How much will Coronavirus (COVID-19) impact Aston Villa's season?

[BoVillan esq]

I admit that I’ve only quickly looked at this thread from time to time, but I’m puzzled by the frequency of the suggestion that it is appropriate to have no relegation from the PL if the season is abandoned whilst at the same time accepting that WBA and Leeds come up. If it is unfair to relegate teams on the basis of the season being incomplete it is equally unfair to promote others.

For what it’s worth my view is that there are only two equitable ways for this to be dealt with (and any others will rightly end up in the courts) - either complete the fixtures (which looks increasingly unlikely) or abandon the season with no relegations or promotions.

Damage limitation, teams getting promoted can only be good news for them, teams getting relegated without finishing a season can only mean anger and mitigation and legal actions, likewise if you deny teams like Leeds and WBA who look odds on at this point to get promoted, then take that away from them, very unhappy bunnies. 

To stop the season dead would deny Liverpool the Premiership when they are realistically already champions, on the other hand you can't grant promotion to sides and then say Liverpool can't be champions, so the good news effect has to be spread evenly, point is why wouldn't Liverpool want this season finished, hold out at all costs, they've already won it.   

[Brassneck]

I admit that I’ve only quickly looked at this thread from time to time, but I’m puzzled by the frequency of the suggestion that it is appropriate to have no relegation from the PL if the season is abandoned whilst at the same time accepting that WBA and Leeds come up. If it is unfair to relegate teams on the basis of the season being incomplete it is equally unfair to promote others.

For what it’s worth my view is that there are only two equitable ways for this to be dealt with (and any others will rightly end up in the courts) - either complete the fixtures (which looks increasingly unlikely) or abandon the season with no relegations or promotions.

Firstly, any decision that is made is almost certainly going to be made by the members (the 20 league clubs).  It will be made by way of resolution and once that resolution is passed, there will not be the option of going to the courts at a later stage if things go pear shaped (for that particular member).

There is no perfect way to get out of this so we have to look at the nearest option.

As the PL & EFL are 2 entirely separate entities, you would think that we are not obliged to accept any EFL side into the division.  It is an option of course to not allow promotion this season.

I am trying to look at the fairest conclusion - The way that keeps most clubs happy, minimising complaints.  This is why I suggest 2 teams are promoted.

You have to accept the 3rd equitable way to finish the season and that is behind closed doors.  Currently, this is far, far more achievable than playing out the season in normal circumstances.  The clubs need the money that will come from finishing the season and probably from fist placed to fourteenth place would want to finish behind closed doors if there is a chance to do so.  If they were to accept no relegations (no shin off their teeth) then the other 6 teams would also want to finish off the season.  You would have a scenario where all 20 members agree on a solution.  Something has to give.  Whatever suggestion you come up will mean it's not fair to certain teams.  How would they decide European slots if the season was voided?  I can't see any other option whereby all 20 PL clubs agree on it.

[Brassneck]

https://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/premier-league/premier-league-step-up-efforts-to-finish-league-behind-closed-doors-as-clubs-warned-stadiums-could-stay-closed-for-up-to-a-year-39121801.html

[Louzie0]

I’d suggest that even playing matches behind closed doors depends on a vaccine being available and effective for all the clubs and officials involved in the professional game.

We seem to be some way off that, at the moment.

Also, I can’t be the only person who hears a chorus of Behind Closed Doors by Charlie Rich every time the phrase comes into discussion.

[old man villa fan]

I admit that I’ve only quickly looked at this thread from time to time, but I’m puzzled by the frequency of the suggestion that it is appropriate to have no relegation from the PL if the season is abandoned whilst at the same time accepting that WBA and Leeds come up. If it is unfair to relegate teams on the basis of the season being incomplete it is equally unfair to promote others.

For what it’s worth my view is that there are only two equitable ways for this to be dealt with (and any others will rightly end up in the courts) - either complete the fixtures (which looks increasingly unlikely) or abandon the season with no relegations or promotions.

Firstly, any decision that is made is almost certainly going to be made by the members (the 20 league clubs).  It will be made by way of resolution and once that resolution is passed, there will not be the option of going to the courts at a later stage if things go pear shaped (for that particular member).

There is no perfect way to get out of this so we have to look at the nearest option.

As the PL & EFL are 2 entirely separate entities, you would think that we are not obliged to accept any EFL side into the division.  It is an option of course to not allow promotion this season.

I am trying to look at the fairest conclusion - The way that keeps most clubs happy, minimising complaints.  This is why I suggest 2 teams are promoted.

You have to accept the 3rd equitable way to finish the season and that is behind closed doors.  Currently, this is far, far more achievable than playing out the season in normal circumstances.  The clubs need the money that will come from finishing the season and probably from fist placed to fourteenth place would want to finish behind closed doors if there is a chance to do so.  If they were to accept no relegations (no shin off their teeth) then the other 6 teams would also want to finish off the season.  You would have a scenario where all 20 members agree on a solution.  Something has to give.  Whatever suggestion you come up will mean it's not fair to certain teams.  How would they decide European slots if the season was voided?  I can't see any other option whereby all 20 PL clubs agree on it.

You mentioned earlier that somebody was blinkered in their view.  Well, I am sorry, I think you are totally blinkered in pushing your ideas.

Football is all about money these days and it is not just the clubs and the companies that sell TV viewing of matches to the public.  One example is sponsorship.  If a sponsor may loose out because of a non-natural playing out of the season, they could be the first into the courtroom, regardless with how the clubs vote.  In fact it could be a backdoor way for a club to fight the decision without being seen to.  If anybody comes out with a loss from a natural conclusion to the season, they could sue the PL, EFL or whoever and if this happened, the first act would be an injunction to stop the leagues starting again.  You cannot financially remedy a party after the event if they were successful in court in this type of situation.

Another major argument which is conveniently being ignored by those that want to end the season in any way possible is the players who are out of contract at the end of June and have already agreed to move to other clubs.  Or the situation where clubs need to get rid of players at the ends of their contracts for financial reasons.  The clubs with nothing to play for would get rid of them and possibly reduce the strength of their squads, whereas clubs with something to play for would have to either extend contracts and pay more money (putting themselves at financial risk) or get rid of them and accept having less chance with a weaker squad.

What about insurance.  Who is insured for what if the season was cancelled.

There is a financial minefield out there for continuing the season unnaturally.  How much of a minefield is out there for cancelling the season due to a totally unforeseen event, nobody is saying in detail.  Talking points on not coming to a final decision on something sells but at a cost of integrity.

[old man villa fan]

I’d suggest that even playing matches behind closed doors depends on a vaccine being available and effective for all the clubs and officials involved in the professional game.

We seem to be some way off that, at the moment.

Also, I can’t be the only person who hears a chorus of Behind Closed Doors by Charlie Rich every time the phrase comes into discussion.

I think I raised this earlier in the thread but what about players' insurance.  What if a player was to pick up the virus even though a game was played behind closed doors and was put out of the game for some time or, heaven forbid, died through it.  A player's insurance company would certainly be looking at that scenario and either would refuse to insure or force a new greater risk policy on the player.

[aev]

If we restart presumably we could at some stage get rid of Drainwater and re register Wesley or Heaton?

[Jon Crofts]

If this 22 team league transpired and we had 5 relegated next season, we'd have the trauma of thinking every week, are there 5 teams worse than us?

[Brassneck]

I am not blinkered - I am stating the obvious.  If there is an opportunity to play behind closed doors, you can bet your bottom dollar that it will be taken.  It is because football is all about money that this is the case.

Yes, sponsors MAY be able to get into the courtroom but ONLY if they cannot agree the refund (that they are lawfully entitled to) with an individual club.  If you want to have a read of the Frustration Act 1943, you will see that a party who loses out because of circumstances that are beyond either parties control is protected by statute.  Court action would be a very last resort and only applicable if an amicable solution cannot be reached.  You don't even know whether sponsors have paid in stage payments or all up front.

Players cannot move to other clubs because as we've discovered ourselves, the squad lists submitted in January cannot be altered/amended.

I think it is you who is blinkered pal.  You don't seem to have thought this through very well or researched it.

Try to think logically.

[andyh]

If the can cancel (reschedule) the most expensive sporting event in the world, together with virtually every other iconic sporting event,  why the fuck does Premier League football believe it is such a special case?

Just void the season.

[Richard E]

If this 22 team league transpired and we had 5 relegated next season, we'd have the trauma of thinking every week, are there 5 teams worser than us?

Not quite that bad. One of the 22 teams would be Albion, so we’d only have to worry whether there were 4 teams worse than us.

[Brassneck]

I’d suggest that even playing matches behind closed doors depends on a vaccine being available and effective for all the clubs and officials involved in the professional game.

We seem to be some way off that, at the moment.

Also, I can’t be the only person who hears a chorus of Behind Closed Doors by Charlie Rich every time the phrase comes into discussion.

I think I raised this earlier in the thread but what about players' insurance.  What if a player was to pick up the virus even though a game was played behind closed doors and was put out of the game for some time or, heaven forbid, died through it.  A player's insurance company would certainly be looking at that scenario and either would refuse to insure or force a new greater risk policy on the player.

Players would be tested prior to games.

In any case, how could you possibly prove that the virus was contracted whilst a player was participating in a match?

[Louzie0]

I’d suggest that even playing matches behind closed doors depends on a vaccine being available and effective for all the clubs and officials involved in the professional game.

We seem to be some way off that, at the moment.

Also, I can’t be the only person who hears a chorus of Behind Closed Doors by Charlie Rich every time the phrase comes into discussion.

I think I raised this earlier in the thread but what about players' insurance.  What if a player was to pick up the virus even though a game was played behind closed doors and was put out of the game for some time or, heaven forbid, died through it.  A player's insurance company would certainly be looking at that scenario and either would refuse to insure or force a new greater risk policy on the player.

Sorry I missed it, omvf.
The scenario you describe of Covid 19 being passed on would be inevitable if clubs go ahead and hold matches without vaccinating everyone. It’s not as if players can wear PPE.

I appreciate Brassneck’s technical point about not being able to prove they caught it at the match and testing everybody beforehand. I think it would be cold comfort for anybody who tested positive days after a match, though. I don’t think there’s a test that can definitely rule it out, yet; perhaps there will be one later this year? 

The insurance companies, PL, FIFA players and clubs must be having interesting discussions about this at the moment, given lockdown dates being extended. And Sky.

[Bent Neilsens Screamer]

I’m sure it’s been said before but playing behind closed doors doesn’t necessarily mean no crowd..see the PSG game in Paris I forget against who.
Could you trust the great British public to stay away and even if they did you would still have to have a police presence there to ensure that was the case.

[Pete3206]

It wouldn't just players at risk though would it? There would be the match officials, the rest of the team squad/staff, ground/maintenance staff and also, all the media/TV personnel.

Presumably, outside the ground, there would need to be a sizable Police presence to stop crowds congregating as well.