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

[paul_e]

How would you determine the European places then?

I have always argued that relegation should be scrapped either if the season is voided OR it is played out behind closed doors.

My argument for playing behind closed doors is:

1. To determine the league chapions
2. To determine European places
3. To minimise the financial hit that clubs take.

The rules would have to be amended slightly in many ways (for example, the league table portrays both home and away games as per Rule C.3.2)

Surely you appreciate that it is much fairer to give the European chasing teams the opportunity to qualify?  Relegation could be scrapped in either scenario as it isn't a must.

Playing out the season with no relegations is the fairest and most financially beneficial option.

European places, I honestly don't know, that's part of the problem, I don't see any way of determining them that is in line with the rules, etc as they were last August.

Finishing the season but having no relegation, how is that fair on Leeds, West Brom and the as yet undetermined play off winner? So we agree to promote the first 2 (and ignore the existence of the latter as some have suggested) then we have 4 more games to fit into a season that will, if games for this season are still being played in July, be starting later than normal and has no chance to be extended due to the rescheduled Euros. How will that work?

Minimising the financial hit, is it better to take the hit for this season and have a full season next year or to risk cancelling competitions and/or scheduling problems next year? For me from both a financial and a sporting perspective the best situation is to get back to normal as quickly as possible (in line with government guidelines). If the options are games for this season running into July and pushing next season back or voiding this season and starting up in August as normal (but maybe with crowd restrictions to begin with) then the latter is the sensible choice for the vast majority of clubs. You do then need to work out how to handle European places but that's the only unanswered question that needs to be resolved.

[Brassneck]

I have tried to argue a scenario that keeps most teams happy.

I suggested a 22 team league next season (that also requires a rule change).  Regrettably, I see no way of getting a 3rd placed team promoted.  If the season were to be voided, there could be no play offs in any case.

In my scenario, I wouldn't mind betting that all the European challenging sides would happily accept a behind closed doors finish - It has to be the fairest solution.

Next season takes priority all day long so if they can't get this season done by September, the decision is taken out of their hands.  How they'd decide European spots would then become an issue although it might be that this seasons competitions carry over to next season.

As there are extraordinary circumstances this season, there would have to be emergency/consequential rules set up to accommodate the situation.  Not ideal but not the end of the world and still paves the way for the fairest outcome.

[Drummond]

The particular argument over being easy to suspend registrations is not the same as claiming the overall decision is "a piece of piss" so as I thought, you just included it to add value.

I would have thought it obvious to everyone that football will not be permitted until it gets the go ahead from the Government?

The world and his wife know what you do for a living - You've told us on more than one previous occasion.  Why do you twist every argument to compare with your own job?

It isn't for me to explain or determine when it is safe to play - I'm only arguing the pros for doing so when it is deemed safe

Instead of me continuing to explain myself to every Tom, Dick & Harry - How about you coming up with your own skewed ideas on a solution and I'll rip those to shreds for you.  Aren't you one of the "I don't care about football at the moment" brigade anyway?

No, you dismissing it as easily as you do is because it doesn't suit your argument.

What you may think is obvious isn't as clear to everyone else, and with your arguments about how easy this would be I wondered if you had some masterplan up your sleeve to bypass the common-sense approach of no bloody football.

I have expressed what I do once or twice (probably more) yes, I hadn't realised people (including you obviously) were that interested and had taken any note (perhaps I'd rammed it down your throat too much) and in this current scenario, it's a pretty good yardstick to measure by wouldn't you think?

Your argument seems to be based on it being fairly easy to finish this season. In my view, there's not a cat in hell's chance. Because of the restrictions in place.

Your last point does you no favours. And as you're having to explain to everyone it seems, perhaps that indicates how ridiculous your idea is.

The solution as far as I'm concerned is to void it all and start again with another season. When the crowds can return. in itself that may mean a further delay.

We may lose a whole year of football, and play out the rest of this season in a year's time, with different players in different teams. But that' idea's just as ridiculous as yours.

[Drummond]

And whilst many clubs and leagues and most of all UEFA might not like it in principle, I'd cancel all European football next season anyway.

[Brassneck]

Just for clarity Drummond - It is a discussion on how the problem affects football.  Naturally, this includes discussing various ways of concluding this season.

I have no ideas - I only discuss options that have been mentioned previously.  If you want to talk about ridiculous, how about your ridiculous inability to read what I stated many times ie no football to be played until it is safe to do so?  How about the poster who claimed we couldn't finish the season by not having different scenarios at the top and bottom of the division and then wanting to do exactly the same in a voided season?  Or the poster who didn't understand frustration of contracts and then ended up claiming the exact opposite of what he started out claiming? Or claims that we couldn't finish the season because players contracts run out?

It's nothing to do with not suiting my argument - I dismissed them because they were nonsense.  It is not my argument that is ridiculous, it is the responses.

Even  now, you still don't seem to be able to grasp that I am not advocating playing whilst it is dangerous to do so.  I am simply promoting the merits of completing the season in a safe manner - Personally, I couldn't care less about any of it other than the impact it has on Villa.

The fact that you are making decisions for next season 4 months in advance tells me that it is you who is doing yourself no favours.

[paul_e]

I have tried to argue a scenario that keeps most teams happy.

I suggested a 22 team league next season (that also requires a rule change).  Regrettably, I see no way of getting a 3rd placed team promoted.  If the season were to be voided, there could be no play offs in any case.

In my scenario, I wouldn't mind betting that all the European challenging sides would happily accept a behind closed doors finish - It has to be the fairest solution.

Next season takes priority all day long so if they can't get this season done by September, the decision is taken out of their hands.  How they'd decide European spots would then become an issue although it might be that this seasons competitions carry over to next season.

As there are extraordinary circumstances this season, there would have to be emergency/consequential rules set up to accommodate the situation.  Not ideal but not the end of the world and still paves the way for the fairest outcome.

but you haven't responded to the most important part, if the choice is finishing this season but causing problems for next season which do you think should be prioritised and which do you think makes the most sense from both a sporting and financial sense?

[Brassneck]

I have tried to argue a scenario that keeps most teams happy.

I suggested a 22 team league next season (that also requires a rule change).  Regrettably, I see no way of getting a 3rd placed team promoted.  If the season were to be voided, there could be no play offs in any case.

In my scenario, I wouldn't mind betting that all the European challenging sides would happily accept a behind closed doors finish - It has to be the fairest solution.

Next season takes priority all day long so if they can't get this season done by September, the decision is taken out of their hands.  How they'd decide European spots would then become an issue although it might be that this seasons competitions carry over to next season.

As there are extraordinary circumstances this season, there would have to be emergency/consequential rules set up to accommodate the situation.  Not ideal but not the end of the world and still paves the way for the fairest outcome.

but you haven't responded to the most important part, if the choice is finishing this season but causing problems for next season which do you think should be prioritised and which do you think makes the most sense from both a sporting and financial sense?

I did respond (4th line down).  I have stated repeatedly throughout this thread that this season should not be finished to the detriment of next season.

I'm not convinced many clubs could survive what would effectively be an entire season without income so regardless of the sporting aspect, the financial implications need to take precedent.  This season is totally screwed in any case.  It would be much easier to start from scratch again in September.  Why chase 25% of a season to the detriment of 100%?

Of course, it can't be guaranteed that we'll be able to play games in September.  I notice that Spain have relaxed their lockdown and we're about 2 weeks behind them.  It will be interesting to see when shops and bars are re-opened because that will probably be the point at which football can be played again.  Personally, I think it might be a year before crowds return to games.

[paul_e]

I have tried to argue a scenario that keeps most teams happy.

I suggested a 22 team league next season (that also requires a rule change).  Regrettably, I see no way of getting a 3rd placed team promoted.  If the season were to be voided, there could be no play offs in any case.

In my scenario, I wouldn't mind betting that all the European challenging sides would happily accept a behind closed doors finish - It has to be the fairest solution.

Next season takes priority all day long so if they can't get this season done by September, the decision is taken out of their hands.  How they'd decide European spots would then become an issue although it might be that this seasons competitions carry over to next season.

As there are extraordinary circumstances this season, there would have to be emergency/consequential rules set up to accommodate the situation.  Not ideal but not the end of the world and still paves the way for the fairest outcome.

but you haven't responded to the most important part, if the choice is finishing this season but causing problems for next season which do you think should be prioritised and which do you think makes the most sense from both a sporting and financial sense?

I did respond (4th line down).  I have stated repeatedly throughout this thread that this season should not be finished to the detriment of next season.

I'm not convinced many clubs could survive what would effectively be an entire season without income so regardless of the sporting aspect, the financial implications need to take precedent.  This season is totally screwed in any case.  It would be much easier to start from scratch again in September.  Why chase 25% of a season to the detriment of 100%?

Of course, it can't be guaranteed that we'll be able to play games in September.  I notice that Spain have relaxed their lockdown and we're about 2 weeks behind them.  It will be interesting to see when shops and bars are re-opened because that will probably be the point at which football can be played again.  Personally, I think it might be a year before crowds return to games.

September is, in my opinion, far too late to say they're not impacting next season, which is why I asked it again because I think you've hedged. For me starting next season as close as possible to the intended start date is the first priority, there's simply not enough capacity through the season to absorb a delay of more than a few weeks without risking player welfare. If that means next season has to start behind closed doors, or with limited crowds in some way then that becomes a new conversation.

Every day after the end of June is eating into next season, remember the preliminary rounds of the champions league and europa league take place in that exact window and whilst they don't directly involve English teams delays there will have a knock-on effect all season and English teams, as Wolves have shown and Sheffield United would likely see next year, aren't always that far behind them.

[Brassneck]

When the cut off point is to finish the season is another debate.

I think it’s feasible to start as late as September.

End of June isn’t necessarily too late as a pre season would have taken place prior to the players returning from this break.

If need be, the league cup could be sacrificed as it’s less lucrative than 25% of this season.

If they think they have up to the end of July to finish this season, then it’s almost certainly the case that they’re satisfied next season is intact.

[Pat Mustard]

When the cut off point is to finish the season is another debate.

I think it’s feasible to start as late as September.

End of June isn’t necessarily too late as a pre season would have taken place prior to the players returning from this break.

If need be, the league cup could be sacrificed as it’s less lucrative than 25% of this season.

If they think they have up to the end of July to finish this season, then it’s almost certainly the case that they’re satisfied next season is intact.

If this season can be completed by July then I think September is a realistic target for the start of the new season - some of the windows for international fixtures are already being taken out, which potentially frees up 4 or 6 match days.  I also think we might just have seen the last ever League Cup final - I don’t see anyway of fitting it in next year, and with the winter World Cup in 2022 it could well go again the following year, by which point I don’t think there will be any appetite in the Premier League to bring it back.

[OCD]

And whilst many clubs and leagues and most of all UEFA might not like it in principle, I'd cancel all European football next season anyway.

Well they reckon Italy and Spain got it as bad as they did because of a Champions League game between Atalanta and Valencia so there is that argument. I imagine money will talk loudest though.

[Legion]

Cheltenham for the UK.

[ChicagoLion]

And whilst many clubs and leagues and most of all UEFA might not like it in principle, I'd cancel all European football next season anyway.

Well they reckon Italy and Spain got it as bad as they did because of a Champions League game between Atalanta and Valencia so there is that argument. I imagine money will talk loudest though.

That and the 3 flights a week from Wuhan to Northern Italy.

[cdbearsfan]

If it were based on flights from Wuhan, there are loads of countries that would be far worse affected than Italy but aren't. Pretty much all of South-East Asia, for starters.

[ChicagoLion]

If it were based on flights from Wuhan, there are loads of countries that would be far worse affected than Italy but aren't. Pretty much all of South-East Asia, for starters.

Google Italy Wuhan and it explains the connection and why Northern Italy has been so adversely effected.