 4 teams in the playoffs now are voting for a scenario that ends the season it'll be the one where only 3 other teams are in the playoffs with them
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
There's a clarification on the Tranmere site which makes it even more batshit crazy than I originally thought. The whole point of the proposed regulation from the EFL is that a rule is but in place for consistency across the divisions. Tranmere are now saying their proposal allows each division to do something different. They've given an example that the Championship could use straight PPG, L1 their weird margin of error thing, and L2 use current positions with no relegation!

So rather than standardising things and then just requiring each division to vote on playing on or stopping the season if Tranmere's proposal passed we'd be back to square one with each division arguing which method to use.
 

jordan210

Well-Known Member



Im think she is getting confused. I know I am !

I assume she means L2 will continue with the options they are all ready doing. nothing to do with tranmeres proposal
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
My understanding is that Tranmere's proposal has made it onto the EFL voting paper next week. This is why I think it has a good chance of winning the vote.
Currently the following 8 teams have declared their desire to finish the season.
Oxford
Portsmouth
Peterborough
Fleetwood
Sunderland
Ipswich
Gillingham
Tranmere
The following 4 teams have given mixed messages and some or all could vote to play on.
Wycombe
Doncaster
Lincoln
Bristol Rovers
And there are one or two teams who have not, as far as I know, declared their preference and will probably vote with the majority.
That's incredibly tight and could go either way, and one vote could swing it.
The teams on that list that would likely vote for Tranmere's proposal are Tranmere and Doncaster (who are currently 5 points off a playoff place). In addition Peterborough have declared their support for it, but may actually prefer to play on. Either way, there is a good chance Peterborough or Sunderland, or both would be happy with a guaranteed playoff slot, and would vote for it, considering 2 promotion slots would be up for grabs.
Rotherham wouldn't be happy because they would be moved into the playoffs, but they are not voting to play on anyway.
By my thinking, Tranmere's proposal, as ridiculous as it sounds, makes a vote to play on very unlikely.
You've only looked at L1 teams, it would need to get past at least 51% of all EFL clubs first. If it does then L1 votes and if they decide to play on Tranmere's proposal doesn't come into it. Can't see why Oxford, Portsmouth, Peterborough or Fleetwood would vote for the Tranmere method. That would see them go from being in the normal play off format to an 8 team tournament, why vote to make it harder for yourselves while losing more money? Sunderland, Wycombe and Doncaster might as they're suddenly in the play offs. The only other team who is works in the advantage of is Tranmere themselves.
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Im think she is getting confused. I know I am !
The EFL proposed regulation change was about 10 lines, Tranmere's is 7 pages, no wonder people can't understand it!

Also the point of the EFL change was to permanently have a solution. Tranmere only want this to cover the current season.
 

RegTheDonk

Well-Known Member
There's a clarification on the Tranmere site which makes it even more batshit crazy than I originally thought. The whole point of the proposed regulation from the EFL is that a rule is but in place for consistency across the divisions. Tranmere are now saying their proposal allows each division to do something different. They've given an example that the Championship could use straight PPG, L1 their weird margin of error thing, and L2 use current positions with no relegation!

So rather than standardising things and then just requiring each division to vote on playing on or stopping the season if Tranmere's proposal passed we'd be back to square one with each division arguing which method to use.
Yes very strange. I would assume their formula is to protect integrity, to make everything as fair as possible. So why should not all leagues be using this. After all, haven't they supposedly got a lot of chairmen backing this (most probably the ones from position 7 downwards who suddenly could be in a play off place).
 

SkyBlueDom26

Well-Known Member
15 clubs want to end the season according to the Rotherham chairman
 

Attachments

  • 76CDCF0D-7641-4796-93D4-927A5B30C91E.png
    76CDCF0D-7641-4796-93D4-927A5B30C91E.png
    379.7 KB · Views: 88

jordan210

Well-Known Member
The EFL proposed regulation change was about 10 lines, Tranmere's is 7 pages, no wonder people can't understand it!

Also the point of the EFL change was to permanently have a solution. Tranmere only want this to cover the current season.

I swear she makes thing up as she is going along.
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Yes very strange. I would assume their formula is to protect integrity, to make everything as fair as possible. So why should not all leagues be using this. After all, haven't they supposedly got a lot of chairmen backing this (most probably the ones from position 7 downwards who suddenly could be in a play off place).
Seems the clubs have the choice of the EFL proposal, which is consistent across all divisions, maintains the play off format, maintains the correct number of teams in each division. Or the Tranmere proposal which could end up with something different applied to every division, completely tears up the play off format (without defining the replacement) and messes up the number of teams in the divisions which will then need correcting in following seasons.

They've basically proposed a rule which is applied different to L1 to benefit only them. And they have the cheek to claim it is about sporting integrity.
 

Moff

Well-Known Member
Nicola Palios "I am sick of arguing with people who haven’t read the proposal."- well stay off Twitter :)

She's amended it, so that not only do we look at results over a three year period, but during that time Tranmere get 20 points for a win, so under the new proposal they are up as Champions.
Its not biased in their favour though.
 

Warwickhunt

Well-Known Member
Ipswich board now saying they proposed a 10 team playoffs and possibly including the top 2!! They can fuck right off with that one
might as well finish the season off rather than this proposal
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top