Coronavirus and the Scottish Championship

[Thereisalight..]

4 minutes ago, parsforlife said:

If clubs can get have confidence that they will be playing with crowds in January then maybe they can just about get through a couple of months with small squads on season ticket sales /spfl payments.  
 

Tbf if there is no great rise in cases in the next week or so, then I don’t see why we should wait until Jan for crowds to return. Is the virus going to reboot as soon as 1st Jan 2021 strikes? Certainly in our league (outwith Dundee and Hearts) some crowds if not all should be allowed in. Just make face coverings mandatory if the fear element is still there 

[Skyline Drifter]

34 minutes ago, D'Jaffo said:

They asked the current Championship teams which as it stands includes Hearts.

I presume they voted against it though.

Eh? Am I being whooshed? Why on earth would Hearts vote against it? Hearts need to be playing. If theur reconstruction plans flounder they need the Championship to be playing.

[D'Jaffo]

Eh? Am I being whooshed? Why on earth would Hearts vote against it? Hearts need to be playing. If theur reconstruction plans flounder they need the Championship to be playing.

I might be way off but the way I’ve read Kheredines tweets it sounds like Hearts either voted against it or abstained.

 

It wouldn’t be the biggest shock tbf given the vote was apparently a formality so Hearts single vote wouldn’t really have mattered in the grand scheme of things.

[parsforlife]

I’m not even sure kheredines tweet actually states that 2 clubs are against the proposal, I took it to mean that they had sufficient support.  Just like how the end the season vote only the ‘missing’ Dundee vote was chased, and not the other clubs from league 1/2 that didn’t submit a vote as they’re threshold had already been reached.

[D'Jaffo]

I’m not even sure kheredines tweet actually states that 2 clubs are against the proposal, I took it to mean that they had sufficient support.  Just like how the end the season vote only the ‘missing’ Dundee vote was chased, and not the other clubs from league 1/2 that didn’t submit a vote as they’re threshold had already been reached.

Aye I think you’re probably right.

[Homer Thompson]

9 minutes ago, D'Jaffo said:

I might be way off but the way I’ve read Kheredines tweets it sounds like Hearts either voted against it or abstained.

 

It wouldn’t be the biggest shock tbf given the vote was apparently a formality so Hearts single vote wouldn’t really have mattered in the grand scheme of things.

The article on the BBC says they were asking for assurances that clubs could play a shortened season, not whether they wanted to.

If that is the case, its hard to see how Hearts could say no

[Paisley Ton]

44 minutes ago, D'Jaffo said:

I don’t think so no. There are still talks regarding streaming Championship games according to the Morton CEO and afaik that seems the most likely scenario until crowds return at the turn of the year.

 

40 minutes ago, Thereisalight.. said:

I struggle to see why we need to wait until Oct if games are being played behind closed doors? Why not start it in Aug like the SPL and have a full season? 

As good as it gets.

Keep players on Gov scheme so limiting number of game  behind closed doors with hopefully crowds back in Jan 21.

Would not expect great confidence in supporters attending until then since good number are older generation and classed as vulnerable. 

[Skyline Drifter]

42 minutes ago, D'Jaffo said:

I might be way off but the way I’ve read Kheredines tweets it sounds like Hearts either voted against it or abstained.

 

It wouldn’t be the biggest shock tbf given the vote was apparently a formality so Hearts single vote wouldn’t really have mattered in the grand scheme of things.

Really? I'd be absolutely astonished if Hearts voted against it or weren't first in the box with a Yes. Hearts are desperate to play. Sitting idle for 6 months to a year does them no good. Their top choice is reconstruction obviously but their fall back has to be to get the Championship playing asap. They need a competition to win promotion back from.

There's no such thing as a formality in the scheme of things (see the slam dunk Hearts et al thought they'd sorted for the season ending vote).

And as pars for life said, I don't see anything that says there were any "no's" as such though I think we're comfortably the most likely no out there. If 2 clubs haven't voted yet / abstained / voted "no" I imagine we're one of them.

Edited June 14, 2020 by Skyline Drifter

[Dunning1874]

40 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Eh? Am I being whooshed? Why on earth would Hearts vote against it? Hearts need to be playing. If theur reconstruction plans flounder they need the Championship to be playing.

I assume because Hearts would be in favour of starting from August in line with the top flight rather than waiting until October, with the logic that they still have a lot of players under contract with most of them exceeding the £2500 a month limit on furlough payments, so they'd be as well having behind closed door games to stream sooner if they're still making significant losses anyway.

Obviously that doesn't apply to the rest of us who don't have as many staff members under contract and have costs fully covered for those who are, so are much better off waiting until furlough is no longer an option and we're closer to having fans back in grounds before starting up.

[Skyline Drifter]

3 minutes ago, Dunning1874 said:

I assume because Hearts would be in favour of starting from August in line with the top flight rather than waiting until October, with the logic that they still have a lot of players under contract with most of them exceeding the £2500 a month limit on furlough payments, so they'd be as well having behind closed door games to stream sooner if they're still making significant losses anyway.

Obviously that doesn't apply to the rest of us who don't have as many staff members under contract and have costs fully covered for those who are, so are much better off waiting until furlough is no longer an option and we're closer to having fans back in grounds before starting up.

The Championship starting in August isn't on the table. That's already been ruled out. Starting October is the best deal on the table for Hearts if reconstruction doesn't happen. This wasn't a series of "what do you prefer" options at this stage, we're beyond that. It was a do you want to start in October or defer longer vote.

Edited June 14, 2020 by Skyline Drifter

[HMIP]

1 hour ago, itzdrk said:

I think it's in hope that crowds can return then or soon after so either no or as few games as possible are played to empty stadiums. 

Pains me to say it, but it seems like the low risk option is to mothball clubs until 2021.  The doomsday scenario for our clubs is that they take on full squads in anticipation of an October start then a 2nd wave hits and we go back into lockdown or see further delays in getting crowds back.   Unless they put clauses into players contracts alloŵing them to be cancelled if crowds aren’t back by a cerysjn point, though that would be a horrible step to have to take.

[Poet of the Macabre]

Someone talk me through the pros of starting in October without fans? Because I see few, if any.

Also, how are they going to decide who gets fewer home games?

[TxRover]

For a fun cat among the pigeons thought, let’s say two teams say they can’t play starting in October (QoS Chair did say it would be suicide without subsidies in May). Falkirk and Partick raise their hands, “Mister, may I”, and it gets really amusing.

There’s also a rumor that the OF are requesting their games all be after December to increase the crowd chances. It A) That’s true and B) It’s even entertained, then the death knell for fitba is sounded. 

[TheGoon]

If we’re coming back in October to maximise our chances of having crowds at some point later in the season, what if restrictions begin to be put back in place and we get further away from that? Do we just carry on knowing it’s to the detriment of the clubs or scrap it? 

(I do think we have to try coming back in October FWIW, but there’s still a lot of questions surrounding it)

[Skyline Drifter]

44 minutes ago, Poet of the Macabre said:

Someone talk me through the pros of starting in October without fans? Because I see few, if any.

Also, how are they going to decide who gets fewer home games?

Easy bit first - I assume a fixture list will be drawn up randomly as it always is. 5 sides will get 14 home, 13 away. 5 sides will get the other way round. We had that situation in 14 team leagues for the better part of two decades in the 70s and 80s. Nobody lost a lot of sleep over it. It is anticipated that crowds are unlikely before January anyway so the advantage of an extra home game is limited anyway.

The pros of starting in October  is more difficult. Basically, the closer you are to a first team squad intact anyway then the less relevant the starting date is. The single biggest issue with playing closed doors is meeting wage bills with severely restricted income. Now, if you already have to all intents and purposes a first team squad as for instance Hearts and Dundee do, then that's semi irrelevant. They are going to have to pay these players anyway and may as well get them playing and try to bring in some net income (ie if they can raise more money from online subs, and various other promotions and sponsorships when actually playing than it costs to put games on then they are better off). To a lesser extent most of the division have something close to a 1st team available to play even if they need to flesh out squads a bit. The part time sides have less of an issue as their players are not dependent on them for a living wage anyway. I guess given Alloa have re-signed half their squad in the last week their contracts are probably along the lines of nominal pay until they actually return to playing.

Also, furlough ceases at the end of October anyway and support is limited in October itself so the financial benefits of "mothballing" are far less for the clubs.

The other major cost in coming back "early" before crowds are allowed is player and staff testing but the Anderson Grant is expected to address this.

The main benefit though is far more difficulty to quantify and that's what the long terms cost in NOT playing are. The longer the division shuts down, the more supporters will get out of the habit of attending and may find other things to do. There will be wall to wall English football by this time next week. The Scottish Premier will follow in August. If fans get into the habit (more than they were already) of not attending football and watching other clubs on tv instead then there are long term ramifications for the feasibility of clubs at this level.

That's about all I can see? Anybody want to add anything?

Personally I think it's mental. I understand why big clubs with major support bases or wealthy owners feel they can sustain it short term but I think it's enormously risky. From our point of view we'd clearly be better mothballing for months than recruiting 15 players + to play with no guarantee of much income and the very real possibility of a 2nd wave or a localised outbreak shutting the crowds out for much longer. There's no realistic way ANY club, even Hearts, is actually making money playing closed doors. I would want a lot more certainty about when crowds can be "normal" before I committed to it personally.

39 minutes ago, TxRover said:

For a fun cat among the pigeons thought, let’s say two teams say they can’t play starting in October (QoS Chair did say it would be suicide without subsidies in May). Falkirk and Partick raise their hands, “Mister, may I”, and it gets really amusing.

There’s also a rumor that the OF are requesting their games all be after December to increase the crowd chances. It A) That’s true and B) It’s even entertained, then the death knell for fitba is sounded. 

The first part has been a very real possibility for several weeks. It's not a new suggestion though I think it's now more likely than not that the lower leagues are going to return too so less relevant anyway.

The second part was a suggestion at one point to do with renegotiation of the tv deal. I don't think it was being pushed by the OF themselves but as a potential negotiating point on the tv deal. However it's not been heard for a week or two and they announced agreement of an amended contract so I presume it's no longer a factor unless we've just not been told yet.

Edited June 14, 2020 by Skyline Drifter

[vikingTON]

I don't see why Hearts would vote on anything as a Championship club until their rolling tantrum gets smacked down once and for all.

[The Master]

1 hour ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Really? I'd be absolutely astonished if Hearts voted against it or weren't first in the box with a Yes. Hearts are desperate to play. Sitting idle for 6 months to a year does them no good. Their top choice is reconstruction obviously but their fall back has to be to get the Championship playing asap. They need a competition to win promotion back from.

Isn’t it also the case that Hearts’ legal argument (for what it’s worth) is that they’re being relegated into a league that might not even run?

Them voting against a proposal to get going would completely undermine that. 

[Jamie_M]

2 hours ago, Thereisalight.. said:

I struggle to see why we need to wait until Oct if games are being played behind closed doors? Why not start it in Aug like the SPL and have a full season? 

Furlough covers wages into October, closer to fans getting back in so less games behind closed doors and a few months less of having to pay the cost of testing, making the Anderson grant go further.

[jagsfan57]

I might be way off but the way I’ve read Kheredines tweets it sounds like Hearts either voted against it or abstained.
 
It wouldn’t be the biggest shock tbf given the vote was apparently a formality so Hearts single vote wouldn’t really have mattered in the grand scheme of things.

I suppose Hearts will not want to be showing any association with the championship if they are going to take legal action

[jagsfan57]

I’m not even sure kheredines tweet actually states that 2 clubs are against the proposal, I took it to mean that they had sufficient support.  Just like how the end the season vote only the ‘missing’ Dundee vote was chased, and not the other clubs from league 1/2 that didn’t submit a vote as they’re threshold had already been reached.

Do Premiership and league 1 & 2 not get a vote ? and if not, why not ?