Coronavirus and the Scottish Championship

[kdyteejay]

1 hour ago, craigkillie said:

The board could end the season if they wanted, but it is clearly fairer to leave it up to the clubs rather than having self-interested board members making decisions from on high.

I think it’ll end up with the board having to end the season as I can see no way that the clubs will ever agree a solution. 

[Ayr145]

12 minutes ago, Ludo*1 said:

I still reckon this is the way forward and it's used in some South American leagues such as Argentina and Uruguay.

 

So how does that work for Dundee? Relegated last year with i can't remember how many points, but it wouldn't have been many.

[DiegoDiego]

I can see how promoting Cove and whomever else might be the least bad way of dealing with this situation, but I don't think they should be able to call themselves champions or receive medals unless they had already been mathematically confirmed in first.

What's the script with Brora? Were they just awarded the league to facilitate a potential League 2 playoff, or are they currently stoating about Sutherland wearing "Champions" t-shirts?

[MacArab]

20 minutes ago, johnnydun said:

How is binning the play offs fair? 

If we are to end it and wait for next season then surely next seasons first games should be the play offs.

But even that is not fair on the teams who still have a chance to get in the play offs but are not currently in those positions.

There has to be some kind of decisive action taken, and they can’t have the playoffs at the beginning of next season, as everyone needs to know where they stand well in advance of the season beginning.

Take the example of Dundee FC. In order for you to secure promotion through the playoffs, you have  up to 15 more games to play before the season can end. Given that no football is likely to be able to be played until July at the earliest, this can’t happen without a hefty impact on next season, which could in turn have a major impact the tasty new Sky deal that the Heed Bummers are keen to protect.

This season is fucked up beyond all recognition already. I think protecting next season as much as possible is a top priority, whilst upsetting the fewest people possible.

[Ludo*1]

9 minutes ago, Ayr145 said:

So how does that work for Dundee? Relegated last year with i can't remember how many points, but it wouldn't have been many.

Sorry - I mean going forward for next year with next season being the defacto '2nd season'.

[SpoonTon]

Reconstruction should only happen if it produces a positive, longer term, way forward. However you draw the lines of reconstruction, without a season's advanced warning, it will be unfair on some teams. You would need a positive vision of a better way forward that a large majority of clubs to be happy with in order for it to be the best way forward. 

It shouldn't be used as a way to appease clubs in the short term. 

[punk_dfc]

The "deserve to go down" argument is utter pish. No team "deserves" to go down or win a league if it was still mathematically possible not to be in that position at the completion of the season.

The last game was played on 11 March 2020. As at 11 March 2019, Dundee were sitting 11th. Dundee deservedly went down in the end by a big margin. It is far from unlikely that Hearts or Partick or both would stay up if fixtures fulfilled.

[Derry Alli]

2 minutes ago, punk_dfc said:

41 minutes ago, johnnydun said:

The "deserve to go down" argument is utter pish. No team "deserves" to go down or win a league if it was still mathematically possible not to be in that position at the completion of the season.

The last game was played on 11 March 2020. As at 11 March 2019, Dundee were sitting 11th. Dundee deservedly went down in the end by a big margin. It is far from unlikely that Hearts or Partick or both would stay up if fixtures fulfilled.

Yup. St Mirren were 4 points adrift of the rest at this point. 

How many are Hearts behind? 

[johnnydun]

22 minutes ago, MacArab said:

There has to be some kind of decisive action taken, and they can’t have the playoffs at the beginning of next season, as everyone needs to know where they stand well in advance of the season beginning.

Take the example of Dundee FC. In order for you to secure promotion through the playoffs, you have  up to 15 more games to play before the season can end. Given that no football is likely to be able to be played until July at the earliest, this can’t happen without a hefty impact on next season, which could in turn have a major impact the tasty new Sky deal that the Heed Bummers are keen to protect.

This season is fucked up beyond all recognition already. I think protecting next season as much as possible is a top priority, whilst upsetting the fewest people possible.

Well if it's upsetting the fewest people possible you are after, then 'null and void' should be what you are wanting.

No team would be justifiably upset as no team is mathematically certain of anything.

Can I hear your approval of this?

[MacArab]

18 minutes ago, johnnydun said:

Well if it's upsetting the fewest people possible you are after, then 'null and void' should be what you are wanting.

No team would be justifiably upset as no team is mathematically certain of anything.

Can I hear your approval of this?

No you can't I'm afraid, as I don't think that your argument makes sense. 

Under my plan, Dundee and Ayr (and all other playoff contenders across all leagues)  lose their chance at promotion, and this is upsetting to you as you feel you could go up were the fixtures to be concluded.

Under Nul and void, Dundee and Ayr (and all other playoff contenders across all the leagues) lose their chance at promotion and this would also be upsetting to you as you feel you could go up were the fixtures to be concluded.

It woukd also upset teams like Celtic, United and Cove who have been top of their respective leagues since day 1, and are more than 3 quarters of the way through the season.

In addition, the signigicant legal ramifications of Nul and Void would upset alot of people.

Self interest will always be a factor in people's preferences for how the season should conclude, and like most, I would love to see this season played out, just not to the detriment of next season, or to public safety.

FWIW, If Dundee were 14 points ahead at this stage with the goal difference we have, I would have no hesitation in conceding that they deserve to go up.

ETA. Were United to be currently sitting in a playoff spot, I would happily bin them, given our experience over the past 3 playoff campaigns.

Edited April 9, 2020 by MacArab

[johnnydun]

2 minutes ago, MacArab said:

No you can't I'm afraid, as I don't think that your argument makes sense. 

Under my plan, Dundee and Ayr (and all other playoff contenders across all leagues)  lose their chance at promotion, and this is upsetting to you as you feel you could go up were the fixtures to be concluded.

Under Nul and void, Dundee and Ayr (and all other playoff contenders across all the leagues) lose their chance at promotion and this would also be upsetting to you as you feel you could go up were the fixtures to be concluded.

It woukd also upset teams like Celtic, United and Cove who have been top of their respective leagues since day 1, and are more than 3 quarters of the way through the season.

In addition, the signigicant legal ramifications of Nul and Void would upset alot of people.

Self interest will always be a factor in people's preferences for how the season should conclude, and like most, I would love to see this season played out, just not to the detriment of next season, or to public safety.

FWIW, If Dundee were 14 points ahead at this stage with the goal difference we have, I would have no hesitation in conceding that they deserve to go up.

My point is, why give some teams a benefit (promotion) and give others nothing and even take things away from some teams (chance of avoiding relegation), when you can give everyone the same thing, nothing, everyone is then treated equally.

[TheScarf]

Celtic haven't been top since day 1, Rangers won the league in December for a few days. 

[Rob1885]

1 hour ago, MacArab said:

Not that it matters, but I think that calling it all now, and declaring Celtic Champions, and looking at reconstruction is the least damaging way to end this utter clusterfuck now, and protect the integrity of next season.

The only team out of 44 that will be unhappy with this would be The New Rangers, and to be fair, the ensuing Sevconian meltdown would give us all a laugh during these tragic times.

Apologies if I am repeating stuff other have said already, however...

United and Caley up (to be fair, Caley have been consistently second pretty  much all season)

Raith and Falkirk up (saves any tears and snotters out of Grangemouth)

Cove and EC up.

Kelty and Brora introduced to league 2 (Welcome)

Anybody further down the list in terms of current or potentials playoff positions (including Dundee sadly) need to realise that we are in uncharted waters and it is highly unlikely that they were going up anyway, especially if we can’t play any more games for the next 3 months.

Hearts and Partick Thistle are saved, Stranraer and Brechin (who looked doomed) are also saved.

Premiership Next Season 3 go down automatically, and 1 play off, whilst in the Championship is as is, with 1 up and playoffs as normal, meaning that. We then have 12 team leagues for the Premiership and Championship the follwoing season, and can introduce the split to the Championship as well for 2021/22.

What’s not to like?

This.

[flyingscot]

1 hour ago, Ad Lib said:

You don't. You have more shit teams to play against and therefore if anything a better chance of escaping it despite there being more relegation spots.

If they think they aren't as good as Dundee United and Inverness, or as Raith Rovers and Falkirk etc then that's on them.

If there is no reconstruction a team that finishes 10th or better in the Premier League is safe.

If there is reconstruction a team that finishes 10th or better in the Premier League is safe.

Sure but that still doesn't answer the question why bother? At the moment you have 1 automatic relegation place, so why would you want to risk it introducing 3 potential relegation spots? 

Revenue is all important at these times and you'd think both Dundee clubs and Inverness would likely compete over a season. With multiple teams moving divisions would the league fund all the parachute payments for clubs going down?

I can see why the Championship teams would want it as a 'fair solution' but don't see what's in it for the Premiership teams to make them vote for it. 

[MacArab]

8 minutes ago, johnnydun said:

My point is, why give some teams a benefit (promotion) and give others nothing and even take things away from some teams (chance of avoiding relegation), when you can give everyone the same thing, nothing, everyone is then treated equally.

Quick question - If Dundee were 14 points clear at the op of the Championship, would you truly be such an advocate of Nul & Void?

[MacArab]

7 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

Celtic haven't been top since day 1, Rangers won the league in December for a few days. 

Apologies, I thought that Rangers got within 2 points of Celtic but with a game in hand, (thus with the opportunity to go top)  but didn’t ever actually sit top of the league?

[TheScarf]

3 minutes ago, MacArab said:

Apologies, I thought that Rangers got within 2 points of Celtic but with a game in hand, (thus with the opportunity to go top)  but didn’t ever actually sit top of the league?

No they were never literally top, but they did hold the league title around that time. 

 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Yes. I think at the very least, for example, Alloa and Arbroath, and probably 2-3 of the full-time teams, would not have accepted this approach to disasters if presented to them at the outset. They would have known it would make the situation of a team with an early poor run of form at an extreme disadvantage. Teams would have much preferred an arrangement that protected them against the catastrophic.
The unequally complete part is not tackled by averaging points per game. That's literally the whole bone of contention. If you've played Celtic three times but St Johnstone zero times you are at a sporting disadvantage compared to someone who played Celtic twice and St Johnstone twice. If you have played 28 games and everyone else has played 29 games you have played the other teams in the division in different proportions. That is the unfairness and average points per game is never fair unless you have played the same teams the same number of times.
The only fair ways to end the season are voiding it outright, playing it outright, or perhaps calling it based on one set of home and away fixtures rather than two. If those aren't possible, it is the moral duty of the league to compensate and support those who are punished for deserts that had not fully been earned, and not as fully to reward those who had not earned it outright.
Only rejecting outright promotion and relegation or temporary reconstruction with promotion but no relegation then more relegation the following season can begin to address that.

This.

Some teams will also have played more away games compare to home games.

As you say the balance of games isn't fair either - some teams for their third game may have lots of tough away matches and easier home matches (or vice versa).

The only point where it could be said to be fair is the halfway point where every team has played each other twice. But then is it fair to say that teams who have had a bad run in third set of games will have an advantage (and vice versa)?

I don't think there is any fair solution if there is an early termination to the season.

[Ad Lib]

6 minutes ago, flyingscot said:

Sure but that still doesn't answer the question why bother? At the moment you have 1 automatic relegation place, so why would you want to risk it introducing 3 potential relegation spots? 

Revenue is all important at these times and you'd think both Dundee clubs and Inverness would likely compete over a season. With multiple teams moving divisions would the league fund all the parachute payments for clubs going down?

I can see why the Championship teams would want it as a 'fair solution' but don't see what's in it for the Premiership teams to make them vote for it. 

I mean it's really simple why bother: it prevents unfairness to clubs who shouldn't be relegated on the basis of part of a season, it provides the opportunity for good Premier League teams to absolutely shag rotten a bigger sack of upcoming Championship dross. It gives them more home games for one season so more gate revenue too.

It introduces more relegation spots but crucially also, uh, *more shit teams*. I would venture that it is easier to finish 10th in a league of 14 than it is to finish 10th in a league of 12, and even more so because of the split.

As for parachute payments, the point is simple: you don't have them for those finishing 13th and 14th, only for those finishing 12th. Those in 13th and 14th should be treated financially as though they finished 1st or 2nd in the Championship in a normal season.

[johnnydun]

8 minutes ago, MacArab said:

Quick question - If Dundee were 14 points clear at the op of the Championship, would you truly be such an advocate of Nul & Void?

I am going to be honest here and say no.

I don't actually advocate 'null and void', I would prefer the season to be played out to a conclusion.