Let's Call The Whole Thing Off?

I’m not sure it really matters at this point tbh. You either get an asterisk title win for an incomplete season which you lot will take and rival fans will think is funny. Or you get no title which you lot will still see as a title win and rival fans will think is funny. This season will always be remembered as the coronavirus season that had to be cancelled before the end so either way I don’t see that it makes much difference.

And you can be known as European champions for two years, again it doesn’t make much difference as you only get the one trophy!

 

Sweet, where do I sign?

 

Are you a mong?

 

What ****ing blushes yesterday? You half quoted an article on sunday from the Brighton chairman, that I then fully quoted, that stated that null and void was off the table for the Prem, and only ppg and play to the finish were being considered. You blustered that in your legal opinion ppg would be legally challenged. Now the Dutch have gone null and void they're already being legally challenged by one of their clubs.

All I'm asking is do you still thing null and void is open to less legal challenges than ppg, and if so, why?

 

Oh please. You stated that UEFA had taken null and void off the table, when they’d done nothing of the sort, as I pointed out.

Which was then further proved by the Dutch FA voiding their league later in the day.

 

Top of the League and Top of the Pops

 

You can't steal that one mate.

That's the captain, **** all to do with you lot.

 

Grim that you’re even trying to grab that one.

 

I'm sorry, but what sporting merit do the finishing positions of the 2018/19 season have over the current positions of a league three quarters of the way through? Some on here argued that you couldn't finish the league beyond june 30th because youd have out of contract players, there for some teams would have different players ( though that doesn't seem to count in January). Yet you are now proposing that it carries more sporting merit to disregard a teams current sporting merit and instead go back a year to when they had different players, possibly a different manager, and in the case of Sheffield United, even a team that wasnt in that league? Let alone at least one team that played in a different stadium.

 

I corrected myself that is was the Prem, not UEFA, but I did maintain that UEFA had stipulated that sporting merit was their yardstick for qualification for their competitions. That was in that telegraph report you didnt want to read. So all I'm asking from that, given your stance on sunday when the full quote from the Brighton chairman blew your selective snippet of what he said out of the water, is that is it still your stance that ppg is more open to be legally challenged than null and void?

 

What selective snippet? I posted an article from the BBC site ffs.

I don’t subscribe to the Torygraph and the other article you posted was subjective and not factual. Sporting merit is also subjective, as proven by the Dutch voiding their league.

 

This season no-one has earned **** on sport merit whereas last season was actually finished so the places are deserved.

That also wasn’t the point I’d made that you replied to. The point was “sport merit” covers literally every possible way of deciding the teams except for lucky dip.

 

You could even argue that a lucky dip of the Premiership teams has sporting merit as they had qualified for the competition at least.

It's an intentionally vague thing "sporting merit" than was clearly used so as to cover everything, it is a vapid and pointless phrase. I don't get why people would get hung up on it.

 

I can post the full telegraph article if you want, AGAIN. And it was no more subjective than the half of what the Brighton had said that you quoted from the BBC. It just went on to fully quote him saying the league would be finished or they'd use ppg with no relegations. And that liverpool would be crowned champions. None of that was in the semi- complete report from the bbc that you quoted.

Without going back, I'll swear your begrudged response to that was that in your learned opinion it would be open to be legally challenged. Why that more than null and void I cant remember you explaining. Perhaps the Dutch club challenging their omission from the Europa would do well to seek your counsel.

 

Ps sorry all for the mito like spelling - out with the dog on my phone.

 

What did you think of my suggestion last night Donga?

 

It’s really not complicated. If the PL clubs vote collectively to void the league, then that’s their prerogative. They’ve voided the league as it couldn’t be completed.

If they vote to have a completed league on the basis of PPG BUT choose to have no relegation, then they’ve chosen to judge the league as being complete whilst failing to adhere to the relegation / promotion rules with the EFL.

You confuse a club posturing with a coherent legal argument that actually makes it to the courts. I’ll be interested to see whether that happens and on what possible grounds.

 

What's that got to do with it when UEFA hasn't confirmed they will accept the Dutch FA's nominated teams, or any Dutch teams?

The Dutch FA's hope is that UEFA accept their nominations on the basis that the ban is imposed by the government, which also isn't applicable to the PL since the UK government did **** all and the PL itself called off games.

So do you keep bringing up the Dutch out of ignorance or desperation?

 

TBF your dog makes some decent points.

 

If they wanted to cover everything they wouldn't have bothered imposing the "sporting merit" condition in the first place. To anyone not grasping at straws it means some solution that recognises the results of games which have actually been played.