Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
EFL Chairman: Halting Season Last Resort
Monday, 28th Sep 2020 19:06

EFL chairman Rick Parry says halting the League One and Two seasons is the last resort, despite not expecting fans to be back in stadia until March.

Last week, Government the planned October return was scrapped following the rise in Covid-19 cases and Parry now doesn’t expect crowds to be at Portman Road and other grounds for another six months.

However, he played down the suggestion that the season might be brought to an early end.

“I’m not saying that dialogue isn’t happening within clubs or amongst clubs but, from our perspective, it’s absolutely the last resort,” he told Radio Five Live.

“We need League One and League Two to remain relevant - if we go into hibernation, we might not come out of it, quite frankly.

“League One and League Two matter, they’re the heart of their communities, we need them playing football and coming out of this stronger.”

He admitted the decision to pause the return of supporters was a big blow with a number of pilot events with 1,000 fans present having taken place prior to last week's developments. Town had been given the go-ahead for 1,000 supporters to attend Saturday's game against Rochdale.

“Clearly we’re incredibly disappointed,” he said. “We’ve been carrying out pilots, which were immensely successful last weekend, so in a sense the only evidence the government had to consider were the pilot projects and they appear to have ignored that evidence.

“Clearly we recognise that infection rates are rising, the virus is a huge challenge for everybody.


“We get that health and safety must come first but everybody was gearing up for a gradual return in October.

“We really thought we could be an example to the country and show how to bring people into top-class entertainment safely, sensibly and securely.

“It’s not happening, it’s probably now going to be March, so we’ll have to pick ourselves up, dust ourselves down and find some money.”

Regarding the financial impact, Parry continued: “The challenge for us is that, certainly at League One and League Two level, more than 30 per cent of the revenues come from gate receipts.

“We’re much less dependent on TV revenues than the Premier League or even the Championship.

“So it’s going to be really tough. Clubs have been really responsible, they’ve introduced salary caps at that level and are trying to control the costs.

“They’re doing their bit but, without an input, injection or rescue package then it’s going to be really tough to get through this season and, frankly, getting through this season, keeping clubs alive and the competition alive is a huge priority for us.”

He added: “We’ve consistently said that we need up to £250 million - that figure hasn’t changed, we’ve been saying it since May.

“To be honest, that was based on the losses from last season and the assumption we’d play the whole of this season without crowds, which we thought was pessimistic at the time.

“So we’re not saying we now have to recalculate and come up with a completely different figure, it just means we’ll be getting onto the upper end of that figure.

“It’s something we’ve been working night and day on, we’re in dialogue with the Premier League, which is constructive, but we’re exploring other sources as well.

“It might take a package of different measures, we’re still hopeful we can get some support from the government.

“The Department of Culture, Media and Sport have been incredibly helpful to us throughout the end of last season and this season.

“So we remain confident that we will have a package but we do need specifics. Clubs need answers and reassurance very, very soon. We’re talking not very many weeks before we know where we’re heading.

“Some will run into difficulty sooner than others, they’re all different with different resources.

“Some will run into problems in October, some in November, some will be okay until March, but many of them would absolutely have difficulty in finishing the season.

“I don’t want to overplay it or be too sensationalist about it as we’re doing our utmost to make sure everybody comes through it if we can.

“But some are on the brink, some would have been on the brink without Covid. We’ve kept all of them intact so far but, yes, absolutely, some will be very worried.

“Of course there’s a prospect that, if we can’t put a package in place, some will go to the wall.”

Over the weekend, Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden said he hoped the Premier League, whose clubs are set to meet on Tuesday, would agree a deal which would help out League One and Two clubs this week, however that timescale is now thought to be ambitious.


Photo: Matchday Images



Please report offensive, libellous or inappropriate posts by using the links provided.



Westy added 21:25 - Sep 28
It should have been last resort last season too. With only eight games remaining for most Clubs (two games a week for four weeks). It was obvious when the decision was made to cut short last season that this virus was going to be with us for a long time. As such, they should have accounted for the risk to this season as well. Football will not survive two successive incomplete seasons. Who would buy a season ticket again ?
4

ArnieM added 21:41 - Sep 28
It might well be a “last resort”, but given that the majority of these Clubs can only survive if fans are allowed in, means they will no5 be able to fulfil the fixtures this seas9n. Nothing has changed from the easing why these clubs couldn't fulfil last season!
For example, I'd say just their ability to perform meet the cost of the pre match Covid testing will In itself be prohibitive to them meeting their league games.


The EFL and frankly the PL need to pull together to save the game in this Country . It isn't all about the PL!
1

Pencilpete added 21:48 - Sep 28
Let's holt the season now and work the table out on points per game like last season and we can have a Mickey mouse promotion like Coventry and Rotherham did
0

Taricco_Fan added 21:53 - Sep 28
Get the fans back in at a reduced capacity and get on with it. The risk to fans seated in a stadium in the fresh air is absolutely minimal.
13

Saxonblue74 added 22:03 - Sep 28
In comparison to the premier league the EFL needs a very small amount of money to operate. It's time for Sky to put their hands in their pockets to help out financially and cover lots more EFL football. This would help clubs financially and also offer fans greater access to games. The game of football has made Sky incredibly wealthy, time to give something back.
11

Pendejo added 22:14 - Sep 28
Can't have 1,000 socially spaced fans in a stadium, but can still have 300 crushed together on an aeroplane.
13

Saxonblue74 added 22:19 - Sep 28
I'm not sure how much it costs to stage a home game for 1000 spectators but surely it doesn't make much profit....if any?
2

runningout added 22:46 - Sep 28
Premier league clubs don't really care of plight of lower leagues. Can't blame them as it gives them a sense of security if clubs die out. Football maybe the lifeblood of communities but we can't expect bail outs when priority should come before football clubs. ITFC are on their last legs like so many. It's going to be a sad time
0

Edmundo added 23:16 - Sep 28
Football is our national game. Thousands of players go unsigned from development squads every year, but become good players, grassroot coaches. This is about more than the 11 v 11 in the stadium each week.
Government and suits in high places cannot and will not see that: it is beyond their 5 year perspectives.
So is this disaster. More will die of poverty and suicide in future years than die of Covid-19 now. They have no perspective and fewer ideas about how to really look after a nation.
2

Bert added 23:35 - Sep 28
Whatever happens it can never be the case again that clubs vote to carry on or not on the basis of where they are in the league. Decision making within Government and by the football authorities remains confused, piecemeal and arbitrary.Add to that the regional nature of the virus making it reasonably safe in our area but not in others and we have a perfect storm. Decisions based on the science and understanding of the virus is one thing but where does good judgement and common sense come into the mix ?
2

Ipswichtown4life added 01:33 - Sep 29
Instead of them cardboard cut outs, they are gonna use people's money to fill the stadiums with virtual screenings, only way i can see the clubs making any money out of it. Their guess in march is as good as anyone's .... I don't think this virus is going away any time soon
1

bobble added 03:17 - Sep 29
poor government can cause problems and deaths to last so much longer than necessary.
0

AndrewPC added 06:48 - Sep 29
The policy decisions of the Govt regarding Covid have been mis-guided , disproportionate to the problem and catastrophic for the economy and growth.

Of those that get "infected" over 95% are never ill or experience only mild flu-like symptoms.
Coronaviruses have been around probably for millenia.

Public health policy in the past has never required lockdowns and social distancing as regards the flu - which is seasonal every year and kills more people that Covid has.

Why is this important ?

Because people in roles of authority within the UK need to start rejecting this government's policies and their implementation because they are wrong, extremely damaging and if not halted quickly will lead to economic and political meltdown.

This applies to those in football as well.

Mr Parry and his ilk seem to adopt an entirely supine approach to the situation as if it is inevitable, and expect we should roll over and passively accept the government's hopeless, punitive and potentially deadly impact on the EFL as a going professional sport.

If the stance remains that there are no crowds back until March, this is already the financial death knell for a majority of clubes in Leagues 1 and 2.

Surely it is not beyond the wit and determination of the owners of these clubs to come together to determine a joint policy which would include either suing the government for egregious policy errors and damages, or else mount a concerted campaign to the political instances (local and national) that they MUST change their approach immediately and allow crowds back in on a staged basis /

The infections rates are nearly all fictitious as the testing renders very high numbers of "false positives" and anyway 99.8% of people "infected" neither die nor are ill.

WAKE UP FOLKS> SMELL THE COFFEE.

Moaning and resignation are a recipe for destruction. Start campaigning and lets also get Mr. Parry and his cohorts to earn their corn because they are not doing so presently.

Maybe even our clever businessman owner Mr Evans could take a lead here ?

-10

Saxonblue74 added 07:33 - Sep 29
Andrew, it's a little concerning that you consider Covid 19 as having a potentially "deadly impact" on the EFL but not the general population. Maybe the very conservative 0.2% estimate of fatalities you speak of may be considered insignificant by yourself. Perhaps you should have your "lives V Football" debate with somebody who has suffered at the hands of this virus.
6

Ipswichbusiness added 07:42 - Sep 29
AndrewPC; suing the Government is unlikely to be a viable option as the regulations have been introduced by statute.

The virus discriminates. If you are over 65 and/or have a pre-existing medical condition then the virus is really serious, potentially fatal.

However, if you are younger than that and have no such medical condition then any infection is likely to have no or mild symptoms. A professor of statistics was saying on the radio a few weeks ago that if you are 35 or younger and have no medical condition then your chances of dying of the virus are about the same as dying in a road accident.

It really ought to be possible to devise a set of regulations that allows, say, 10% capacity to attend in safety. I realise that there is a theoretical risk of low risk groups passing the virus on to high risk groups, “don't kill granny”, but it should be possible to manage the risk, “don't visit granny”.
4

Edmundo added 09:22 - Sep 29
Totally agree, Andrew and Ipswich Business.
The disproportionate response will be shown up in 2-3 months when more are dying of flu than Covid-19. Then what? We lock down every winter. or we start properly funding the NHS and making policies on healthcare that actually make sense, like not letting everyone fly on holiday just before the schools go back during a pandemic!
3

Europablue added 09:27 - Sep 29
Saxonblue74 it just isn't as simple as a case of lives Vs football. It lives Vs more younger lives and football.
AndrewPC You are totally right, the problem in the UK and the world in general is that there is no opposition to the corona panic. There needs to be some visible pushback against the position that we lockdown indefinately forever and worry about the damage we are doing to society and lives we are condeming to death and poverty in the future for an unclear current gain. Business leader are usually the ones who have more realistic views on life, so you'd hope that the league and the owners would express their concerns and opposition.
The one thing that might come out of this is political change. It is all part of the same movement that brought about Brexit, but Boris seems oblivious to the cultural undercurents that swept him into power. We need a reformation to bring back personal freedom and responsibility and the trust in people to make their own risk assesments.
In terms of football. They should absolutely be pushing ahead with allowing fans back perhaps either banning risk groups or preferably allowing people in risk groups to make their own risk assesment on whether watching football or indeed seeing family is worth the risk.
0

Europablue added 09:34 - Sep 29
Edmundo, we don't get to start properly funding anything because we have allocated all our funds (fuelled by yet more debt) in a misguided attempt to save lives (or save political careers) and that will lead to worse healthcare and more deaths spread over years and potentially decades.
Football is a part of businesses that put money into the pot to be spent on healthcare, so paying people not to work is like losing money twice.
0

MrJase_79 added 09:36 - Sep 29
@AndrewPC - well said.
-2

NorthLondonBlue2 added 09:57 - Sep 29
So, aeroplanes, trains and the London Underground, all enclosed spaces with no fresh air = low risk

Footballs stadiums, all outdoors with plenty of ventilation = high risk

Got it.
7

Steve_ITFC_Sweden added 10:03 - Sep 29
If we could rely on people to be sensible and unselfish and observe "recommendations" rather than "restrictions" then probably we could fairly easily get back to limited crowds. It's a good point made that 300 people in an aircraft are more crowded together than 3000 in the fresh air in a 30,000-seater stadium. Unfortunately, however, a significant number of people do not respect the fears or circumstances of others. If you are young and fit then, no, you probably don't need to worry; but the person next to you who is trying to keep his/her distance may have an elderly relative who is very vulnerable. A bit more understanding and a little less disrespect all round would help. Finally, yes - time for the PL and Sky to pay back a little of the outrageous money that has been made in the higher echelons of the game. The money from the sale of just one player in the PL could probably mean the difference between survival and bankruptcy for not just one but several clubs in the lower leagues. There but for the grace of God ....
5

BangaloreBlues added 10:23 - Sep 29
With no financial support we will start to see clubs go out of business and that means Leagues One and Two will not be completed, end of.
The EFL might be dreaming, but I can see what's coming.
1

BangaloreBlues added 10:28 - Sep 29
@ Steve_ITFC_Sweden

You said:

"If we could rely on people to be sensible and unselfish and observe "recommendations" rather than "restrictions" then probably we could fairly easily get back to limited crowds..... Unfortunately, however, a significant number of people do not respect the fears or circumstances of others."

The government's Eat out to help out scheme has got to be largely responsible for these new outbreaks. Millions of people in small spaces with no masks on. But of course they blame "selfish people" and those that didn't "self isolate" for the recommended time.
It's time for people to wake up to what's really going on, and stop believing the crap the media tell us. They were always going to blame us for any outbreaks; the government is never wrong and would never take responsibility.
1

CLM1967 added 10:47 - Sep 29
£250 Million to help save Clubs futures, Yes Sky could help out with more coverage but equally when we read in the last week or so about the latest Premier League signing earning £600k per week a ridiculous £30 million per year couldn't these clubs be spending this money more wisely and help save our national game?
3

TexacoCup added 10:56 - Sep 29
A couple of points about ITFC
- We would need to have more than 9,000 attending every game before it became profitable (unless the plan is to refund ST holders for missed games).
- Are we and other clubs prepared to help other clubs further down the pyramid (Subury, Hadleigh, Stowmarket etc) in the same way we are expecting PL clubs to help us?
6


You need to login in order to post your comments

Blogs 295 bloggers

Ipswich Town Polls

About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© TWTD 1995-2024