Coronavirus and the Scottish Championship

[Derry Alli]

6 hours ago, itzdrk said:

I wonder what will eventually come out of Inverness.  

Given what the Morton chairman (and others) have said it's obvious something is no right up there. 

They're inbred teuchters, m8. 

[Alibi]

How can you play games when the players aren't allowed close enough to each other to put in a tackle?  Are squads expected to be tested regularly for CV19 and to live in isolation?  What happens when the inevitable CV19 outbreak occurs amongst players? I can't see football at our level happening until at lest August 2021.  It doesn't stack up either financially or in terms of basic health and safety for the players, to whom the clubs and the league have a duty of care.  Any of you that have had CV19 other than a very minor case will know that it absolutely wipes you out physically for a long time (or in extreme cases wipes you out permanently).  No responsible club could ask players to sign up to that.

Edited May 13, 2020 by Alibi

[mishtergrolsch]

34 minutes ago, Alibi said:

How can you play games when the players aren't allowed close enough to each other to put in a tackle?  Are squads expected to be tested regularly for CV19 and to live in isolation?  What happens when the inevitable CV19 outbreak occurs amongst players? I can't see football at our level happening until at lest August 2021.  It doesn't stack up either financially or in terms of basic health and safety for the players, to whom the clubs and the league have a duty of care.  Any of you that have had CV19 other than a very minor case will know that it absolutely wipes you out physically for a long time (or in extreme cases wipes you out permanently).  No responsible club could ask players to sign up to that.

You obviously didnt watch Dundee United from around 2015 to 2019.

[Parttimesupporter]

Thanks for the responses, and in particular those in relation to existing media rights.  I think we have gone past the point where multi-quote will help so I will start again having digested replies so far.  Apologies for another verbose post - thoughts on the two questions underlined would be particularly appreciated.

Sky/BT - I agree with SD that Sky will probably be helpful up to a point, with the current contract being amended in some way.  I don't know what Sky's rights are if games for 2020/21 can't start on time.  Hopefully they don't have the right to tear up the deal and start negotiations from scratch! 

Streaming rights - I should have explained some of my thinking a bit more clearly last night.  Some clubs in the Premiership will have relatively small wage bills once a lot of current players become out of contract, and the extension of some form of furlough until October helps.  Larger clubs have a real issue with delays.  For example, as far as I know  Aberdeen and Hibs have only agreed wage deferrals, not cuts.  Dave Cormack was quoted as saying that Aberdeen's outgoings are around £1m a month.   Deferrals reduce the cash flow issue to an extent, but the wages still have to be paid at some point. 

There are a number of clubs which offer live streaming of games to overseas fans.  My expectation is that they will be looking for permission to extend that facility to UK supporters (safe to assume that Sky won't allow that for their games or at times which compete with games which they are showing).  I'm not convinced that they will want much in the way of pooling to take place.  Their argument will be that the away team doesn't get a cut of the gate when fans are there, so shouldn't expect a cut of the proceeds from fans who pay to watch on line.  I'm not saying that is necessarily right or fair, but that's how I think it will pan out.  

Does anyone know if clubs currently have to pay a cut of what they receive from overseas fans to the SPFL, and if so what percentage?

I share the scepticism about when closed doors games can safely begin, but I reckon the larger clubs will be desperate to get an income stream ASAP.  The longer the start of the season is delayed the less likely it is that there will be 38 games.  There may then be a tension with smaller clubs who would rather sit tight, as the cost of signing a number of new players to build a squad would not be met by the income they can generate without fans at games.  That might lead to larger clubs agreeing some element of pooling their income in order to ensure that they have enough teams to play against!

Season tickets - there are a number of clubs (including Aberdeen and Hibs) who are selling season tickets for next season.  Surely the thinking must be that season ticket holders can receive free streaming of closed doors games in lieu of a seat at the match?

My guess - I still believe that the larger clubs in the Premiership will want to start as soon as the government gives the green light.  They may well be indulging in wishful thinking about when that will be.  If it transpires that closed doors games can't take place until late in 2020 or even 2021 then clubs will presumably have to exercise their 'article 12' rights and suspend players' contracts as they can't last long with significant outgoings and no income.  I fear that point may come for all clubs eventually.

Out of interest does anyone know the rules on starting the season once there are no legal barriers?  Is that entirely at the discretion of the SPFL Board, or do clubs have a say at divisional level?

[Rob1885]

How can you play games when the players aren't allowed close enough to each other to put in a tackle?  Are squads expected to be tested regularly for CV19 and to live in isolation?  What happens when the inevitable CV19 outbreak occurs amongst players? I can't see football at our level happening until at lest August 2021.  It doesn't stack up either financially or in terms of basic health and safety for the players, to whom the clubs and the league have a duty of care.  Any of you that have had CV19 other than a very minor case will know that it absolutely wipes you out physically for a long time (or in extreme cases wipes you out permanently).  No responsible club could ask players to sign up to that.

August 2021 hahaha glad you're not in charge ya doom merchant.

[Derry Alli]

Just now, Rob1885 said:

1 hour ago, Alibi said:

I can't see football at our level happening until at lest August 2021.  

August 2021 hahaha glad you're not in charge ya doom merchant.

I was more concerned about the 'at our level' part, tbh. Is there to be some sort of sacrificial level where football is to resume to see how many people might/do die? 

[SpoonTon]

 

2 hours ago, Alibi said:

How can you play games when the players aren't allowed close enough to each other to put in a tackle?  Are squads expected to be tested regularly for CV19 and to live in isolation?  What happens when the inevitable CV19 outbreak occurs amongst players? I can't see football at our level happening until at lest August 2021.  It doesn't stack up either financially or in terms of basic health and safety for the players, to whom the clubs and the league have a duty of care.  Any of you that have had CV19 other than a very minor case will know that it absolutely wipes you out physically for a long time (or in extreme cases wipes you out permanently).  No responsible club could ask players to sign up to that.

If there is no football until August 2021 at our level, how will there be any clubs left to resume playing? You'd need some sort of government bailout to prop clubs up for a year. 

Society will need to live with test, trace, isolate for the foreseeable future, and football will need to do the same. If football cannot be played until August 2021, then I'm going to be home-schooling until August 2021 as well. 

Edited May 13, 2020 by SpoonTon

[eibbod nehpets]

3 hours ago, Alibi said:

How can you play games when the players aren't allowed close enough to each other to put in a tackle? 

Hopefully by the time competitive matches start again we (QoS) will have stopped practicing social distancing at corner kicks. The past few seasons have been a joke with regards to defending set pieces. 

1 hour ago, Dele said:

I was more concerned about the 'at our level' part, tbh. Is there to be some sort of sacrificial level where football is to resume to see how many people might/do die? 

Dickhead.

[Derry Alli]

2 minutes ago, eibbod nehpets said:

Dickhead.

I beg your pardon? 

[Sergeant Wilson]

3 hours ago, SpoonTon said:

 You'd need some sort of government bailout to prop clubs up for a year. 

 

Aye, it's not like they've anything else to spend money on.

[ScottyG]

3 hours ago, SpoonTon said:

 

If there is no football until August 2021 at our level, how will there be any clubs left to resume playing? You'd need some sort of government bailout to prop clubs up for a year. 

Society will need to live with test, trace, isolate for the foreseeable future, and football will need to do the same. If football cannot be played until August 2021, then I'm going to be home-schooling until August 2021 as well. 

As government don't have any money apart from that which is raised from tax-payers then if football got this money they'd have to bail out every other sport too.

[craigkillie]

As government don't have any money apart from that which is raised from tax-payers then if football got this money they'd have to bail out every other sport too.

They can choose to bail out whatever sports they want - indeed they've already chucked a ton of money to rugby league. Football is by far the biggest sport in the country and has far more jobs reliant on it than any other sport, so they will clearly have a very good economic case for bailing out football without necessarily doing the same for basketball or ice hockey or whatever else.

[Sergeant Wilson]

12 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

They can choose to bail out whatever sports they want - indeed they've already chucked a ton of money to rugby league. Football is by far the biggest sport in the country and has far more jobs reliant on it than any other sport, so they will clearly have a very good economic case for bailing out football without necessarily doing the same for basketball or ice hockey or whatever else.

I'm not convinced and if it is granted it'll come with heavliy caveated or maybe loans.

[craigkillie]

52 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

I'm not convinced and if it is granted it'll come with heavliy caveated or maybe loans.

I'm not saying I think football will get a bail out - I'd say it's not that likely - but just that the government could easily make a case for it without feeling obliged to do the same for every other sport.

[Rob1885]

I'm not saying I think football will get a bail out - I'd say it's not that likely - but just that the government could easily make a case for it without feeling obliged to do the same for every other sport.

Exactly as government funding for particular sports is already allocated. The more popular ones get the bigger slice of the pie.

[Sergeant Wilson]

4 minutes ago, Rob1885 said:

28 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

I'm not saying I think football will get a bail out - I'd say it's not that likely - but just that the government could easily make a case for it without feeling obliged to do the same for every other sport.

Exactly as government funding for particular sports is already allocated. The more popular ones get the bigger slice of the pie.

Any Government money going to sport goes on development, grassroots level. Even pro clubs need to direct it to that area. It won't be used to bail club out.

[Thereisalight..]

17 hours ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Games will cost the same to put on no matter where you play them. Size isn't an issue when there's no crowd anyway. It's not cheaper to use a neutral venue. The reasons for neutral venue proposals in England were mainly because police were concerned about the gathering of people around those stadiums such as the London ones, Liverpool ones, Newcastle, Manchester, etc which are in the middle of cities. It's easier to control crowd gathering if the stadium is on the outskirts at an industrial estate location. That may or may not be also relevant here (Celtic and Rangers grounds are certainly in the middle of residential areas) but it's not a cost factor, except I suppose if the policing costs would be higher.

In practical terms of course with Scotland being smaller, and the vast majority of clubs and their players in a relatively small geographical area, a neutral venue would work better here. Obviously the likes of ICT, Ross County, Elgin, Aberdeen, the Tayside clubs, Stranraer, us, Annan, etc would be more inconvenienced by such an arrangement but it's not a massive deal and only two or three of those clubs are Premiership. But I don't really see it being massively important, certainly not in economic debates. As a safety concern maybe.

 

I don’t think policing costs would be an issue. Most lower league clubs only ever have police there if its a “big game”. They’d more than likely have stewards to try and move along anybody that comes along to the stadium, but the clubs wouldn’t need their full quota of stewards imo 

[Sergeant Wilson]

1 minute ago, Thereisalight.. said:

I don’t think policing costs would be an issue. Most lower league clubs only ever have police there if its a “big game”. They’d more than likely have stewards to try and move along anybody that comes along to the stadium, but the clubs wouldn’t need their full quota of stewards imo 

How will clubs with no income pay players, never mind stewards?

[Skyline Drifter]

2 minutes ago, Thereisalight.. said:

I don’t think policing costs would be an issue. Most lower league clubs only ever have police there if its a “big game”. They’d more than likely have stewards to try and move along anybody that comes along to the stadium, but the clubs wouldn’t need their full quota of stewards imo 

Yeah, I think you somewhat missed the point there. I am well aware that most lower league games have no policing. The issue being discussed here was closed door games in cities and whether the police might need to disperse or control a crowd turning up outside. 

[super_carson]

Government intervention is a tricky one.  It could be argued that any business that has been forced to close (which is essentially what would happen for most clubs outwith the Prem if no crowds are allowed for several months) due to government action should be given support, and I include all sports in that (see the example for rugby league).  But, the impending economic shit-show will prbably severely tighten government spending.  I also mentioned on the Ayr thread that the public perception is that all footballers are millionaires and don't deserve any help.  While that is certainly nowhere near the reality of football in Scotland, the government could face a backlash if they were to offer any sort support to the SPFL. 

 

.