Football and the Coronavirus

And everyone in this thread says it is only the fans that are going to be petty. This is going to get messy regardless unless the season will be finished normally.
Brighton aren't being petty, they're looking after their own interests. They may have the same number of home games as those around them but they have harder home games, where home advantage might be the difference between them having a chance at getting a result or not. If the season isn't finished then they're safe. If the season restarts then they're back in a relegation fight.

The only battle we'll see is around relegation (and promotion) and that's what's happening now. The clubs that are currently safe but would be at risk if the season resumes (West Ham, Watford & Brighton) are happy for the season to be cut short. That's why Brighton will be objecting, that's why we've had Karen Brady making comments in the past. £40m in lost TV money this season is a much smaller hit than if the season restarts and they get relegated. You then have the current bottom 3 that are in a tricky position - they're happy for the season to be ended but only if relegation is scrapped. If relegation is still live then they'll want to play on. We're now going to see a lot of politics, no doubt with the biggest clubs pushing for relegation to be live, to force the hand of those in the bottom 3.

edit: and following the broadcasters in France not paying for the remainder of the Ligue 1 season, I've just read that Sky have not paid the ECB for it's Cricket coverage too. The risk of losing nearly £800m in TV money looks very real if the season isn't finished now.
 
Last edited:
Steve Parish (Palace Chairman) on Project Restart:
I write, of course, amid the greatest tragedy to unfold in my lifetime. When Crystal Palace last played football, squeezing past Watford 1-0 on March 7, it was impossible to predict how words like “pandemic” and “coronavirus” would become so familiar to us all, and the terrible loss and sadness so many families would experience, in so short a time.

With little else in the news except the human and economic damage wrought by this disease, it can feel wrong even to contemplate taking steps back towards normality. But perhaps we should allow ourselves to do that. We in football accept it is an obsession that always seems to get inserted into public debate and that we are held to a higher account than other sectors, yet there are limits. Caring about the terrible situation around us and caring about our clubs and industry are not mutually exclusive.

I hope Crystal Palace, during this crisis, have acted in a way that acknowledges the important role we have in the community and I would stress that, first and foremost, football has an absolute duty to society. No sacrifice our game is making can come close to those being made by people on the front line. If we can do anything to help the NHS reduce fatalities or even make one person’s life easier, then it is of course the No 1 priority. But after that, I also have a duty to my club, staff and the wider sport. It helps no one if we — or any other industry — come out the other side in a worse state than we otherwise could have.

Hence Project Restart. Of course, there are many barriers. We know we cannot have spectators at matches. Given we cannot leave our houses at the moment, we know things out of our control must change before the Premier League can consider finishing 2019-20 or starting next season on time.

What’s more, if the nation decides that the gravity of events dictates that it’s simply not appropriate to play, then we must and will respect that. Of all the objections raised this is the only one that seems, to me, potentially insurmountable and I would respond to it with the following observations.

First, we will not walk from this nightmare in one quick step to a bright future, the disease over, the world on the same track that it was before. Barring a miracle or a vaccine, the next months are likely to involve a game of cat and mouse with Covid-19, with restrictions ebbing and flowing. Every facet of normal behaviour is going to crawl slowly from the wreckage — we may have to develop a completely new normal for work and social places.

I believe that just as Formula One is often the precursor to developments that become standard in general road vehicles, so Premier League football with its physical science, medical infrastructures and resources for looking after its people, can begin to define how the “new normal” might look for a lot of working environments.

Not only that, in our country and beyond, people need to find ways to move forward mentally, to experience some small relief from the worries of this crisis. In my view a story here and a conversation there about the game last night will not trivialise loss or suffering but offer a tiny respite from it for many people. Football is meaningless — but it is magnificently meaningless. It has the power to lighten lives; why not see if we can use that power again?

Let’s be clear: there are a list of things we cannot and will not do. We cannot occupy any paramedic or ambulance that the NHS needs. We must do our best not to create a public-order issue with supporters attempting to get close to grounds. Perhaps most importantly, we cannot take testing capacity from one person in greater need.

The issue of player and staff welfare has to be treated with the utmost seriousness. We must bring the players with us, we must listen to them, we must put the health of them and their families front and centre whenever we play again. It should be not just about rendering it safe for them but also making sure they feel safe.

But I’ve seen all the proposals for training and travel and while there are challenges, those proposals offer a level of protection to players, staff and officials that I believe will render Premier League football one of the safest places in society to co-exist, much safer than a journey to the supermarket at present.

Playing represents the greatest challenge, of course, because physical contact presents a risk of cross-infection but protocols are being worked on for that. At their centre is reducing to almost zero the chance of any player participating who is carrying the virus. It’s no more or less than every workplace will have to wrestle with until there is a vaccine.

Isn’t it all just about the money? Well, not entirely. I want to complete the competition for reasons of sporting integrity. I want to crown Liverpool champions and give every other club a fair crack at the best league position they can achieve. I certainly don’t want to have difficult conversations about curtailing, voiding and points per game. The ramifications of each are complex and could involve legal challenges that run on for months, if not years.

But, yes, it is partly about the money. And we should all care about the money. I’ll tell you why. Nobody wins if the Premier League receives less money. Nobody. We are already facing losses no one can quantify — and if we don’t finish the season we are entering uncharted waters.

Football is one of the most efficient tax-generating industries in Britain: we pay the players a lot but 50 per cent goes straight back into the public purse. Overall we pay about £3.3 billion in tax every year and it is the Premier League that largely funds the whole football pyramid.

It pays about £400 million per year to the English Football League (EFL) in parachute and solidarity payments — almost five times the EFL’s TV deal. It pays £25 million annually towards the National League and grassroots. The Premier League in itself does not make profit or retain cash — it is merely a mechanism for distributing income to its 20 clubs and throughout the game.

Suppliers, contractors and services in our communities depend on us and the money we spend on capital projects — Palace and Leicester City are building academy facilities costing tens of millions. Premier League clubs owe approximately £1.6 billion in transfer payments to other clubs, by far the most of any league.

So, this is about football’s whole ecosystem and the exchequer, and the many secondary industries football enriches. While Palace went into this in good shape financially, no business is immune to the realities of profit or loss and cash flow. Some Premier League clubs are already warning they face crisis if they cannot get back to playing, and in the EFL many more may face extinction.

Finally, and this is key, if we cannot play out the end of this season, why can we necessarily start the next one in August or September? Are we convinced things will look so much different from how they do today? Many of the same issues regarding player welfare, venues and closed-doors matches will exist then. The more we can work out now, the better chance we have of coming out of this with the game we all love in position to recover over time.

I think Javier Tebas, the La Liga president, had it right when justifying steps to try to restart in Spain. He said: “I do not understand why there would be more danger in playing football behind closed doors, with all precautionary measures, than working on an assembly line, being on a fishing boat on the high seas.”

Football is just another industry trying to get back to work. It doesn’t have any more right to do so than construction or retail but nor does it have any less. Neutral grounds, dressing-room distancing, no fans: however we do it, and whenever we do it, football cannot return the same. So let’s at least contemplate whether it’s possible. As Tebas observed: “If important economic sectors cannot restart, in a safe and controlled manner, they could end up disappearing. That could happen to professional football.”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/why-i-m-backing-the-premier-league-s-project-restart-xl3ns75hp
 
Great statement from Steve Parish, I've always thought he's one of the smartest, most thoughtful and eloquent chairmen in football. There are reasons to be concerned by the statement, but also reasons to be positive. I agree with him that it would be nice to have football back to give fans something positive to think about and debate, I've missed football a lot and over the last few weeks the lockdown has started to weigh more heavily on my mental health, and football would at least give me something to look forward to each week.

I think one of the key points is that there probably isn't really that much difference in terms of risk between restarting this season and cancelling it and resuming football in August or September. We won't have a vaccine by then and although things like testing kits and PPE might be more plentiful by then, we can't know that for sure. So long as the PL aren't taking vital supplies or workers away from the NHS and key/essential workers then I'm all for them getting going as soon as it is safe to do so (as safe as can be in current circumstances).
 
I think the most important take from his article is that we have to remember that football is a big industry, employing 10s of 1000s of people, not just a small group of highly paid PL players. Football is always held to a higher standard than other industries, mainly because that small group of highly paid players are the most visible part of the industry, but in these circumstances it shouldn't be treated any differently. Nearly all industries have a small group of highly paid employees however football is unique in the sense that it's the small group of PL players that are the key to the financial survival of the entire football pyramid - it's usually the other way around with the low paid factory workers propping up the industry, paying the highly paid executives.

Obviously there are differences due to the fact that football is a contact sport and there is a requirement for a small amount of emergency services however once these issues are resolved through regular testing* and the burden on the NHS easing, there's no reason why football shouldn't be able to resume when many other non essential industries are continuing to operate even now. As Steve Parish points out, with the planned testing and medical facilities and expertise the PL already have, football will likely be safer than going to the supermarket let alone people working in other industries.

*Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the testing issues at the moment mainly relate to the logistics around getting tests to the people that need testing rather than a shortage of testing kits.

And shock horror, there's already leaks coming out that the clubs currently opposing playing at neutral venues would drop their concerns if relegation is scrapped.
 
This has never ever been about peoples health.

Correct about the tests. I had symptoms and my wife is a nurse so i went to book a test and there were loads of slots available for me to choose from. Im in brighouse and the closest place to me was Bradford Uni which is 6 miles but theres stations everywhere which suggests to me they have the kit.
 
I'm a season ticket holder down at Leicester, I've absolutely no objections to them playing the remaining games behind closed doors, but televised... If they can do it safely. It would make a welcome distraction from this whole situation.

Simply canning the season would be catastrophic on a number of levels, that and I don't want us to miss out on CL.... whenever that may return!
 
And shock horror, there's already leaks coming out that the clubs currently opposing playing at neutral venues would drop their concerns if relegation is scrapped.

Well if they're not going to be relegated then it doesn't matter about losing any home advantage, 5 out of the bottom 6 teams have got the majority of their points from playing at home so it stands to reason they would not want to lose it in a relegation fight.

Like I said before the best thing to do is to increase the EPL to 24 teams then you have promotion but no relegation throughout the leagues. Otherwise, it's going to have to be null and avoid like it or not. If the FA try to force it all it will take is one player getting infected and you'll probably have players and teams boycotting on safety grounds and it won't be the Premier League who have the public backing.
 
Well if they're not going to be relegated then it doesn't matter about losing any home advantage, 5 out of the bottom 6 teams have got the majority of their points from playing at home so it stands to reason they would not want to lose it in a relegation fight.

Like I said before the best thing to do is to increase the EPL to 24 teams then you have promotion but no relegation throughout the leagues. Otherwise, it's going to have to be null and avoid like it or not. If the FA try to force it all it will take is one player getting infected and you'll probably have players and teams boycotting on safety grounds and it won't be the Premier League who have the public backing.
If there is no relegation then what about 'the integrity of the League', which they're reportedly arguing about? And losing home advantage is cancelled out by also losing away disadvantage. Obviously it won't be perfectly equal as teams may have 1 more home game than away game remaining.

Two things that won't happen, 24 teams in the PL next season and a voided season. And I'm not sure what you mean by the FA trying to force it - it's the League (the clubs) that are pushing this through. All 20 clubs want to resume the season, with 6 of them wanting relegation scrapped too.
 
And shock horror, there's already leaks coming out that the clubs currently opposing playing at neutral venues would drop their concerns if relegation is scrapped.
Home advantage is a massive thing and I understand where the clubs in the relegation fight are coming from, I posted a few days ago the 12th man is a big thing to lose especially for clubs that are not as blessed like those at the top of the league
 
Home advantage is a massive thing and I understand where the clubs in the relegation fight are coming from, I posted a few days ago the 12th man is a big thing to lose especially for clubs that are not as blessed like those at the top of the league
Those in the relegation fight are coming from a position of self-interest. Home advantage will be lost for their opposition in their away games too remember. Their arguments about integrity and player safety will disappear the moment they can't be relegated.
 
22 teams in the prem and no league cup? or if they can have 3 play off games for the Championship 23 teams in the Prem.
Scrapping the League Cup will almost certainly have to happen regardless with there being little prospect of next season starting before September. A 22 team PL is a possibility but I wouldn't bet on it just yet - the PL don't want to expand the League as it'll mean more games and less money in a season when clubs have less time and need money the most.

As I mentioned before, there's going to be a lot of politics going on right now around relegation. I've seen it reported today that in response to the bottom 6's objections about playing at neutral venues (and willingness to drop those objections if relegation is scrapped), the top 6 will now push for relegations to go ahead if the season isn't finished - the idea being that it will force the hand of the current bottom 3 into agreeing to the neutral venue idea.
 
Here's a question.. Anyone seen how much the TV companies have lost? Because no one was allowed to cancel their subscription only pause it. So that money will still eventually arrive. Also they don't have the expense of filming matches. And of course everyone's at home so I'd imagine the skystore is doing a roaring trade.
 
As I mentioned before, there's going to be a lot of politics going on right now around relegation. I've seen it reported today that in response to the bottom 6's objections about playing at neutral venues (and willingness to drop those objections if relegation is scrapped), the top 6 will now push for relegations to go ahead if the season isn't finished - the idea being that it will force the hand of the current bottom 3 into agreeing to the neutral venue idea.

The most obvious issue here is that if you scrap the idea of relegation, suddenly all the teams at the bottom have literally nothing to play for and completely imbalance the top of the table who will end up playing 'free wins' against crap teams who now won't even need to try. It's something you accept when a team is so bad they're already relegated by April because they were probably crap and low effort against everyone but when you suddenly take the bottom 5 or 6 teams and take away their need to fight for survival, it (much like many other issues we're facing) results in a massively unfair skewing of game difficulty for those who were lined up to play them, versus those who have just played them when they may have been fighting hard.
 
As I mentioned before, there's going to be a lot of politics going on right now around relegation. I've seen it reported today that in response to the bottom 6's objections about playing at neutral venues (and willingness to drop those objections if relegation is scrapped), the top 6 will now push for relegations to go ahead if the season isn't finished - the idea being that it will force the hand of the current bottom 3 into agreeing to the neutral venue idea.
The bottom 6 hold the cards really as all they need to do is convince 1 other club to stand with them as the PL need 14 votes to force the season to be completed at neutral grounds. Much easier for the bottom 6 to convince one team to stand firm to bin relegation this season than to finish it at neutral grounds.
 
The bottom 6 hold the cards really as all they need to do is convince 1 other club to stand with them as the PL need 14 votes to force the season to be completed at neutral grounds. Much easier for the bottom 6 to convince one team to stand firm to bin relegation this season than to finish it at neutral grounds.
I'm not sure how the bottom 6 hold all the cards - they need to convince others to back their idea, the current plan (reportedly at least) already has enough votes for it to pass. And hypothetically, if the restart is blocked where does that leave the current bottom 3? What benefit is there for the other 17 clubs to not relegate them? Most of the top 14 clubs would be ****ed off at them for blocking the restart, costing them money, why would they increase the possibility of an expanded PL next season which would cost them even more money? If you're West Ham and Bournemouth, would you trust Karen Brady to stick by you as soon as West Ham are safe?
The most obvious issue here is that if you scrap the idea of relegation, suddenly all the teams at the bottom have literally nothing to play for and completely imbalance the top of the table who will end up playing 'free wins' against crap teams who now won't even need to try. It's something you accept when a team is so bad they're already relegated by April because they were probably crap and low effort against everyone but when you suddenly take the bottom 5 or 6 teams and take away their need to fight for survival, it (much like many other issues we're facing) results in a massively unfair skewing of game difficulty for those who were lined up to play them, versus those who have just played them when they may have been fighting hard.
Yep, it's reported that broadcasters are pushing for relegation to still be live too. They want the drama of a relegation battle and games meaning something and if it was scrapped it could be another reason for broadcasters to withold money. It's even being suggested that broadcasters will insist on in-game interviews with coaches and subs to make up for other lost content.
 
I'm not sure how the bottom 6 hold all the cards - they need to convince others to back their idea, the current plan (reportedly at least) already has enough votes for it to pass. Any hypothetically, if the restart is blocked where does that leave the current bottom 3? What benefit is there for the other 17 clubs to not relegate them? Most of the top 14 clubs would be ****ed off at them for blocking the restart, costing them money, why would they increase the possibility of an expanded PL next season which would cost them even more money? If you're West Ham and Bournemouth, would you trust Karen Brady to stick by you as soon as West Ham are safe?

Yep, it's reported that broadcasters are pushing for relegation to still be live too. They want the drama of a relegation battle and games meaning something and if it was scrapped it could be another reason for broadcasters to withold money. It's even being suggested that broadcasters will insist on in-game interviews with coaches and subs to make up for other lost content.
You love twisting words don’t you? The bottom 6 have all said they don’t want to complete the season if it is at neutral grounds with relegation, so all they need to do is convince Southampton for instance to vote with them or vote against the other 13 for the PL not to be able to complete the season at neutral grounds if relegation is on the table, simple really. Considering everyone from Everton down is still at risk of relegation I’m willing to bet that at least one club will be convinced by the bottom 6 that no threat of relegation this season will be in the clubs interests
 
Back
Top Bottom