We wont be paying for testing, bringing our payers and staff off furlough, extending loans/contracts and training for 3 weeks just to play one game against Wycombe.It was said on radio yesterday or suggested that clubs play their games in hand which would mean us playing Wycombe then going ppg, sounds far fetched but the Premiership is kicking off with Villa for one playing their game in hand. Apparently Premiership clubs are also meeting soon to discuss what should happen if the season cannot finish, sounds ominous that but they are saying at the moment no relegation is not on the table but I’m wary of that. That all brings us back to the original no relegation and possible increasing the Prem idea from weeks ago.
1. Don't see us coming back for 1 game to sort out PPG issues. Prohibitive costs for a one-off game.It was said on radio yesterday or suggested that clubs play their games in hand which would mean us playing Wycombe then going ppg, sounds far fetched but the Premiership is kicking off with Villa for one playing their game in hand. Apparently Premiership clubs are also meeting soon to discuss what should happen if the season cannot finish, sounds ominous that but they are saying at the moment no relegation is not on the table but I’m wary of that. That all brings us back to the original no relegation and possible increasing the Prem idea from weeks ago.
seems the way they are scheduling fixtures over so many days for TV means that (if there was a 2nd spike) chances are all teams wouldn't finish on same number of games played anyway.We wont be paying for testing, bringing our payers and staff off furlough, extending loans/contracts and training for 3 weeks just to play one game against Wycombe.
Prem are doing it as they plan to finish the season, starting with the "games in hand" so that PPG is easier to sort if things get worse and play has to be curtailed
True but rounds of games are only spread over what 2-3 days. They will see a second spike coming and be able to finish a round of games. We won't wake up on a Tuesday and be back into immediate lockdown because of what happened on a Monday.seems the way they are scheduling fixtures over so many days for TV means that (if there was a 2nd spike) chances are all teams wouldn't finish on same number of games played anyway.
It was said on radio yesterday or suggested that clubs play their games in hand which would mean us playing Wycombe then going ppg.
1. Don't see us coming back for 1 game to sort out PPG issues. Prohibitive costs for a one-off game.
We could ask Peterborough to pay for the testing, etc, as they are so interested in that game being held? :woot:
If the Prem dont relegate its all over and start again !
Unlikely they'll get the 14 votes needed to cancel relegation.Dint the FA say there has to be relegation. Also what's the point of restarting for a dud league. TV won't be happy with no relegation battle
Not sure if this got posted but this has the table in for tranmeres new idea
https://www.tranmererovers.co.uk/siteassets/news/3.-appendices-2.pdf
Does this now still show with their information added they are still 2 points or so behind the the team above. But still saves them
So does that mean we are the only team in the EFL to get promoted with Tranmere's proposal??
I think it’s all still very much in the melting pot and certain scenarios possibles and probables have been discussed, the Prem bottom six and maybe a couple above that I’m sure would go no relegation given the chance, and distribution of future tv money taken into consideration, as for European football not sure if that will happen as it used to next season the logistics of that is massive. Whatever they decide won’t effect our promotion so in a way who cares1. Don't see us coming back for 1 game to sort out PPG issues. Prohibitive costs for a one-off game.
2. Don't see no relegation from PL as well as adding 3 clubs from Championship. Already too many fixtures for those involved in Europe etc. But probably more importantly is the financials. Suddenly TV contracts split amongst 23 clubs, then there would be the cost of 6 parachute payments from the following season as the PL went back to 20 clubs. - assuming it would be 3 up 6 down which just seems cumbersome in the extreme (although can be sure teams 4th-6th from bottom would be bleating how unfair it is)
They've already moved the Champions League from Turkey to Portugal so expect that to happen. As with the Prem too expensive not to. Likely to happen over a 2 week period in AugustI think it’s all still very much in the melting pot and certain scenarios possibles and probables have been discussed, the Prem bottom six and maybe a couple above that I’m sure would go no relegation given the chance, and distribution of future tv money taken into consideration, as for European football not sure if that will happen as it used to next season the logistics of that is massive. Whatever they decide won’t effect our promotion so in a way who cares
By the looks of things. yes
Im sure Swindon and Leeds for example are over the moon with this idea
My understanding is that Tranmere's proposal has made it onto the EFL voting paper next week. This is why I think it has a good chance of winning the vote.
Currently the following 8 teams have declared their desire to finish the season.
Oxford
Portsmouth
Peterborough
Fleetwood
Sunderland
Ipswich
Gillingham
Tranmere
The following 4 teams have given mixed messages and some or all could vote to play on.
Wycombe
Doncaster
Lincoln
Bristol Rovers
And there are one or two teams who have not, as far as I know, declared their preference and will probably vote with the majority.
That's incredibly tight and could go either way, and one vote could swing it.
The teams on that list that would likely vote for Tranmere's proposal are Tranmere and Doncaster (who are currently 5 points off a playoff place). In addition Peterborough have declared their support for it, but may actually prefer to play on. Either way, there is a good chance Peterborough or Sunderland, or both would be happy with a guaranteed playoff slot, and would vote for it, considering 2 promotion slots would be up for grabs.
Rotherham wouldn't be happy because they would be moved into the playoffs, but they are not voting to play on anyway.
By my thinking, Tranmere's proposal, as ridiculous as it sounds, makes a vote to play on very unlikely.
Interesting analysis.
Given that Lincoln have announced their released players list, I doubt they are in any position to play on. Doncaster & Wycombe have questioned the costs of playing on and Bristol Rovers are clearly nuts as only wanting to play on, so they can assess their squad.....seems a pretty expensive way of doing that!
Therefore, I think it'll be a close vote, of 12 - 11 or 13 - 10 in favour of curtailing the season.
Why would the teams who say they want to finish the season vote for a proposal that ends it? I get why Posh and Sunderland might but if the 4 teams in the playoffs now are voting for a scenario that ends the season it'll be the one where only 3 other teams are in the playoffs with themMy understanding is that Tranmere's proposal has made it onto the EFL voting paper next week. This is why I think it has a good chance of winning the vote.
Currently the following 8 teams have declared their desire to finish the season.
Oxford
Portsmouth
Peterborough
Fleetwood
Sunderland
Ipswich
Gillingham
Tranmere
The following 4 teams have given mixed messages and some or all could vote to play on.
Wycombe
Doncaster
Lincoln
Bristol Rovers
And there are one or two teams who have not, as far as I know, declared their preference and will probably vote with the majority.
That's incredibly tight and could go either way, and one vote could swing it.
The teams on that list that would likely vote for Tranmere's proposal are Tranmere and Doncaster (who are currently 5 points off a playoff place). In addition Peterborough have declared their support for it, but may actually prefer to play on. Either way, there is a good chance Peterborough or Sunderland, or both would be happy with a guaranteed playoff slot, and would vote for it, considering 2 promotion slots would be up for grabs.
Rotherham wouldn't be happy because they would be moved into the playoffs, but they are not voting to play on anyway.
By my thinking, Tranmere's proposal, as ridiculous as it sounds, makes a vote to play on very unlikely.
You've only looked at L1 teams, it would need to get past at least 51% of all EFL clubs first. If it does then L1 votes and if they decide to play on Tranmere's proposal doesn't come into it. Can't see why Oxford, Portsmouth, Peterborough or Fleetwood would vote for the Tranmere method. That would see them go from being in the normal play off format to an 8 team tournament, why vote to make it harder for yourselves while losing more money? Sunderland, Wycombe and Doncaster might as they're suddenly in the play offs. The only other team who is works in the advantage of is Tranmere themselves.My understanding is that Tranmere's proposal has made it onto the EFL voting paper next week. This is why I think it has a good chance of winning the vote.
Currently the following 8 teams have declared their desire to finish the season.
Oxford
Portsmouth
Peterborough
Fleetwood
Sunderland
Ipswich
Gillingham
Tranmere
The following 4 teams have given mixed messages and some or all could vote to play on.
Wycombe
Doncaster
Lincoln
Bristol Rovers
And there are one or two teams who have not, as far as I know, declared their preference and will probably vote with the majority.
That's incredibly tight and could go either way, and one vote could swing it.
The teams on that list that would likely vote for Tranmere's proposal are Tranmere and Doncaster (who are currently 5 points off a playoff place). In addition Peterborough have declared their support for it, but may actually prefer to play on. Either way, there is a good chance Peterborough or Sunderland, or both would be happy with a guaranteed playoff slot, and would vote for it, considering 2 promotion slots would be up for grabs.
Rotherham wouldn't be happy because they would be moved into the playoffs, but they are not voting to play on anyway.
By my thinking, Tranmere's proposal, as ridiculous as it sounds, makes a vote to play on very unlikely.
The EFL proposed regulation change was about 10 lines, Tranmere's is 7 pages, no wonder people can't understand it!Im think she is getting confused. I know I am !
Yes very strange. I would assume their formula is to protect integrity, to make everything as fair as possible. So why should not all leagues be using this. After all, haven't they supposedly got a lot of chairmen backing this (most probably the ones from position 7 downwards who suddenly could be in a play off place).There's a clarification on the Tranmere site which makes it even more batshit crazy than I originally thought. The whole point of the proposed regulation from the EFL is that a rule is but in place for consistency across the divisions. Tranmere are now saying their proposal allows each division to do something different. They've given an example that the Championship could use straight PPG, L1 their weird margin of error thing, and L2 use current positions with no relegation!
So rather than standardising things and then just requiring each division to vote on playing on or stopping the season if Tranmere's proposal passed we'd be back to square one with each division arguing which method to use.
The EFL proposed regulation change was about 10 lines, Tranmere's is 7 pages, no wonder people can't understand it!
Also the point of the EFL change was to permanently have a solution. Tranmere only want this to cover the current season.
Seems the clubs have the choice of the EFL proposal, which is consistent across all divisions, maintains the play off format, maintains the correct number of teams in each division. Or the Tranmere proposal which could end up with something different applied to every division, completely tears up the play off format (without defining the replacement) and messes up the number of teams in the divisions which will then need correcting in following seasons.Yes very strange. I would assume their formula is to protect integrity, to make everything as fair as possible. So why should not all leagues be using this. After all, haven't they supposedly got a lot of chairmen backing this (most probably the ones from position 7 downwards who suddenly could be in a play off place).
Nicola Palios "I am sick of arguing with people who haven’t read the proposal."- well stay off Twitter
might as well finish the season off rather than this proposalIpswich board now saying they proposed a 10 team playoffs and possibly including the top 2!! They can fuck right off with that one
Why? I don’t get it. They’ve underperformed all season why would they suddenly go on an 8 game winning streak?Ipswich board now saying they proposed a 10 team playoffs and possibly including the top 2!! They can fuck right off with that one
Maybe they are using the same definition of integrity that Peterborough are?Why? I don’t get it. They’ve underperformed all season why would they suddenly go on an 8 game winning streak?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?