Coronavirus & The Premier League

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said:

Not taken it seriously? I've worked through the whole fucking thing. Trust me, I've taken it very seriously mate.

Ok mate my mistake. It has just seemed like you were displaying the seriousness of it at times but could be my mistake 

[Guest]

@RandoEFC what is your opinion on schools going back? 

Personally I'm not to sure what the scientists are saying but one thing I do think is of they go back it has to be safe with very little social distancing because I don't think kids will distance.  I do wonder weather it would be easier to just start again next year. I know it means a year is wasted but is it possible it may be the easiest option? 

[LFCMadLad]

11 hours ago, Storts said:

The desperation of Liverpool fans in this topic is evident for all to see. Considering what Liverpool is like as a city and the value of them, to be taking a very hard-line Tory view of withholding their pay etc is concerning. I don't think it's justifiable in the slightest. There is not a single chance you can guarantee the safety of these players from this virus at the current time. They should not be punished for returning to train or play under current circumstances, regardless of what other team mates may chose to do. 

desperation? I don't even want us to be given the league if that is what you're referring to?... played behind closed doors or not. The moment has gone mate. 

 

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

57 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said:

desperation? I don't even want us to be given the league if that is what you're referring to?... played behind closed doors or not. The moment has gone mate. 

 

 

Yeah, bit of a strange thing to say tbh. Considering I don’t even think the league should go on and if they’ve got to decide places, do PPG because other alternatives aren’t really safe with the state of the virus in the UK.

The fans of Manchester and relegation battling clubs that are safe calling for the season to be null and void after most of the seasons been played are more desperate - you can plainly see what their reasons are.

[LFCMike]

Yeah I don't get the view that Liverpool fans are desperate for the league to start again. Whatever happens we'll win it and it won't be how we wanted or imagined it.

I just want the league to be concluded in as fair way as possible for the positions that matter (top 4, relegation) and to work a way to play football in the medium term because fans in stadiums is not happening anytime soon 

[DeadLinesman]

I know a fair few locals (Liverpool fans) that don’t actually want it to be completed because you’re going to get a few hundred numpties turning up in the streets around Anfield. Liverpool has been fairly hard hit by the virus and you’re going to get local bellends and daft day trippers travelling up to celebrate a none event in essence. It will happen, absolutely and the police and authorities can’t do anything about it.

[LFCMadLad]

48 minutes ago, DeadLinesman said:

I know a fair few locals (Liverpool fans) that don’t actually want it to be completed because you’re going to get a few hundred numpties turning up in the streets around Anfield. Liverpool has been fairly hard hit by the virus and you’re going to get local bellends and daft day trippers travelling up to celebrate a none event in essence. It will happen, absolutely and the police and authorities can’t do anything about it.

Exactly this! You will have total idiots acting like Liverpool winning the league whilst people are dying is something to actually celebrate. 

Just to be clear, so that @Storts doesn't think im desperate for Liverpool to win the league.... I couldn't give a monkeys toss if Liverpool win the league or not. In fact the way football is going and what its turned into, I dont really give a toss if we never win it again. 

That desperate enough for you? 

[RandoEFC+]

Depends if you're talking about actually (relatively) sound Scouse or at least Northern Liverpool fans or Twitter clingers on whose handle is simply lAD  and their bio says they're from Hackney, Egypt or Bangkok.

[Lucas]

Where do people stand on this potential proposal?

Realistically, they won't get the money back. It actually sounds to me that the PL would be keen to maybe introduce the idea of 'B' teams into the lower divisions.

I expect the 'big' clubs in particular would like that.

[Stan]

40 minutes ago, Lucas said:

Where do people stand on this potential proposal?

Realistically, they won't get the money back. It actually sounds to me that the PL would be keen to maybe introduce the idea of 'B' teams into the lower divisions.

I expect the 'big' clubs in particular would like that.

So many different strands to it to explore.

Firstly, what message does it give to clubs that have exhaused their wage bills and are in huge amounts of debt due to mis-management? Some clubs vastly overspend in the hope of promotion cos they know PL money is the jackpot. But several clubs have not been so successful in doing so.

A flat fee per club would be uneven. Does a club like Leeds need the same kind of money as Luton, for instance? Or do the riches of Salford need the same kind of money as a struggling club like Macclesfield?

And as the tweet says, what about clubs that will continue to receive parachute payments? I can't remember how long they get them for (3 or 4 years?) but clubs like Huddersfield, Fulham, West Brom, Swansea will all still be receiving it for sure.

Maybe it needs to be weighted? So the clubs that are in dire straits, or forecast to be in the near future, would get the money first, or a higher amount of money in the interim for now? Clubs that can and will probably survive (which is the majority?) can maybe have access to the money if and when they need it?

[RandoEFC+]

The Premier League should do everything they can to support the lower leagues. We have the best football league structure in the world and the Premier League needs that as much as the clubs in those lower tiers do. It's a no brainer for me. The Premier League can afford it. But then I'm a rabid socialist so I haven't read the details, I just jump to saying yes, you should help those less fortunate than yourself in times of trouble.

The reason I came to this thread was a bit different. Is it actually important for the Premier League and the clubs to announce how many positive tests there have been each time? I get theres arguably some public health interest there but is it really necessary? There was some kick off last week when Mariappa was basically forced to say yes I was the one who tested positive because the whole Watford squad were being pretty much harassed to find out if it was them who had coronavirus. Transparency is great but what purpose does it serve telling us that a Bournemouth player has tested positive because it only seems to invite obsessive media and public trying to find out which player it is because they simply can't bear to know anything less than the full story even if the player would rather keep it to themselves.

[Danny]

1 hour ago, Lucas said:

Where do people stand on this potential proposal?

Realistically, they won't get the money back. It actually sounds to me that the PL would be keen to maybe introduce the idea of 'B' teams into the lower divisions.

I expect the 'big' clubs in particular would like that.

B Teams would ruin the integrity of the lower leagues. Supporting a side in League One or the Championship is beyond just hoping you one day get promoted to the Prem, it’s an entire existence built on rivalries and excitement within the lower leagues that doesn’t hinge on the Prem.

[Smiley Culture]

Not sure why the Premier League clubs should be giving money out tbh. Only way they should would be any compensation to the top Championship clubs for blocking promotion. 

[Honey Honey]

Why not put a celebrity match on, led by Robbie William's, played at Old Trafford. During the ad breaks and build up we hear sob stories from millionaire chief executives. Fans across the county can donate £2 by texting 442 451 433. Then after Ben Shepherd, Ralf Little and co get their match fee, we split the remainder of the pot between League One clubs. I dunno, I think ITV4 would be up for it.

[El Profesor]

On 23/05/2020 at 12:25, Carnivore Chris said:

I wouldn't say the Premier league is ready to start yet, but the measures taken in Germany seem to be working thus far(although they have shown to be a far superior nation to us in every way, shape and form during this if we are honest) and the players seem happy to carry on as normal.

In La Liga, which is returning on the 8th of June, the measures I've seen being taken there are unreal. I've never seen as much disinfectant being used or as many tests being carried out, I don't see where they are actually risking their lives. More adapting to a situation under some of the highest safest measures you will ever see.

When it's ready, there is no reason why it can't start under these conditions.

 

In my opinion, the Corona crisis will extend for years and eventually football will return before it´s over. 

Unfortunately, I don´t think a totally safe scenario similar to the pre-corona days is possible. Maybe I´m too pessimistic but I think the Bundesliga scenario is here to stay and this is how football will operate for years.

Yes, football is not an essential activity, but eventually the majority of players will end up returning because, yes, that´s what they love to do and also because they´re aware of the huge financial implications of not playing for months or even years. 

 

[Carnivore Chris]

7 hours ago, El Profesor said:

 

In my opinion, the Corona crisis will extend for years and eventually football will return before it´s over. 

Unfortunately, I don´t think a totally safe scenario similar to the pre-corona days is possible. Maybe I´m too pessimistic but I think the Bundesliga scenario is here to stay and this is how football will operate for years.

Yes, football is not an essential activity, but eventually the majority of players will end up returning because, yes, that´s what they love to do and also because they´re aware of the huge financial implications of not playing for months or even years. 

 

No, I agree mate, I don't think we'll see fans in the stadium for a while now, for years in fact, so for the game to continue, they are going to need to adapt or the sport will literally die.

The Champions League could prove the most difficult to finish this season.

 

 

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

I can understand the Premier League helping the EFL survive. However, giving money to some of these clubs that have been ridiculously mismanaged seems like a bit of a fools gambit - you’d need conditions on how that money would be used - and make sure bad owners don’t just treat it as personal pocket money.

[Smiley Culture]

10 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I can understand the Premier League helping the EFL survive. However, giving money to some of these clubs that have been ridiculously mismanaged seems like a bit of a fools gambit - you’d need conditions on how that money would be used - and make sure bad owners don’t just treat it as personal pocket money.

But can we use more or less money from the Premier League clubs that have been ridiculously mismanaged?

[Dr. Gonzo]

46 minutes ago, Smiley Culture said:

But can we use more or less money from the Premier League clubs that have been ridiculously mismanaged?

How many premier league clubs are worried about whether they’ll exist next season?

[Stan]

On 24/05/2020 at 12:13, Stan said:

So many different strands to it to explore.

Firstly, what message does it give to clubs that have exhaused their wage bills and are in huge amounts of debt due to mis-management? Some clubs vastly overspend in the hope of promotion cos they know PL money is the jackpot. But several clubs have not been so successful in doing so.

A flat fee per club would be uneven. Does a club like Leeds need the same kind of money as Luton, for instance? Or do the riches of Salford need the same kind of money as a struggling club like Macclesfield?

And as the tweet says, what about clubs that will continue to receive parachute payments? I can't remember how long they get them for (3 or 4 years?) but clubs like Huddersfield, Fulham, West Brom, Swansea will all still be receiving it for sure.

Maybe it needs to be weighted? So the clubs that are in dire straits, or forecast to be in the near future, would get the money first, or a higher amount of money in the interim for now? Clubs that can and will probably survive (which is the majority?) can maybe have access to the money if and when they need it?

 

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I can understand the Premier League helping the EFL survive. However, giving money to some of these clubs that have been ridiculously mismanaged seems like a bit of a fools gambit - you’d need conditions on how that money would be used - and make sure bad owners don’t just treat it as personal pocket money.

Could have just said 'this'

[Smiley Culture]

10 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

How many premier league clubs are worried about whether they’ll exist next season?

What’s that got to do with anything? Burnley have come and said them, so at least one. 

I just don’t get the bizarre stance that certain people should get this money and others shouldn’t when we have human rights abusers, wanted men and Mike Ashley owning Premier League clubs. 

[Stan]

Aaron Ramsdale is one of the Bournemouth players who tested positive.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52805363

Had originally tested negative on Monday.

[Dr. Gonzo]

3 hours ago, Smiley Culture said:

What’s that got to do with anything? Burnley have come and said them, so at least one. 

I just don’t get the bizarre stance that certain people should get this money and others shouldn’t when we have human rights abusers, wanted men and Mike Ashley owning Premier League clubs. 

Mike Ashley is a shitbag, but I don’t think he’s in the same category as Mr. Bone-Saw, the slave owners at Man City, or Putin’s pal in west London. Plus when Newcastle have gone down with him, haven’t they come straight back up? He’s a cheapskate and doesn’t have ambition to do well in the top flight because he makes money in the top flight - and he’s definitely a cunt. Again, not really the same as literal human rights abusers though.

Also it’s interesting you singled out morally questionable owners to not give money. But I was thinking more like those people who bought Blackburn and then absolutely ran them into the ground, or that Belgian twat at Charlton.

And the reason you’d single out clubs that have been less than responsible financially is because otherwise that money is just going straight into the pockets of their owners and not actually going to benefit those clubs at all.

[Smiley Culture]

3 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Mike Ashley is a shitbag, but I don’t think he’s in the same category as Mr. Bone-Saw, the slave owners at Man City, or Putin’s pal in west London. Plus when Newcastle have gone down with him, haven’t they come straight back up? He’s a cheapskate and doesn’t have ambition to do well in the top flight because he makes money in the top flight - and he’s definitely a cunt. Again, not really the same as literal human rights abusers though.

Also it’s interesting you singled out morally questionable owners to not give money. But I was thinking more like those people who bought Blackburn and then absolutely ran them into the ground, or that Belgian twat at Charlton.

And the reason you’d single out clubs that have been less than responsible financially is because otherwise that money is just going straight into the pockets of their owners and not actually going to benefit those clubs at all.

So you can use the money of asset strippers like Ashley and Gold & Sullivan but you can’t give that money to clubs who are poorly run? Seems legit. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

1 minute ago, Smiley Culture said:

So you can use the money of asset strippers like Ashley and Gold & Sullivan but you can’t give that money to clubs who are poorly run? Seems legit. 

It’s the premier league, morality left it back in 1992.