Jump to content

League Reconstruction 20/21 season


Recommended Posts

Doncaster would clearly have bent to a 14 team league if he had the power. With the mindset that Celtic/Rangers/Sky wouldn't care and he wouldn't have to go to court against clubs.

And probably add colts and whatever other pish he thinks he can get away with.

 

The clubs should absolutely reject it. Or at least specify the board has no powers to reconstruct the leagues.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Golden Gordon said:

Yes, you would think that emergency regulations would be more appropriate than emergency powers.  Learn from the contentious elements of the shutdown & put procedures in place that would avoid any dubiety should the same happen again.  

I greenied that because I basically agree, but regulations couldn't cover every eventuality in a crisis and having to wait 28 days for a decision. It's a temporary measure for next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jim McLean's Ghost said:

Doncaster would clearly have bent to a 14 team league if he had the power. With the mindset that Celtic/Rangers/Sky wouldn't care and he wouldn't have to go to court against clubs.

And probably add colts and whatever other pish he thinks he can get away with.

 

The clubs should absolutely reject it. Or at least specify the board has no powers to reconstruct the leagues.

 

What would you do if 3 Premiership clubs say have to go into quarantine? Or L2 clubs can't afford to fulfil fixtures? Wait 28 days for a club vote? We're talking about temporary powers during a pandemic, not a coup. And for the elected Board, not Doncaster.

Edited by welshbairn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One fun fact that today's news has unearthed - the SPFL's law firm is Shepherd and Wedderburn, who employ, as a senior associate, none other than Scottish fitba's very own Kevin Clancy.

Here's hoping his knowledge of the laws of the land is at least as keen and sharp as his command of the Laws of the Game...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would you do if 3 Premiership clubs say have to go into quarantine? Or L2 clubs can't afford to fulfil fixtures? Wait 28 days for a club vote? We're talking about temporary powers during a pandemic, not a coup. And for the elected Board, not Doncaster.

There are rules in place already for clubs being unable to fulfil fixtures.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently....

 

 

SFA & SPFL plan to have fans inside stadiums from 23 July onwards, provided Scottish Government guidance allows it. They are looking at restricted numbers of supporters with distancing measures, subject to coronavirus continually suppressing.#Scotland #Football

 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Aim Here said:

One fun fact that today's news has unearthed - the SPFL's law firm is Shepherd and Wedderburn, who employ, as a senior associate, none other than Scottish fitba's very own Kevin Clancy.

Here's hoping his knowledge of the laws of the land is at least as keen and sharp as his command of the Laws of the Game...

We're screwed!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, craigkillie said:


There are rules in place already for clubs being unable to fulfil fixtures.

I was meaning if there's a few and merging leagues looks like the best option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely it'd be better to just introduce a rule governing what happens in the event the season can't be completed? The board already have the power to declare the season over without a vote (they just chose to put it to the clubs in this case) so they'd have the power to declare it done with everyone already knowing PPG would be the deciding factor if a certain threshold of games had been met, null and void if not.

There are many issues in the SPFL rules where I think it's right that there isn't a set in stone  'if X happens then Y must happen', for example punishments for clubs fielding an ineligible player. There are shades of grey there and it's reasonable enough to leave the severity of the sanction up to the board or a disciplinary panel's own interpretation - a club deliberately bending the rules on player registration being worse than accidentally naming a suspended player on the bench, for example.

A force majeure event ending the season early isn't like that - if using PPG after three quarters of the season is the right thing to do in one season why would it be right to null and void after the same number of games the following season? Set the minimum number of games needed to be played by each team for PPG to be used (19 in the Premiership, 18 for Champ, L1 & L2?) and if that threshold isn't met then void it.

There are arguments for the SPFL board having more power to stop the self-interest of clubs causing inertia on issues where everyone sees a need for change on an issue but no one proposal can meet the threshold for support, but this isn't one of those issues. Where reconstruction's concerned clubs having that power can be the only thing stopping appalling ideas which come from a board going through, such as Ross County and St Mirren stopping the 12-12/8-8-8. I can't help thinking that handing the board that power now would just invite them to force through a change no one wants and bring the colts in at the first chance they get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Dunning1874 said:

Surely it'd be better to just introduce a rule governing what happens in the event the season can't be completed? The board already have the power to declare the season over without a vote (they just chose to put it to the clubs in this case) so they'd have the power to declare it done with everyone already knowing PPG would be the deciding factor if a certain threshold of games had been met, null and void if not.

There are many issues in the SPFL rules where I think it's right that there isn't a set in stone  'if X happens then Y must happen', for example punishments for clubs fielding an ineligible player. There are shades of grey there and it's reasonable enough to leave the severity of the sanction up to the board or a disciplinary panel's own interpretation - a club deliberately bending the rules on player registration being worse than accidentally naming a suspended player on the bench, for example.

A force majeure event ending the season early isn't like that - if using PPG after three quarters of the season is the right thing to do in one season why would it be right to null and void after the same number of games the following season? Set the minimum number of games needed to be played by each team for PPG to be used (19 in the Premiership, 18 for Champ, L1 & L2?) and if that threshold isn't met then void it.

There are arguments for the SPFL board having more power to stop the self-interest of clubs causing inertia on issues where everyone sees a need for change on an issue but no one proposal can meet the threshold for support, but this isn't one of those issues. Where reconstruction's concerned clubs having that power can be the only thing stopping appalling ideas which come from a board going through, such as Ross County and St Mirren stopping the 12-12/8-8-8. I can't help thinking that handing the board that power now would just invite them to force through a change no one wants and bring the colts in at the first chance they get.

This ^^^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting stuff from Belgium. Google's translation isn't great but looks like the court says finishing the league wouldn't be fair as the squads have changed since they shut down, and suggest expanding the league to 18 to avoid relegation. But they've sent it back to the football body to decide.

https://www.voetbalprimeur.be/nieuws/933512/-waasland-beveren-krijgt-gelijk-van-bma-competitie-met-18-ploegen-geadviseerd-.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently....
 
IePN4V-N_bigger.jpg&key=42680491eeec1251caab749b6349da293d32cfad4d4c15b460243caf04f80f31 Barry Anderson@BarryAnderson_    

SFA & SPFL plan to have fans inside stadiums from 23 July onwards, provided Scottish Government guidance allows it. They are looking at restricted numbers of supporters with distancing measures, subject to coronavirus continually suppressing.#Scotland #Football

  177 5:58 PM - Jun 24, 2020 Twitter Ads info and privacy
    Similar to the schools - people have planned for smaller sizes and "blended learning" but it looks like they'll be back full time anyway. Now looks like crowds could be back in time for the new season but Championship clubs have already signed up for a shortened season and have already been selling season tickets. I know they have to plan for the worst but they should have also been planning for a restart at or near the original time, perhaps with reduced capacities IMO. We are going to look daft when everything is pretty much back to some sort of normal in schools, offices, shopping centres and cinemas but there is no football at all below Premiership level.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

Clubs below the Premiership still aren't allowed to train as far as I know, so it's unlikely they'd be able to start on time anyway.

Is this purely down to testing? What's the difference between a Premiership player and and a Championship player training.. if hearts want to train if they provide everything the Premiership clubs do, why not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bohemian said:

Is this purely down to testing? What's the difference between a Premiership player and and a Championship player training.. if hearts want to train if they provide everything the Premiership clubs do, why not?

The SPFL had to obtain government permission to allow the Premiership to start. They could presumably ask for the Championship (or other leagues) to start too, but the cost of testing is still going to be high right now and while Hearts could afford it others may not be able to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Salvo Montalbano said:
4 hours ago, bennett said:
Apparently....
 
IePN4V-N_bigger.jpg&key=42680491eeec1251caab749b6349da293d32cfad4d4c15b460243caf04f80f31 Barry Anderson@BarryAnderson_    

SFA & SPFL plan to have fans inside stadiums from 23 July onwards, provided Scottish Government guidance allows it. They are looking at restricted numbers of supporters with distancing measures, subject to coronavirus continually suppressing.#Scotland #Football

  177 5:58 PM - Jun 24, 2020 Twitter Ads info and privacy

    Similar to the schools - people have planned for smaller sizes and "blended learning" but it looks like they'll be back full time anyway. Now looks like crowds could be back in time for the new season but Championship clubs have already signed up for a shortened season and have already been selling season tickets. I know they have to plan for the worst but they should have also been planning for a restart at or near the original time, perhaps with reduced capacities IMO. We are going to look daft when everything is pretty much back to some sort of normal in schools, offices, shopping centres and cinemas but there is no football at all below Premiership level.

Schools are going back (fcuk the social distancing) because they have to go back - kids need educated and their parents need to work. You don't have to go to the fitba.

The virus will almost certainly rebound back in the autumn/winter - do you reckon they're gonna want thousands of guys packed in together singing and shouting?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

The SPFL had to obtain government permission to allow the Premiership to start. They could presumably ask for the Championship (or other leagues) to start too, but the cost of testing is still going to be high right now and while Hearts could afford it others may not be able to.

Sound, I get that about the league but if Hearts for example wanted to start training and provided all the necessary testing etc they still need government permission? Probably pointless anyway if their league doesn't start..  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...