| Accrington Chairman 09:16 - May 16 with 2269 views | tractorboy1978 |
Going off on one on Twitter again this morning. Getting agreement looks like it's going to be extremely difficult - not sure how any solution is going to get the required support unless the EFL can obtain money and sweeten the deal for the smaller clubs in the league. |  | | |  |
| Accrington Chairman on 09:23 - May 16 with 2233 views | itfcjoe |
If there is someway that an independent body (EFL, FA, PFA, EPL) can pay for the testing and cleaning processes then that makes a big difference.
ANdy Holt can't seem to see that his attitude on this and looking out for his team first and foremost is no different to what the other chairman are doing.
It's going to cost Accrington more money if the games are played - ergo they don't want to play them
It's going to cost ITFC more money to not play the games (and ends any hope of promotion) - ergo we do want to play them.
Why should ITFC, Sunderland, Pompey, Posh accept losing more money just because Accrington don't want to lose more money? We are all hardly swimming in cash at this level as it is |  |
| |
| Accrington Chairman on 09:34 - May 16 with 2187 views | tractorboy1978 |
| Accrington Chairman on 09:23 - May 16 by itfcjoe |
If there is someway that an independent body (EFL, FA, PFA, EPL) can pay for the testing and cleaning processes then that makes a big difference.
ANdy Holt can't seem to see that his attitude on this and looking out for his team first and foremost is no different to what the other chairman are doing.
It's going to cost Accrington more money if the games are played - ergo they don't want to play them
It's going to cost ITFC more money to not play the games (and ends any hope of promotion) - ergo we do want to play them.
Why should ITFC, Sunderland, Pompey, Posh accept losing more money just because Accrington don't want to lose more money? We are all hardly swimming in cash at this level as it is |
Yes, he's blinded by his own self interest (which every club and owner has!). There is no altruism in football. | | | |
| Accrington Chairman on 09:39 - May 16 with 2167 views | ITFC_Forever |
| Accrington Chairman on 09:23 - May 16 by itfcjoe |
If there is someway that an independent body (EFL, FA, PFA, EPL) can pay for the testing and cleaning processes then that makes a big difference.
ANdy Holt can't seem to see that his attitude on this and looking out for his team first and foremost is no different to what the other chairman are doing.
It's going to cost Accrington more money if the games are played - ergo they don't want to play them
It's going to cost ITFC more money to not play the games (and ends any hope of promotion) - ergo we do want to play them.
Why should ITFC, Sunderland, Pompey, Posh accept losing more money just because Accrington don't want to lose more money? We are all hardly swimming in cash at this level as it is |
And due to the large difference in size between the bigger and smaller clubs in L1, that’s why we have the stalemate. |  |
| |
| Accrington Chairman on 09:46 - May 16 with 2140 views | tractorboy1978 |
| Accrington Chairman on 09:39 - May 16 by ITFC_Forever |
And due to the large difference in size between the bigger and smaller clubs in L1, that’s why we have the stalemate. |
We are looking at season ticket refunds alone in the region of £750k if this season doesn't complete. Whereas Accrington are looking at around £75k. That's before even thinking about variations in corporate/shirt sponsorships etc. [Post edited 16 May 2020 9:57]
| | | |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:23 - May 16 with 2025 views | Chrisd |
| Accrington Chairman on 09:23 - May 16 by itfcjoe |
If there is someway that an independent body (EFL, FA, PFA, EPL) can pay for the testing and cleaning processes then that makes a big difference.
ANdy Holt can't seem to see that his attitude on this and looking out for his team first and foremost is no different to what the other chairman are doing.
It's going to cost Accrington more money if the games are played - ergo they don't want to play them
It's going to cost ITFC more money to not play the games (and ends any hope of promotion) - ergo we do want to play them.
Why should ITFC, Sunderland, Pompey, Posh accept losing more money just because Accrington don't want to lose more money? We are all hardly swimming in cash at this level as it is |
Equally, why should Accrington put themselves in a difficult financial situation because ourselves and a few other clubs want to finish the season? Apparently, 60% of L1 sides don’t want to finish the season. Are you telling me their owners haven’t compared the cost of finishing the season to one that is just concluded like L2? | |
| |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:24 - May 16 with 2018 views | itfcjoe |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:23 - May 16 by Chrisd |
Equally, why should Accrington put themselves in a difficult financial situation because ourselves and a few other clubs want to finish the season? Apparently, 60% of L1 sides don’t want to finish the season. Are you telling me their owners haven’t compared the cost of finishing the season to one that is just concluded like L2? |
I'm not saying they should, but he claims others are merely looking out for themselves only and claiming sporting integrity when it is just about the money - and can't see that he is doing exactly the same thing. | |
| |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:34 - May 16 with 1986 views | pointofblue |
| Accrington Chairman on 09:23 - May 16 by itfcjoe |
If there is someway that an independent body (EFL, FA, PFA, EPL) can pay for the testing and cleaning processes then that makes a big difference.
ANdy Holt can't seem to see that his attitude on this and looking out for his team first and foremost is no different to what the other chairman are doing.
It's going to cost Accrington more money if the games are played - ergo they don't want to play them
It's going to cost ITFC more money to not play the games (and ends any hope of promotion) - ergo we do want to play them.
Why should ITFC, Sunderland, Pompey, Posh accept losing more money just because Accrington don't want to lose more money? We are all hardly swimming in cash at this level as it is |
I think the difference is, whilst there is no doubt the six will lose money, they won’t go out of business over it. If Accrington are ordered to restart the season then they won’t be able to pay the rates. giant_ullaa said something to me when I was pointing out Stuart Webber’s probable hypocrisy earlier in the week - at least, for all his faults, we do have a benefactor who can sustain the club through this. Many don’t.
The one thing which needs clarity is who supports the clubs through loss of earnings. Will their be further Premier League remuneration? Will Sky let teams keep he cash? Will the repayment season ticket costs and sponsorship deals have to forked out by the clubs?
If we weren’t so awful for so long then we’d be sitting in the top two and would now doubt be far less concerned about the season restarting if PPG, weighted or otherwise, came into play. We brought this on ourselves and those inside the club have to accept the position we’re in.
Saying that my position has always been the season needs to finish. In all likelihood 2020/2021 is going to be disrupted by Covid-19 at some point anyway so why not make sure one season is completed rather than two which are interrupted? | |
| |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:35 - May 16 with 1981 views | Chrisd |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:24 - May 16 by itfcjoe |
I'm not saying they should, but he claims others are merely looking out for themselves only and claiming sporting integrity when it is just about the money - and can't see that he is doing exactly the same thing. |
It’s always been about the money, which I said weeks ago, but he’s got a good point. For clubs to be put in an even more difficult financial position than they are already and threaten their existence, that’s his angle. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Accrington Chairman on 10:35 - May 16 with 1979 views | pointofblue |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:23 - May 16 by Chrisd |
Equally, why should Accrington put themselves in a difficult financial situation because ourselves and a few other clubs want to finish the season? Apparently, 60% of L1 sides don’t want to finish the season. Are you telling me their owners haven’t compared the cost of finishing the season to one that is just concluded like L2? |
A report in the Bristol Telegraph states eleven clubs want to finish the season so less than 60% do. | |
| |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:38 - May 16 with 1972 views | Herbivore |
| Accrington Chairman on 09:46 - May 16 by tractorboy1978 |
We are looking at season ticket refunds alone in the region of £750k if this season doesn't complete. Whereas Accrington are looking at around £75k. That's before even thinking about variations in corporate/shirt sponsorships etc. [Post edited 16 May 2020 9:57]
|
I'm not expecting the club to refund season tickets if the season is cancelled. |  |
| |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:39 - May 16 with 1969 views | Chrisd |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:35 - May 16 by pointofblue |
A report in the Bristol Telegraph states eleven clubs want to finish the season so less than 60% do. |
I got that 60% from listening to reports after yesterday’s L1 meeting. So could be wrong. | |
| |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:41 - May 16 with 1960 views | pointofblue |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:39 - May 16 by Chrisd |
I got that 60% from listening to reports after yesterday’s L1 meeting. So could be wrong. |
I think the starting belief was Fleetwood, Town, Posh, Pompey, Oxford and Sunderland were the only six who wanted to finish so it seems to be changing all the time. | |
| |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:43 - May 16 with 1950 views | tractorboy1978 |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:38 - May 16 by Herbivore |
I'm not expecting the club to refund season tickets if the season is cancelled. |
Legally I have no idea where the club stand. Not offering would be pretty poor PR though and the club has to budget for that. If people choose not to take it then fair enough. [Post edited 16 May 2020 10:44]
| | | |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:44 - May 16 with 1947 views | itfcjoe |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:34 - May 16 by pointofblue |
I think the difference is, whilst there is no doubt the six will lose money, they won’t go out of business over it. If Accrington are ordered to restart the season then they won’t be able to pay the rates. giant_ullaa said something to me when I was pointing out Stuart Webber’s probable hypocrisy earlier in the week - at least, for all his faults, we do have a benefactor who can sustain the club through this. Many don’t.
The one thing which needs clarity is who supports the clubs through loss of earnings. Will their be further Premier League remuneration? Will Sky let teams keep he cash? Will the repayment season ticket costs and sponsorship deals have to forked out by the clubs?
If we weren’t so awful for so long then we’d be sitting in the top two and would now doubt be far less concerned about the season restarting if PPG, weighted or otherwise, came into play. We brought this on ourselves and those inside the club have to accept the position we’re in.
Saying that my position has always been the season needs to finish. In all likelihood 2020/2021 is going to be disrupted by Covid-19 at some point anyway so why not make sure one season is completed rather than two which are interrupted? |
Not all the 6 clubs have a benefactor, and that's not really a fair reason.
MacAnthoney thinks Posh will lose £400k (and a potential promotion), Holt thinks Accrington will lose £150k.
It's not the big clubs fault that £150k will put them out of business, and it is up to the authroities to help with that.
Realistically Accrington are a non league club punching above their weight, and whilst I'd never want any club to go bust, and agree they need help and will hopefully get it - I don't see why their losses are more important than other teams making losses | |
| |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:52 - May 16 with 1914 views | Chrisd |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:44 - May 16 by itfcjoe |
Not all the 6 clubs have a benefactor, and that's not really a fair reason.
MacAnthoney thinks Posh will lose £400k (and a potential promotion), Holt thinks Accrington will lose £150k.
It's not the big clubs fault that £150k will put them out of business, and it is up to the authroities to help with that.
Realistically Accrington are a non league club punching above their weight, and whilst I'd never want any club to go bust, and agree they need help and will hopefully get it - I don't see why their losses are more important than other teams making losses |
6 teams losses from a league of 23 clubs? It’s all relative to their own situations and finances. You could argue there are a few L1 clubs currently that are L2 in structure, why should they be bullied out of existence because they are punching above their weight? [Post edited 16 May 2020 10:55]
| |
| |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:53 - May 16 with 1908 views | pointofblue |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:44 - May 16 by itfcjoe |
Not all the 6 clubs have a benefactor, and that's not really a fair reason.
MacAnthoney thinks Posh will lose £400k (and a potential promotion), Holt thinks Accrington will lose £150k.
It's not the big clubs fault that £150k will put them out of business, and it is up to the authroities to help with that.
Realistically Accrington are a non league club punching above their weight, and whilst I'd never want any club to go bust, and agree they need help and will hopefully get it - I don't see why their losses are more important than other teams making losses |
The benefactor point is true, and if it’s extended to the reported eleven and would be even more the case. But they do have relatively strong fan bases and good support in the local area; at least the named six do.
Isn’t 150k the cost of the Covid-19 tests alone? Even MacAnthony says he thinks continuing the season will cost around 500k, albeit with Accrington it will no doubt be less than that due to lower wages.
Whilst I understand your point there is a difference to clubs covering losses and being able to survive and clubs covering losses and going bankrupt in the process. As a collective the clubs punching above their weight should be supported and applauded rather than being tough tough though I admit it’d help if Andy Holt wasn’t quite so blind in one eye and holier than thought over the whole situation. | |
| |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:59 - May 16 with 1879 views | itfcjoe |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:53 - May 16 by pointofblue |
The benefactor point is true, and if it’s extended to the reported eleven and would be even more the case. But they do have relatively strong fan bases and good support in the local area; at least the named six do.
Isn’t 150k the cost of the Covid-19 tests alone? Even MacAnthony says he thinks continuing the season will cost around 500k, albeit with Accrington it will no doubt be less than that due to lower wages.
Whilst I understand your point there is a difference to clubs covering losses and being able to survive and clubs covering losses and going bankrupt in the process. As a collective the clubs punching above their weight should be supported and applauded rather than being tough tough though I admit it’d help if Andy Holt wasn’t quite so blind in one eye and holier than thought over the whole situation. |
Basically Accrington are all on furlough and Holt is happy to leave them there until they can start getting money in through the gates, which is next season potentially. If they can't get money through the gates then their budget will be slashed to suit and they will be paying players part time to play for them.
That's a million miles away from where we and other clubs are.
Even if EFL pay for the tests and the cleaning at £150k, he still has to bring players back off furlough and start playing them.
Many clubs in this league are too big to be mothballed for a few months, that isn't their fault in the same way it isn't in wider industry | |
| |
| Accrington Chairman on 11:00 - May 16 with 1877 views | Kropotkin123 |
Trying to be objective here.
Promotion
Coventry are five points clear with a game in hand over their top-six rivals and have been in good form. I think they are fine going up automatically. That leaves 2 places and the top from 2-9 anyone could have realistically got promoted.
I propose a Bracket play-off system. An upper and lower bracket system gives the chance for a team in the upper bracket to lose one game, and still get promoted. This reflects their current advantage.
So the upper bracket would be positions 2-5 and lower bracket would be positions 6-9
Round 1
Game A: 2v5
Game B: 3v4
------------------
Game C: 6v9
Game D: 7v8
- The winner of Game A and B play off for promotion slot 1
- The winner of Game C and D will play the loser of Game A and B
- The loser of Game C and Game D are out
- The loser of Game A and B are relegated to the lower bracket
Round 2
Game E: Game A winner v Game B winner
--------------------------------------------------------
Game F: Game A Loser v Game C winner
Game G: Game B Loser v Game D winner
- The winner of Game E is promoted as Upper bracket winner
- The winner of Game F and G play each other
- The loser of Game E are through to the final of the lower Bracket
- The loser of game F and G are eliminated.
Round 3
Game H: Game F winner v Game G winner
- The winner of Game H through to lower bracket final
- The loser of Game H eliminated
Round 4
Game I: Game H winner v Game E loser
- The winner is promoted as lower bracket winner
- The loser is eliminated
Relegation
Bolton and Southend are realistically relegated.
I propose a bracket system for 19-21
Round 1
Game A: 19v20
- The winner is safe
- The loser falls into the lower bracket
Round 2
Game B: Game A loser v 21
- The winner is safe
- The Loser is relegated
Departing Thoughts
With these brackets, there is a clear sense of reward for where you currently are. A team like Rotherham can be promoted if they win two in a row, they also get a second chance.
A team like Doncaster would have to win 4 games to win promotion and cannot lose
A team like Tranmere one shot at staying up, whereas a team like Rochdale have 2 shots at staying up.
You see these types of bracket systems in online gaming competitions and they work well. [Post edited 16 May 2020 11:02]
|  |
| |
| Accrington Chairman on 11:02 - May 16 with 1860 views | Ely_Blue |
| Accrington Chairman on 10:52 - May 16 by Chrisd |
6 teams losses from a league of 23 clubs? It’s all relative to their own situations and finances. You could argue there are a few L1 clubs currently that are L2 in structure, why should they be bullied out of existence because they are punching above their weight? [Post edited 16 May 2020 10:55]
|
But likewise why should clubs who are punching below their weight be bullied by the smaller clubs? Surely the only ones who probably don’t care are the ones who will always be perfect L1 clubs and would be punching above their weight if they went to the championship (people like Luton etc) |  |
| |
| Accrington Chairman on 13:11 - May 16 with 1591 views | patrickswell |
| Accrington Chairman on 09:46 - May 16 by tractorboy1978 |
We are looking at season ticket refunds alone in the region of £750k if this season doesn't complete. Whereas Accrington are looking at around £75k. That's before even thinking about variations in corporate/shirt sponsorships etc. [Post edited 16 May 2020 9:57]
|
Surely Accrington must have 75 grand still kicking about given how much cash their benefactor, Paul Hurst, bestowed on them. [Post edited 16 May 2020 13:12]
|  | | |
| Accrington Chairman on 13:49 - May 16 with 1502 views | ronnyd |
| Accrington Chairman on 13:11 - May 16 by patrickswell |
Surely Accrington must have 75 grand still kicking about given how much cash their benefactor, Paul Hurst, bestowed on them. [Post edited 16 May 2020 13:12]
|
Think that's all been spent on ground improvements. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
