So where does this leave us? | Page 4 | Vital Football

So where does this leave us?

chris who

Vital Football Hero
#61
As a reminder of just how frail many L1 clubs are at this time, consider Wycombe Wanderers - top of the table just a few months ago. Their owner has said that the club is now losing £350.000 a month and it`s losses would be £2.5M +

Owner Rob Couhig says that he`s informed all his non-football staff presently on furlough that their pay will be limited to that which is received from the furlough plan. He`s advised them to look for alternative employment once the Government scheme ends.
That sounds terrible for Wycombe might not matter much if they are placed 3rd or 23rd survival is the real issue here .Time some club chairman realized that.
 

madrid_gill

Vital Squad Member
#62
L2 used weighted PPG.

Unweighted would see Oxford in 3rd.
Weighted would see Wycombe (who were sinking like a stone) in 3rd.
Other way around, isn't it? Unless my understanding of weighted/unweighted is the wrong way around?

Weighted PPG (taking into account home and away records and remaining home/away games) would have Oxford on 75.91 vs Wycombe on 74.71

Unweighted (just PPG overall, regardless of home or away) would have Oxford on 75.43 vs Wycombe on 76.35
 

nibbles

Vital 1st Team Regular
#63
Other way around, isn't it? Unless my understanding of weighted/unweighted is the wrong way around?

Weighted PPG (taking into account home and away records and remaining home/away games) would have Oxford on 75.91 vs Wycombe on 74.71

Unweighted (just PPG overall, regardless of home or away) would have Oxford on 75.43 vs Wycombe on 76.35
You’re probably right. I remember doing the calculations and each team benefitting from one method over the other. I thought it was Wycombe who had more home games left.

Your understanding of weighted/unweighted is the same as mine.
 

chris who

Vital Football Hero
#66
Assuming you mean from our division, it would mean the EFL having to get the fixtures out incredibly quickly for that to happen....



Sorry, Chris ;)
What have the fixtures got to do with it?It seems we are likely to have play off's at some point. All I was saying is after all the fighting it would be rather ironic if the team that won them then went bust soon after.
 

madrid_gill

Vital Squad Member
#68
You’re probably right. I remember doing the calculations and each team benefitting from one method over the other. I thought it was Wycombe who had more home games left.

Your understanding of weighted/unweighted is the same as mine.
Wycombe have 4 home and 6 away left, Oxford 5 home and 4 away.

It's the unweighted scenario that favours Wycombe, as they've got a game in hand, are 1 point behind Oxford, and averaging 1.74pts per game, so that game in hand would be enough to see them overtake Oxford.
 

madrid_gill

Vital Squad Member
#69
What have the fixtures got to do with it?It seems we are likely to have play off's at some point. All I was saying is after all the fighting it would be rather ironic if the team that won them then went bust soon after.
You need to think in terms of different possible meanings of "go to the wall". In this particular case, think of a 'Wall that any team promoted to the Championship will be going to next season.
 

Lark

Vital 1st Team Regular
#71
PPG to work out final league table.

Top 2 go up. Next four playoff. That's only 3 games (semi is one leg) to manage. Highest placed teams are at home in semi. Team who has best GD from semi is at home in final. Winner goes up.

No relegation. Only winners no losers in terms of league.

Over next few years an extra team is relegated to balance the leagues. Although a few clubs may fold due to financial impact.

It's not perfect, no solution is, but this seems fairest.
If there was no relegation from League 1 then what would happen to the teams due to be promoted from League 2?
There will be promotion and relegation across the leagues, that has been decided already. It’s how you apply that which is the subject of all the discussions.
 

markinkent

Vital 1st Team Regular
#72
If there was no relegation from League 1 then what would happen to the teams due to be promoted from League 2?
There will be promotion and relegation across the leagues, that has been decided already. It’s how you apply that which is the subject of all the discussions.
Every league has promotion so you end up with too many in premier. Over next few years an extra team is relegated to balance it.


No solution is perfect we are looming for the least worst.
 

Lark

Vital 1st Team Regular
#73
I’ve just seen the Peterborough owner on Sky Sports News, very unhappy that it looks like League 1 will be decided by a “points per game fiasco.”
He hasn’t even furloughed his players, as he was told at the start of this by the EFL that the aim was to get back playing as soon as possible.
He made the point that the players will want to play as many will be unemployed by August, and they can play in June and July to try and gain new contracts at their clubs or elsewhere. He also stated that out of contract players are paid in July as well.
Tranmere Rovers have put their own new proposal forward, Ipswich Town have also put something forward, to be voted on next Tuesday.
 
Last edited:

chris who

Vital Football Hero
#75
If there was no relegation from League 1 then what would happen to the teams due to be promoted from League 2?
There will be promotion and relegation across the leagues, that has been decided already. It’s how you apply that which is the subject of all the discussions.
In theory you are spot on. But if the number of EFL clubs going bust is the same as or more than the number being relegated then no team will go down.That's why I think Tranmere and Stevenage will probably stay up regardless of the result of discussions.
 

Wayne.Kerr

Vital Champions League
#76
The EFL should take some leadership in this issue.
Declare 19/20 void and start again when it’s ok to do it.
Even if Gills were higher I’d still have the same opinion.
You cannot declare winners when no one has won.
Wholly agree but the fly in the ointment is the EFL. The same EFL that allowed Bury to go under without intervening some years before, ie box ticking fit for purpose rules when it was clear the new owner was not fit for purpose. There's no way the EFL is capable of taking leadership because, in reality, it doesn't exist. It's no more than a co-operative of the teams in the EFL or in effect three co-operatives.
 

alphabet_king

Vital 1st Team Regular
#77
The trouble is, Whitstable, in terms of the relegation battle you mention the two easy ones. Southend and Bolton were dead and buried, but who else goes down? Is it fair on Tranmere (currently in the last relegation spot) to relegate them when they're 3 points from safety with 10 games to play?

And at the other end, OK, Oxford are 3rd. But they're level on points with Portsmouth and Fleetwood, and a point ahead of Peterborough, Wycombe and Sunderland with anywhere between 8 and 10 games to go.

Without looking at the fixture list, it's quite possible that some teams will have already played most of the top teams and have (on paper) an easier run-in, while others might be in the top 6 but with a much harder run-in.

Given the doubts over whether next season could also end up being interrupted, my personal preference would be to just freeze everything as it is, and pick up where we left off whenever it's safe to do so. Although there I accept there's also the disadvantage that with players out of contract, by the time you go to restart some of the teams would be completely different with potentially a whole new squad of players.

If there's one thing that's sure, it's that there's no perfect solution that's going to suit everybody. So put it to the vote among the clubs, and go with the majority verdict. And then, most importantly, ensure there's some kind of rule in place for coming seasons stating exactly what will happen in the event of a similar shutdown some time in the future. Whatever's decided this time around, some clubs will complain. If the procedure to follow is written in the rules and clear to everyone before the season starts, they can have no complaints.
Its fairer to relegate them than to relegate anyone else. And i think thats the key here. Someone has to be relegated, so as someone said above, we have to pick the least unfair. You will not get a rssolution that EVERYONE is happy with. But ultimately tranmere cannot moan too much as they are in the relegation zone when the season ended, they did it to themselves.
 

nibbles

Vital 1st Team Regular
#78
Every time we’ve been relegated it’s been unfair (Forest and Wycombe trying against us when they were already relegated FFS!) so can’t see why Tranmere should be able to claim immunity on that basis.
I still haven’t forgiven them for Sean Flynn getting one of our players sent off in our first season in the Championship or Bas Savage scoring against us.
 

madrid_gill

Vital Squad Member
#80
Its fairer to relegate them than to relegate anyone else. And i think thats the key here. Someone has to be relegated, so as someone said above, we have to pick the least unfair. You will not get a rssolution that EVERYONE is happy with. But ultimately tranmere cannot moan too much as they are in the relegation zone when the season ended, they did it to themselves.
That's just it, though, they're not in the relegation zone when the season ended. They're in the relegation zone at a random point where due to world circumstances, the season had to be put on hold with 10 games to go. Their next 4 games were home to Lincoln, then away to Rochdale and AFC Wimbledon, then home to MK Dons. A winnable home game against a team with pretty much nothing to play for, and then 3 relegation 6-pointers against direct rivals. If the season had been cut off 2 weeks later, it could easily have been AFC Wimbledon or Rochdale in there instead.

I just don't see how you can relegate (or indeed promote) teams when they've not all played the same opponents. I know it's not the case here, but it's something that could potentially happen - you could have two teams battling to avoid relegation with 5 games to go. The team in the relegation zone has to play 5 teams from the bottom 8, and the team just above them still has to play all the top 5. Obviously there's still no guarantee the team with the easier run-in would pull clear. But it's not fair to relegate them based on the vagaries of the fixture computer, when they've put themselves in with a fighting chance having got their toughest matches out of the way.

It's like when the Premier League floated their idiotic idea to add a 39th game. Some poor sods would have to play Man City or Liverpool 3 times in a season, while others would get to play Villa or Watford 3 times. Everyone was up in arms about that because it was such a ridiculous idea. Admittedly it's true that that was motivated by money, whereas here it's a necessity due to the wider situation, but even so.
 
Last edited: