Athletic Article: League One and Two Seasons to be abandoned next week

[AdamStag]

I wouldn't be raging. In 09-10 we thought we were going down after Chester got booted out of the Conf and we lost 6 points, whereas Gateshead lost 0. Our club and fans took it on the chin. We had enough other games to get the points and didn't.

Tranmere are in the bottom 3 on merit, just like Swindon, Crewe and Plymouth are in the top 3 on merit. It ain't perfect but those teams deserve to go up more then other teams in L2 and Tranmere deserve to go down more then other teams in L1.

They should stop whining and get on with it.

I wholeheartedly agree.

It’s a rough deal for tranmere but they’re in the relegation zone for a purpose, they’ve not been good enough, even PPG doesn’t save them.

Port vale aren’t moaning about missing out on the playoffs in league 2 for instance.

Bad deal it is, that there is no doubt, but the likes of tranmere and Peterborough aren’t doing themselves, or football any favours

 

[Greenacres]

6. We would have been awarded that game. Chester beat Gateshead twice. We would have stayed up with 3 extra points anyway.

Sorry but that is wrong, we were never going to be awarded any points whatsoever, Chester failed to fulfill a fixture by not turning up to play against us and the club folded...all their results were expunged from the records, it was as if they had never existed.

 

[Chris FGR]

Sorry but that is wrong, we were never going to be awarded any points whatsoever, Chester failed to fulfill a fixture by not turning up to play against us and the club folded...all their results were expunged from the records, it was as if they had never existed.

They didn't fold until after the league booted them out (bit like Bury). They were wound up in March. Fact is that we gained more points that season then Gateshead, in actual matches that were played, but through no fault of our own lost enough from Chester's expulsion to send us down. The clubs voted to kick them out (needed 75%) which cost us points on our relegation rivals. Did we moan/come up with silly rules or threaten legal action? No. And neither should Tranmere now.

Sometimes shit happens, take it on the chin and get on with it.

 

[valefan16]

But does a side that’s currently 7th with their run in against many of the top 10 and potential to drop down the table deserve to go up in place of Tranmere who are pushing hard to stay up? I think there has to be some common sense.

Ultimately Vale and Bradford and Peterborough haven’t lost anything, we’ve missed the chance to go up but are no worse off by the situation whereas Tranmere would be worse off as they’d be relegated with the financial impact that may have.

If there are play offs they should have a footballing chance to stay up. I feel for them in this, I feel this is much different to Peterborough for example.

 

[dannyc5]

But does a side that’s currently 7th with their run in against many of the top 10 and potential to drop down the table deserve to go up in place of Tranmere who are pushing hard to stay up? I think there has to be some common sense.

Ultimately Vale and Bradford and Peterborough haven’t lost anything, we’ve missed the chance to go up but are no worse off by the situation whereas Tranmere would be worse off as they’d be relegated with the financial impact that may have.

If there are play offs they should have a footballing chance to stay up. I feel for them in this, I feel this is much different to Peterborough for example.

But Tranmere want to stay up without a ball being kicked..... They have been in the bottom 3 ALL season, and are trying to stay up on a technicality. Give me a sensible solution that involves them earning their spot in the League, and I will listen to it. But not the nonsense Palios is spouting.

On a side note, do people realise if their amendment is accepted, that will then be the framework used for any future early stoppage? So hypothetically, there could be, for example, a 26 team League 2 and 28 team League 1 for a season. Absolutely nonsensical. I can’t believe people are wanting to write this amendment into the footballing rule book. An amendment we would have to abide by in, say, 50 years time when we have to cut a season short. An amendment that was raised in order to benefit 1 team, put forward in desperation by their chairman. The Tranmere, as it may become known.

 

[WhiteRussian]

If you include Tranmere in the league 2 playoffs, you are fundamentally changing the structure of the league. Completing the league with PPG and than having the normal positioned teams from league 2 playing off is not.

You either void the league or PPG. Southend aren't mathematically relegated either so they have a right to complain despite looking dead and buried. Many teams aren't mathematically promoted, take Harrogate, why should they lose out when they could easily overhall Barrow.

So the league is applying PPG and Tranmere lose out. That's life in Corona British football.

I don't think playing on now is really that fair either. How many teams are the same as they were 3 months ago player wise, form wise or even fitness wise. I'd really rather everything was voided but then that wouldn't be fair in the top teams in the leagues.

There is no good way.

 

[dannyc5]

If you include Tranmere in the league 2 playoffs, you are fundamentally changing the structure of the league. Completing the league with PPG and than having the normal positioned teams from league 2 playing off is not.

You either void the league or PPG. Southend aren't mathematically relegated either so they have a right to complain despite looking dead and buried. Many teams aren't mathematically promoted, take Harrogate, why should they lose out when they could easily overhall Barrow.

So the league is applying PPG and Tranmere lose out. That's life in Corona British football.

I don't think playing on now is really that fair either. How many teams are the same as they were 3 months ago player wise, form wise or even fitness wise. I'd really rather everything was voided but then that wouldn't be fair in the top teams in the leagues.

There is no good way.

Absolutely spot on. PPG is the least unfair way, IMO. And hopefully it’s written into the rule book in case of this situation happening again.

 

[AdamStag]

Absolutely spot on. PPG is the least unfair way, IMO. And hopefully it’s written into the rule book in case of this situation happening again.

You’re right - PPG is fair, writing off the season is a ridiculous idea so late in the season.

So if Peterborough and port vale miss out on playoffs in their respective leagues but also tranmere go down then that’s how it is. It’s got to be the same rule for everyone.

Those who want to change the structure of the playoffs for their own selfish needs isn’t acceptable.

 

[valefan16]

You’re right - PPG is fair, writing off the season is a ridiculous idea so late in the season.

So if Peterborough and port vale miss out on playoffs in their respective leagues but also tranmere go down then that’s how it is. It’s got to be the same rule for everyone.

Those who want to change the structure of the playoffs for their own selfish needs isn’t acceptable.

We’ve accepted our fate and I’m arguing that Tranmere should have a footballing chance, not the Vale or Posh as we don’t “lose” anything.

It’s ok saying we shouldn’t change this and that but we are whatever way we do it. A team 7th now could be mid table by game 46, Newport the other season for example.

Just do think Tranmere have a point although I’m not saying this rule which keeps them up regardless is ideal, I’m saying bring a footballing solution into the equation.

 

[Boletus Edulis]

Why not have a one off relegation decider between Tranmere and Wimbledon?

Why not have a one off relegation decider between Tranmere and Stevenage?

 

[TimeyWimey]

Why not just expel Tranmere from the league for being dicks?

 

[Camborne Gills]

Why not just expel Tranmere from the league for being dicks?

If you could throw out all the teams that have been dicks during this crisis, you might end up with Torquay being in L1

 

[Devon_Lad]

If you could throw out all the teams that have been dicks during this crisis, you might end up with Torquay being in L1

If you were throwing teams out for being dicks then not sure how a club full of dicks would somehow end up in the league

 

[AdamStag]

Why not have a one off relegation decider between Tranmere and Stevenage?

Agreed, have it at Stevenage so you can have all their fans while maintaining social distancing.

 

[Huntsman94]

But Tranmere want to stay up without a ball being kicked..... They have been in the bottom 3 ALL season, and are trying to stay up on a technicality. Give me a sensible solution that involves them earning their spot in the League, and I will listen to it. But not the nonsense Palios is spouting.

On a side note, do people realise if their amendment is accepted, that will then be the framework used for any future early stoppage? So hypothetically, there could be, for example, a 26 team League 2 and 28 team League 1 for a season. Absolutely nonsensical. I can’t believe people are wanting to write this amendment into the footballing rule book. An amendment we would have to abide by in, say, 50 years time when we have to cut a season short. An amendment that was raised in order to benefit 1 team, put forward in desperation by their chairman. The Tranmere, as it may become known.

Sorry to burst your bubble but we haven't. We dropped into the bottom 3 in the Christmas/New Year period.

What this global pandemic has now done is turn a whole host of fans of other clubs against us for fighting our corner. Aside from the odd club, there is no one on our side and we're going to be the club most shafted with PPG. We're going to go down by 0.04 points. Everyone talks about fairness but the fairness in that given the circumstances is anything but.

I don't blame our Owners for fighting like they have and I'm sure you'd hope your owners would do the same if you were in our situation. Now whilst I have come to terms that relegation is the most likely outcome for us, seeing fans of other clubs hack us off for not going down without a fight, with some even accusing us of ruining other clubs financially due to how long this has all taken, is plain wrong. Especially given the circumstances surrounding our situation.

 

[Huntsman94]

We’ve accepted our fate and I’m arguing that Tranmere should have a footballing chance, not the Vale or Posh as we don’t “lose” anything.

It’s ok saying we shouldn’t change this and that but we are whatever way we do it. A team 7th now could be mid table by game 46, Newport the other season for example.

Just do think Tranmere have a point although I’m not saying this rule which keeps them up regardless is ideal, I’m saying bring a footballing solution into the equation.

The thing that frustrates me is not being given the footballing chance in one way or another yet in League Two, they've voted to end the season, whilst those same clubs that voted to end the season will then play off to see who takes our spot.

I think any proposal change is near on impossible mainly because the EFL is run by a load of busy *****. If the clubs could decide ourselves then this would have been sorted weeks ago. What we're relying on is the good faith of Owners of other clubs and whilst I think the vast majority would keep us up (Forest Green aside), we all know that's not going to be enough.

 

[Indian Dan]

Fuck me sideways. Why do you lot keep banging on about the possible L2 PO winner will be the club that replaces you? That’s what’s pissing people off.

If there were no POs and only the top 3 in L2 got promoted, you’d still get relegated. Swindon, Creŵe and Plymouth replace Tranmere, Southend and Bolton. It’s that simple.

Promoted clubs have never, ever, ever, ever replaced specific clubs that get relegated. Bury aside, it’s 4 replacing 4.

 

[Si Robin]

The thing that frustrates me is not being given the footballing chance in one way or another yet in League Two, they've voted to end the season, whilst those same clubs that voted to end the season will then play off to see who takes our spot.

I think any proposal change is near on impossible mainly because the EFL is run by a load of busy *****. If the clubs could decide ourselves then this would have been sorted weeks ago. What we're relying on is the good faith of Owners of other clubs and whilst I think the vast majority would keep us up (Forest Green aside), we all know that's not going to be enough.

Why do you think the vast majority would keep Tranmere up?

It is unfair on Tranmere, anyone can see that, but there does seem to be an implication (there certainly was earlier in this thread) that Tranmere were definitely going to get out of trouble because they'd won 3 games in a row. There seems to be no suggestion at all that those 3 games were a blip in itself.

As one of the teams that benefits from Tranmere going down, I fully accept that I am biased on this matter. However, why should Tranmere get the benefit of the doubt and no-one else?

I've said it a few times already, there is no correct or 100% fair way to settle matters. I absolutely would be raging if my club were in Tranmere's shoes and not likely to benefit like I would, but I'd also accept that other clubs' fans are going to hate us for it.

 

[Huntsman94]

Fuck me sideways. Why do you lot keep banging on about the possible L2 PO winner will be the club that replaces you? That’s what’s pissing people off.

If there were no POs and only the top 3 in L2 got promoted, you’d still get relegated. Swindon, Creŵe and Plymouth replace Tranmere, Southend and Bolton. It’s that simple.

Promoted clubs have never, ever, ever, ever replaced specific clubs that get relegated. Bury aside, it’s 4 replacing 4.

I don't think it's pissing everyone off. Only you who has some gripe on it. What happens in Scotland? What happens in Germany? The playoff winner goes into a playoff against the side highest ranked of the bottom clubs in the division above.

Regardless of that, clubs in the division below will have the right to earn their place in League One through footballing reasons whereas teams in the relegation zones simply have to accept their fate. All of this happening whilst League Two voted for no relegation from their league but fully expect 4 to go up from that division and in doing so, relegate the teams from League One.

 

[Indian Dan]

But that’s not how it works here, is it. We’re not Germany or Scotland - what on earth has that got to do with anything.

We, L2, don’t relegate teams from L1, the teams in L1 do that by being shite and in the bottom 3. Your spouting nonsense.

The 3 teams promoted automatically from L2 have got there for footballing reasons, just as you have got in the bottom 3 for footballing reasons.

 

[Huntsman94]

Why do you think the vast majority would keep Tranmere up?

It is unfair on Tranmere, anyone can see that, but there does seem to be an implication (there certainly was earlier in this thread) that Tranmere were definitely going to get out of trouble because they'd won 3 games in a row. There seems to be no suggestion at all that those 3 games were a blip in itself.

As one of the teams that benefits from Tranmere going down, I fully accept that I am biased on this matter. However, why should Tranmere get the benefit of the doubt and no-one else?

I've said it a few times already, there is no correct or 100% fair way to settle matters. I absolutely would be raging if my club were in Tranmere's shoes and not likely to benefit like I would, but I'd also accept that other clubs' fans are going to hate us for it.

Of the Owners that I've heard from League One that have commented on our situation, Accrington, Peterborough, Sunderland and Rotherham have all said they'd vote to keep us up. I think you'd just rely on common sense. AFC Wimbledon were 7 points off safety this time last season and stayed up so you'd think they would sympathise with us etc...

There is no guarantee we'd stay up but no guarantee we'd go down either. Weirdly if we played our game in hand against Rochdale and won then we'd probably stay up on PPG if that method is decided on. So a waterlogged pitch could relegate us! (Ironic I know given our pitch issues this season and all hypothetical of course as no guarantee we'd win that game!)

If you're asking why we should get the benefit over Bolton and Southend I'd say it's pure common sense. Everyone knows that those two teams were all but relegated but our status is very different in comparison.

Like I said above I think we're down mainly because we're the easiest option to go with. But it's not fair as has been mentioned previously. I read that PPG was going to give a total of 3.4 points out for Coventry v Wycombe... Out of interest does anyone know how the vote works? There are all of those proposals on the table but can you only vote for one? Or does each club vote on each proposal with the proposal with the highest percentage winning?

 

[Huntsman94]

But that’s not how it works here, is it. We’re not Germany or Scotland - what on earth has that got to do with anything.

We, L2, don’t relegate teams from L1, the teams in L1 do that by being shite and in the bottom 3. Your spouting nonsense

You asked what the reasoning was for assuming it and I gave you a logical answer.

As for spouting nonsense. You're there saying "our vote has nothing to do with you" yet fully believe we should get relegated. But if we harp on about no relegation from our league you'd go up in outrage at the thought as you previously have.

Ok I think I'm up to speed.

 

[Indian Dan]

I see you, and other Tranmere fans, have failed to explain how you think you, specifically, would be replaced by the L2 PO winner.

If the POs don’t take place and Cheltenham are promoted using ppg, I take it you’d have no objection to that.

 

[Luke Imp]

Why do you think the vast majority would keep Tranmere up?

It is unfair on Tranmere, anyone can see that, but there does seem to be an implication (there certainly was earlier in this thread) that Tranmere were definitely going to get out of trouble because they'd won 3 games in a row. There seems to be no suggestion at all that those 3 games were a blip in itself.

As one of the teams that benefits from Tranmere going down, I fully accept that I am biased on this matter. However, why should Tranmere get the benefit of the doubt and no-one else?

I've said it a few times already, there is no correct or 100% fair way to settle matters. I absolutely would be raging if my club were in Tranmere's shoes and not likely to benefit like I would, but I'd also accept that other clubs' fans are going to hate us for it.

This kinda sums up my feelings on the Tranmere situation as well. I understand their want to try and prove they can stay up by playing on, but their proposals are based on some fairly questionable points.

The main points of discussion from their end are:

1) We've won three in a row
2) We have a game in hand
3) We play the four sides above us in our next fixtures

But:

1) Everyone has a decent run of form through a season and it invariably lasts a shorter period of time for clubs at the bottom so there's no guarantee it would continue. Form over 34/35 games holds more water than form over 3 games.

2) Winning the game in hand doesn't change anything and they'd still be in the bottom three unless they can swing 9 goals, which is unlikely.

3) But after that they have an horrendous final 5 games. It's arguable that AFCW actually have an easier run in than Tranmere. Same for Rochdale as well. Accrington are probably the first team who have a tougher run-in.

I don't blame Tranmere for doing what they're trying to do, not one bit. Most others would be doing the same and everyone has sympathy for Tranmere. I've still seen no reason why they've opted to do the calculation over 3 years and not 5, 8 or 10? That's not a dig, I just see don't see why they'd apply that margin for error average over a small period of time unless it's better for them within that time frame.

The flaw in the margin for error calculation they're proposing, according to our end, is that you can't apply the same margin for error across a whole division as they're doing. The margin for error is different for teams at the top of the league and those at the bottom so as a full league, it actually makes their proposal less accurate than PPG.

 

[Trapdoor]

The Ppg calculations make no sense currently as I said at the start of this debacle because teams are being awarded more than 3 points per game.

I wouldn't mind ppg if it actually produced results which are physically possible. At the moment teams are being promoted and demoted based on impossible results.

 

[Indian Dan]

Personally, if each team had played the exact same number of games then the tables should have stood as they are.

Ppg is attempting to even things out. But 35 odd games is enough not to make a complete mockery of it.

 

[Chris FGR]

The Ppg calculations make no sense currently as I said at the start of this debacle because teams are being awarded more than 3 points per game.

I wouldn't mind ppg if it actually produced results which are physically possible. At the moment teams are being promoted and demoted based on impossible results.

More then 3 points a game?

 

[Huntsman94]

More then 3 points a game?

Yep. PPG is giving Coventry 1.91 points for their game at home to Wycombe whilst Wycombe are receiving 1.73 points so a total of 3.64 points awarded for one fixture. Also worth noting that Wycombe have won less away games than we have this season so how is PPG giving them 1.73 away at the league leaders?

 

[Chris FGR]

Isn't it an average of 1.91/1.73 ppg over 10 games rather then specifically for that one?

Are there not games that make up less then 3 points as well?

 

[Indian Dan]

Don’t let the truth get in the way of a squirm!