Match Day Thread Premier League, Cups & Euro Watch

[johnsonsbaby]

But they agreed to those rules based on a 38 game season. Cut it short and clubs suddenly do have a leg to stand on

FA has no say in the PL, they don't run it

The only fair outcome of the season is to play the games, in the current climate, behind closed doors. Whether that be a neutral venues or empty stadiums. Any club that argues against that is arguing because they have something to lose by all the games being played.

The rules don't state 38 games or after having played each other home and away. There's one simple sentence that starts "at the end of the season the team with the most points......" and another simple sentence two points down in the rules that starts " at the end of the season the team with the fewest points......" Which is why the only sticking point would be when the season ends.

The FA were granted a special share right of veto for a limited set of issues, one of which is relegation. Greg Clark has confirmed they are using that veto and relegation will be happening.

 

[Libby]

They agree to a 38 game season, not a 28/29 game one.

The Championship won’t complete if the PL can’t, so the idea that PL clubs could be relegated without completing the season and replaced with clubs who’d guaranteed themselves nothing at the point the game was stopped, is a position that has more holes than a Swiss cheese. It simply won’t happen.

I think that last bit is a good point. Would it really be fair for say Brighton, currently outside the bottom 3, to be relegated after playing out their games, to be replaced by a team who didn't earn their spot by right? Not for me.

 

[RogerisontheHunt]

The rules don't state 38 games or after having played each other home and away. There's one simple sentence that starts "at the end of the season the team with the most points......" and another simple sentence two points down in the rules that starts " at the end of the season the team with the fewest points......" Which is why the only sticking point would be when the season ends.

The FA were granted a special share right of veto for a limited set of issues, one of which is relegation. Greg Clark has confirmed they are using that veto and relegation will be happening.

And they started this season with the rule that 38 games would be played, with a home and away fixture.

When the season ends is precisely the problem. Cut it short now and Clubs can argue they've been robbed of potential fixtures they could have gained something from (however unlikely that migth have been).

I'm not arguing it, it's what clubs like Norwich or Brighton etc will say.

I say finish the season.

 

[Tobes]

I think that last bit is a good point. Would it really be fair for say Brighton, currently outside the bottom 3, to be relegated after playing out their games to be replaced by a team who didn't earn their spot? Not for me.

Not only that, a PPG solution has two ways of calculating it. Under 1 version Bournemouth go down, under the other, they’re safe and West Ham go. To agree a PPG solution then the clubs would need a 14 club majority to decide it. So in choosing which method to use, they’d in essence be deciding which club to relegate. Sporting integrity? Fairness? Not a chance, and it’d end up in a legal quagmire.

 

[Libby]

Not only that, a PPG solution has two ways of calculating it. Under 1 version Bournemouth go down, under the other, they’re safe and West Ham go. To agree a PPG solution then the clubs would need a 14 club majority to decide it. So in choosing which method to use, they’d in essence be deciding which club to relegate. Sporting integrity? Fairness? Not a chance, and it’d end up in a legal quagmire.

Although I can see ppg being the ultimate outcome I do think that's where the big issue lies. Effectively voting for which team you want relegated is farcical.


Imagine relegating a team who were sat in 16th when the season was halted.

 

[johnsonsbaby]

And they started this season with the rule that 38 games would be played, with a home and away fixture.

When the season ends is precisely the problem. Cut it short now and Clubs can argue they've been robbed of potential fixtures they could have gained something from (however unlikely that migth have been).

I'm not arguing it, it's what clubs like Norwich or Brighton etc will say.

I say finish the season.

That's the point, the rules specifically don't state how many games are to be played. Obviously it's taken for granted how many will be played but we're talking extremely exceptional circumstances here.

If you're talking about a legal case the first thing that will be looked at is - where does it say in the rules that the season must be 38 games? It doesn't.

 

[Tobes]

The rules don't state 38 games or after having played each other home and away. There's one simple sentence that starts "at the end of the season the team with the most points......" and another simple sentence two points down in the rules that starts " at the end of the season the team with the fewest points......" Which is why the only sticking point would be when the season ends.

The FA were granted a special share right of veto for a limited set of issues, one of which is relegation. Greg Clark has confirmed they are using that veto and relegation will be happening.

That’s not correct. In the PL rule book the season is defined as starting with a sides first league match on the fixture list, and ends on the date of the last match on the fixture list.

As for Clark he’s reportedly told PL clubs that the FA wouldn’t sanction a solution that didn’t include relegation on Monday. He’s not directly stated that anywhere, and talk is cheap. The idea of a PL PPG solution that includes relegation simply doesn’t stack up, for the reasons already given, and the FA can’t impose it irrespective of their veto.

 

[Ivan Dobsky]

And they started this season with the rule that 38 games would be played, with a home and away fixture.

When the season ends is precisely the problem. Cut it short now and Clubs can argue they've been robbed of potential fixtures they could have gained something from (however unlikely that migth have been).

I'm not arguing it, it's what clubs like Norwich or Brighton etc will say.

I say finish the season.

Then you could argue that has to take place even if it takes another decade. What, these are extraordinary circumstances? Yes indeed they are, needing some sort of rule change to what was first in place at the beginning of the programme (as would null and voiding be)? So, does anybody know what the FA's special share decision for the final sanction will be for The Football Association Premier League Limited? Have the FA given any indication about how they wish to use this legally binding power at all?

I think they should make clear their position.

 

[RogerisontheHunt]

That's the point, the rules specifically don't state how many games are to be played. Obviously it's taken for granted how many will be played but we're talking extremely exceptional circumstances here.

If you're talking about a legal case the first thing that will be looked at is - where does it say in the rules that the season must be 38 games? It doesn't.

Taken from the PL handbook 2019/20

'Each Club shall play two League Matches against each other Club each Season, being the Home Club in respect of one such League Match and the Visiting Club in respect of the other'

Being that there are 20 clubs in the league, that means 38 games

 

[johnsonsbaby]

Then you could argue that has to take place even if it takes another decade. What, these are extraordinary circumstances? Yes indeed they are, needing some sort of rule change to what was first in place at the beginning of the programme (as would null and voiding be)? So, does anybody know what the FA's special share decision for the final sanction will be for The Football Association Premier League Limited? Have the FA given any indication about how they wish to use this legally binding power at all?

I think they should make clear their position.

Unless he goes back on his word, Clark has confirmed that the FA won't sanction no relegation. 3 teams will be relegated.

I think we look to Germany to see how it goes there and hopefully all plays out well and we follow suit. Playing to conclusion is the ideal scenario.

 

[Ivan Dobsky]

Unless he goes back on his word, Clark has confirmed that the FA won't sanction no relegation. 3 teams will be relegated.

I think we look to Germany to see how it goes there and hopefully all plays out well and we follow suit. Playing to conclusion is the ideal scenario.

Cheers for that. I was getting the impression that there was some confusion on the FA's stance, and indeed their power of veto.

 

[Libby]

Cheers for that. I was getting the impression that there was some confusion on the FA's stance, and indeed their power of veto.

It'd be interesting to see what happened if there was a stand off. Ie no majority for any outcome with relegation and the FA refusing to sanction it.

They've got a veto on relegation/promotion matters but can't force the clubs to do anything as far as I'm aware.

 

[Ivan Dobsky]

It'd be interesting to see what happened if there was a stand off. Ie no majority for any outcome with relegation and the FA refusing to sanction it.

They've got a veto on relegation/promotion matters but can't they force the clubs to do anything as far as I'm aware.

Appears they can:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/footbal...emier-leagues-attempt-stop-relegation-season/

 

[johnsonsbaby]

Cheers for that. I was getting the impression that there was some confusion on the FA's stance, and indeed their power of veto.

They can and have called that relegation will happen and it's within their power to do so. Hopefully we play the season out to avoid any other confusions

 

[organic red]

Unless he goes back on his word, Clark has confirmed that the FA won't sanction no relegation. 3 teams will be relegated.

I think we look to Germany to see how it goes there and hopefully all plays out well and we follow suit. Playing to conclusion is the ideal scenario.

German Bundesliga games starting at 2:30 on Saturday afternoon, including RB Leipzig (Werner)

 

[johnsonsbaby]

Taken from the PL handbook 2019/20

'Each Club shall play two League Matches against each other Club each Season, being the Home Club in respect of one such League Match and the Visiting Club in respect of the other'

Being that there are 20 clubs in the league, that means 38 games

I seem to have got myself confused while trying to sort this out in my own head. My main point was that in these exceptional circumstances it would be very hard to get a legal case to stick involving how many games have been played and how the season ended.

 

[Libby]

Appears they can:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/footbal...emier-leagues-attempt-stop-relegation-season/

Not a subscriber, copy and paste?

From what I can see though yes they can block relegation by refusing to sanction it, but in that situation it would have to go back to the clubs to find another solution in which a majority vote for. The FA can't then make the decision for them is what I mean. They can't force them to use weighted ppg for example. It still has to be something the clubs have voted for.

Unlikely anyway as I reckon we'll get ppg but it'd be interesting to see how it went were it to reach that point.

 

[Ivan Dobsky]

Not a subscriber, copy and paste?

From what I can see though yes they can block relegation by refusing to sanction it, but in that situation it would have to go back to the clubs to find another solution in which a majority vote for. The FA can't then make the decision for them is what I mean.

Unlikely as I reckon we'll get ppg but it'd be interesting to see how it went were it to reach that point.

Yeah, come up with a solution that allows relegation and promotion and we'll sanction it. If not, we won't. The idea that 14 clubs will then defy the FA is a bit like the theoretical right of Lorretta to have babies even though 'she' hasn't got a womb.

 

[Tobes]

They can and have called that relegation will happen and it's within their power to do so. Hopefully we play the season out to avoid any other confusions

The PL vote by consensus, and any decision on this would require a 14 club majority.

The FA have no power to impose a solution on the PL, their ‘threat’ was to use their power of veto to block any consensus decision that didn’t include relegation.

Given that they delivered this threat on the day they wanted the PL clubs to agree to the neutral venues solution, and at the end of the meeting the entire 20 clubs decided they didn’t want that outcome and that they’d appeal to the authorities, I’d suggest their ‘threat’ didn’t exactly get their knees knocking.

About this no length of season rule btw.....

 

[johnsonsbaby]

Not a subscriber, copy and paste?

From what I can see though yes they can block relegation by refusing to sanction it, but in that situation it would have to go back to the clubs to find another solution in which a majority vote for. The FA can't then make the decision for them is what I mean. They can't force them to use weighted ppg for example. It still gas to be something the clubs have voted for.

Unlikely anyway as I reckon we'll get ppg but it'd be interesting to see how it went were it to reach that point.

They aren't trying to block relegation, they are stopping the league from blocking it I.e. it has to happen.

The only vote I'm aware of atm that is being put to the 20 teams is neutral venues.