The 39th Game

[supertom]

It really only works for a handful of clubs in this league. The Manc bastards, a couple of the London wankers, and Liverpool. No other club will garner any interest from overseas fans to warrant it. There's little point doing it in strong European leagues either.

I think on a club to club basis the better idea is to arrange friendly games in territories like Asia.

A 39th game for the Premier League just won't work.

It's the worst plan since Abe Lincoln said to his wife, "I'm sick of hanging around the house, lets catch a show."

[rjp]

I don't think we should be playing abroad.  Football would be a lot stronger if we helped to develop the local associations in those places instead.  The custodians of our game have lost sight of their purpose, to be custodians.  Now they're more like agents for the big clubs.

The devaluing of the FA Cup at every opportunity really annoys me and doing it so the top 4 or 5 clubs can pull away even further from the rest annoys me doubly so.  Replays can make good money for small clubs that are struggling to survive, I think losing them would be yet another step in the wrong direction.

[cdbearsfan]

I was going to suggest Islamic State host that one.

[fredm]

And the mid winter break is also back on the agenda.  So it will help England by having "refreshed" players for the end of season World/European events.  Ha Ha.  Wonder which will be the first club to arrange a friendly in Doha in  the break? Just giving their players some sunshine mind - my a**e.

[Dave Cooper please]

Agree to an extent but I think there is too much emphasis placed on getting a draw. How many times in recent years has a team's fans done a pitch invasion after a draw? Just seems a bit sad.

It's better for paying spectators and for a televised audience to have it settled on the day. It's also better that big games are settled on a weekend when people can attend without having to take a day off work/school.

Plus the big clubs nearly always seem to win the replays. I think having extra-time and penalties would make the competition more exciting and produce more upsets.

I've been part of one of those sad pitch invasions, when Tamuff drew at Stoke, it was great. Yeah we lost the replay on penalties, but it was in front of a packed out Lamb with live radio commentary and TV crews from all over, Stoke could have sold their 800 tickets four or five times over.
I think a game going into extra-time favours the big clubs, they tend to be fitter and, well, more professional. And to battle to a 90 minute draw and then miss out on a huge pay day and go out in extra-time or on penalties would be gutting.

Burton Albion practically bankrolled their climb into League football by getting a draw against Man Utd.

[cdbearsfan]

I don't think we should be playing abroad.  Football would be a lot stronger if we helped to develop the local associations in those places instead.  The custodians of our game have lost sight of their purpose, to be custodians.  Now they're more like agents for the big clubs.

The devaluing of the FA Cup at every opportunity really annoys me and doing it so the top 4 or 5 clubs can pull away even further from the rest annoys me doubly so.  Replays can make good money for small clubs that are struggling to survive, I think losing them would be yet another step in the wrong direction.

I think replays play into the hands of the big four or five. More games=more advantage to the clubs with massive squads. Extra time and penalties is more of a lottery than a fresh ninety minutes meaning more chance of the bigger clubs being eliminated if replays are abolished.

As for small clubs earning money from replays, that's true. But it's always struck me as wrong that if, say, Tamworth get a penalty against Man U, a minute from time with the score at The Lamb 0-0, they'd be better off to miss than score. The site of fans invading the pitch just because they've drawn and earned the right to be thrashed in a replay always makes me uneasy.

At a lower level, it is obvious that replays favour the bigger (full-time) clubs who don't have to worry about getting their staff time off work to attend the replay. Even at a higher level, the smaller club can often compete for one game but expecting them to repeat the feat twice is asking too much, usually.

I understand reluctance to lose a traditional part of the game, but I feel replays aren't worth keeping. With the police ensuring that replays are never played in the same week and UEFA's decision to spread the Champions League last sixteen across four weeks meaning they can often be played many weeks after the first game, they've lost the magic they may have had.

Scrap replays.

[supertom]

We really shouldn't be doing anymore to help out the big clubs, which in the end, is all this would be doing. Same with scrapping replays etc.

[cdbearsfan]

Explain how scrapping replays would help the big clubs?

[fbriai]

They can stick their 39th game where the sun don't shine.

[Dave Cooper please]

nalties is more of a lottery than a fresh ninety minutes meaning more chance of the bigger clubs being eliminated if replays are abolished.

As for small clubs earning money from replays, that's true. But it's always struck me as wrong that if, say, Tamworth get a penalty against Man U, a minute from time with the score at The Lamb 0-0, they'd be better off to miss than score. The site of fans invading the pitch just because they've drawn and earned the right to be thrashed in a replay always makes me uneasy.

But you are picking an extreme hypothetical scenario, and anyway, the resultant publicity for Tamworth knocking out Man Utd would probably be worth as much as a replay at Mould Trafford. Special shirt sponsorships, practically guaranteed live match in the next round, huge upsurge in crowds even if only temporarily etc. etc.

Anyway, what;s the difference between a pitch invasion in your scenario and a pitch invasion when your 0-0 draw against Walsall has just about kept your team in League One because Colchester lost. Every fan finds things to celebrate about even when they support teams that generally do fuck all for their whole existence.

[UK Redsox]

We really shouldn't be doing anymore to help out the big clubs, which in the end, is all this would be doing. Same with scrapping replays etc.

Are there stats to support the premise that 'big clubs' go through more often when there's no replay ?

I'd have thought that the opposite was true but would like to see the figures.

[fbriai]

Explain how scrapping replays would help the big clubs?

I think the point is that they don't want annoying FA Cup replays to interfere with their Champions League preparations and the like, CD. They already complain about the number of games they have to play.

Your point about them having multiple squads anyway is valid, mind.

[supertom]

Explain how scrapping replays would help the big clubs?

Big clubs barely want to even play in the league cup anymore let alone having to have a second leg, or in the case of the FA cup having to arrange a replay somewhere. In fact if the option was seen as more acceptable I'm sure a couple of the top four clubs would actually consider pulling out of the FA Cup.
But for a Championship club, right down to non-league, a big tie can be the difference between a bit of financial breathing space, or another year of desperately balancing the books.

Replays don't bother me much particularly as we very rarely have anything to play for, and in the rounds where replays would come into effect, we'd not be in immediate danger of exhausting ourselves during a critical relegation scrap.

I think mid-season breaks would only be to the benefit of big clubs too, even though they have the squads to cope with a season. Inevitably the likes of Utd would start making money in overseas friendlies anyway. The rest of us will wait around twiddling our thumbs.

That said if I have to watch us place Bradford twice in a week again. I think I'd go bloody nuts.

[cdbearsfan]

Celebrating staying in a league is entirely different.

You mention the resultant publicity if Tamworth beat Man U. While very unlikely, that is far more likely to happen after one game and a penalty shoot-out than it is after two games.

My earliest (non-Villa) memories of the FA Cup are of brilliant FA Cup games followed by crap replays which the favourites won easily. Not always, but more often than if the games had gone to extra time and penalties I reckon.

Big clubs are more likely to "take their eye of the ball" and rest players and come unstuck in a one-off tie than over two games.

One off ties would also reinvigorate the competition as a televisual format, which in turn would lead to more people taking the competition seriously and hopefully getting better crowds.

I'm really struggling to think of the last brilliant FA Cup replay I watched.

[Clampy]

By scrapping replays you'd be denying smaller clubs the chance to make money which in some cases would keep them going and it's players the chance to play on a bigger stage and at a bigger ground. For some it's a once in a lifetime opportunity and something they never forget long after they've retired. Besides, isn't that what the early stages of the F.A Cup is all about or do we want to kill that off as well?