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

[Devon_Lad]

Here's a scenario. Brighton are in a position right now where they stay up on PPG or a void season. They've won 0 games in 2020. If the season restarted, it's highly likely that they'll go down on current form. They want no relegation if the season restarts so they can get another year of PL income. But they won't get that at all as the PL/EFL/FA have all said that's not possible. So they'd probably be in favour of the season being voided. A void season would cost them less than being relegated in the immediate short term, but in the long term it could cost them more depending on their future on-field performance and the future value of TV rights deals which will be renegotiated in the result of a voided season. Short term gain can easily become long term excruciating pain.

The percentages aren't miles off. There's 25% of the PL season remaining. There's 20% of the EFL season remaining. So that's how much in rebates will be paid before penalty clauses. And it's a staggering amount. No league has pandemic insurance either so they've not got any hope of protecting all income paid to them. A voided season would cause an immediate renegotiation in future broadcasting deals. A PPG season would be deemed as a completed season (whether you agree or disagree that it should) as the season hasn't been expunged and, yes there's a likelihood that broadcasters will want some money back if the PL and EFL season can't be concluded, but PPG would protect the TV deals for the next 2 years (PL/EFL Solidarity payments) and 4 years (EFL TV deal) unlike a void season. So the following years of a full TV deal would cover the loss of income caused by a PPG season if clubs cut their cloth accordingly. But the deals would be substantially reduced if you got your wish and the season would be voided.

I'm not saying PPG is perfect, costs will be incurred even if they go down that route, but over a long-term period, they'd be significantly less than voiding a season would cause.

Immediate loss of parachute money in the result of a void season would put the future of six Championship football clubs at grave risk. As much as I hate Stoke, I wouldn't want them to be crippled as a result of that. You'd be giving that PL promotion money to the bottom three, but the voided and renegotiated deal would mean they'd get less. And the prize money from FA Cup is chicken feed compared to the vast losses the English game faces should the league be voided at once.

You haven't presented anything to back up that a void season would benefit clubs. You're just hoping broadcasters can't charge clubs for not showing a significant portion of the season, which brings me to a point I've originally raised.

If you had an extension done on your house and you paid 100% of the money up front but only 75-80% of the work was undertaken. You'd want a refund, wouldn't you? That's the situation broadcasters are in now...

No it's not - They're paid for on a per game basis throughout the season as a whole. How are you trying to compare building work to a season? Each game broadcasted was finished - the matches didn't finish after 75 mins.

You really think BT and Sky are going to claim the previous matches already broadcasted back, despite clubs facing individual costs to accommodate? If they tried that every club would sue them for loss of earnings and every customer would sue them for 10 months worth of sport that apparently hasn't happened.

Your analysis is laughable, seriously. The entertainment has been broadcasted by the TV company and the entertainment received by the customer. They have no leg to stand on, their rights are broadcasting matches, nothing to do with a completion of a season. Christ.

 

[Indian Dan]

Are you being deliberately obtuse.

He’s saying that as 25% of the season would be voided then broadcasters will, rightly, as for 25% of their funding back

 

[Devon_Lad]

Are you being deliberately obtuse.

He’s saying that as 25% of the season would be voided then broadcasters will, rightly, as for 25% of their funding back

No, he's saying 100% of the money will be given back because 'the building isn't complete'

25% of the season will rightly, as I clearly said initially, be given back whether its voided or done on ppg. So no financial difference.

So now that's sorted - what's your next argument for ppg or finishing the season? You deserve it based on playing a different fixture list to someone else in the league?

 

[Devon_Lad]

So you’d be happy that even though Cheltenham have played a game less than Exeter that shouldn’t be taken into consideration.

What if the outcome was only the top 3 go up so yourselves and Cheltenham both miss out?

That's why I said base ppg off when we both played the same amount of games (36)?

I dont want anyone to go up because nobody has earnt it, as the table shows.

 

[Indian Dan]

Which is exactly why the PL are going to extraordinary lengths to resume their season.

 

[TrinidadsNumberOne]

No, he's saying 100% of the money will be given back because 'the building isn't complete'

25% of the season will rightly, as I clearly said initially, be given back whether its voided or done on ppg. So no financial difference.

So now that's sorted - what's your next argument for ppg or finishing the season? You deserve it based on playing a different fixture list to someone else in the league?

That's your misinterpretation of what I've said. I said they're entitled to a refund. Not a full refund. But certainly the 25% which is a substantial amount of money totalling well over £750 million when you do the maths. A void season would also be a breach of a contract which would cause the immediate renegotiation of the current deal should Sky wish to pursue it whereas a PPG would constitute a completed season (as the season wasn't exactly for nothing) with clubs only having to pay back the current season. However, this would cripple the bottom 3 relegated in the PL which is why the bottom six don't want relegation to happen and clubs would rather play out the season to minimise the significant costs of a void season (25% of this year's TV deal + reduced 2 years of future TV deals with no guarantee the 2022-2025 would recover to previous levels if voided. OR 25% of this TV deal if decided by PPG). Going by PPG is the lesser of the two evils by a very large margin. But the PL season being completed would help the entire game whether you agree with it or not.

My figures weren't bogus at all. When you include other factors as well, it's easily upwards of billion pound problem facing the English game if you void the season. A void season would probably see you lot get fuck all for Ollie Watkins as almost no one could afford to buy him for a huge fee. So it affects you even if you're upset Plymouth might benefit from a system which you won't. Which is inherently why you want the season voided. Because you haven't provided any statistical or factual evidence that clubs would benefit from a void season at all.

 

[Indian Dan]

That's why I said base ppg off when we both played the same amount of games (36)?

I dont want anyone to go up because nobody has earnt it, as the table shows.

That’s bollocks. You’re a begrudger - you just don’t want anyone to go up because it’s not you.

You just want a formula, any formula, that promotes you and not Cheltenham. When that won’t happen you don’t want anybody to go up.

Would you be on here putting forward a more fair solution that happened to promote Cheltenham at your expense?

Of course fucking not. And, may I say, quite right too. Just spare me the hand wringing holier than thou bollocks and just admit it’s shit and it’s just happened to fuck you over

 

[Devon_Lad]

That's your misinterpretation of what I've said. I said they're entitled to a refund. Not a full refund. But certainly the 25% which is a substantial amount of money totalling well over £750 million when you do the maths. A void season would also be a breach of a contract which would cause the immediate renegotiation of the current deal should Sky wish to pursue it whereas a PPG would constitute a completed season (as the season wasn't exactly for nothing) with clubs only having to pay back the current season. However, this would cripple the bottom 3 relegated in the PL which is why the bottom six don't want relegation to happen and clubs would rather play out the season to minimise the significant costs of a void season (25% of this year's TV deal + reduced 2 years of future TV deals with no guarantee the 2022-2025 would recover to previous levels if voided. OR 25% of this TV deal if decided by PPG). Going by PPG is the lesser of the two evils by a very large margin. But the PL season being completed would help the entire game whether you agree with it or not.

My figures weren't bogus at all. When you include other factors as well, it's easily upwards of billion pound problem facing the English game if you void the season. A void season would probably see you lot get fuck all for Ollie Watkins as almost no one could afford to buy him for a huge fee. So it affects you even if you're upset Plymouth might benefit from a system which you won't. Which is inherently why you want the season voided. Because you haven't provided any statistical or factual evidence that clubs would benefit from a void season at all.

A refund of 25% will happen regardless of ppg and voiding so your entire argument makes no sense!

 

[TrinidadsNumberOne]

A refund of 25% will happen regardless of ppg and voiding so your entire argument makes no sense!

Then why do you think the Premier League wants to continue the season then? It's not that hard to understand surely?

 

[Devon_Lad]

That’s bollocks. You’re a begrudger - you just don’t want anyone to go up because it’s not you.

You just want a formula, any formula, that promotes you and not Cheltenham. When that won’t happen you don’t want anybody to go up.

Would you be on here putting forward a more fair solution that happened to promote Cheltenham at your expense?

Of course fucking not. And, may I say, quite right too. Just spare me the hand wringing holier than thou bollocks and just admit it’s shit and it’s just happened to fuck you over

Give me a fair system that promotes Cheltenham over us and ill let you know - We've already established ppg is the most flawed approach.

I don't want us going up and I've been arguing for void since the very start before ppg even came up if you check the other forum which I shan't name otherwise I'm sure ill get a steadily ban.

The season is not complete. There is no situation which is fair so it needs voiding. I don't want us to get promoted as I already explained - if we go up I want to celebrate promotion properly with all the europhia, otherwise what's the point? To sit in the bottom third of league for the next 5 years trying to avoid relegation? But if the season isn't going to be void, it needs an actual fairest possible way to establish promotions and relegations and ppg is categorically the worst at any way you look at it. It needs weighting and analysing future fixtures based on games remaining, home and away and the weather.

The only reason you don't want it voided is because you won't go up. You're shouting and having a pissy fit over others demanding whats in their clubs interest when you're doing it more than anyone. You don't deserve to go up because you haven't secured it. Get over it.

 

[Devon_Lad]

Then why do you think the Premier League wants to continue the season then? It's not that hard to understand surely?

Because PL don't depend on attendances ffs, they can play bonuses and appearance fees without attendances. You seriously not grasping this? Accrington compared to United.

 

[TrinidadsNumberOne]

Because PL don't depend on attendances ffs, they can play bonuses and appearance fees without attendances. You seriously not grasping this? Accrington compared to United.

What pays bonuses, appearance fees and wages? That's right, TV income! More so at the smaller clubs like Bournemouth, where TV income amounts for 85% of all revenue generated...

 

[TrinidadsNumberOne]

The funny thing is even if we did a subjective method based on clubs current form and upcoming result, I'm pretty damn sure Exeter had the weakest form of the Top 5 by a country mile. They were dropping like a stone of late!

 

[Indian Dan]

Give me a fair system that promotes Cheltenham over us and ill let you know - We've already established ppg is the most flawed approach.

I don't want us going up and I've been arguing for void since the very start before ppg even came up if you check the other forum which I shan't name otherwise I'm sure ill get a steadily ban.

The season is not complete. There is no situation which is fair so it needs voiding. I don't want us to get promoted as I already explained - if we go up I want to celebrate promotion properly with all the europhia, otherwise what's the point? To sit in the bottom third of league for the next 5 years trying to avoid relegation? But if the season isn't going to be void, it needs an actual fairest possible way to establish promotions and relegations and ppg is categorically the worst at any way you look at it. It needs weighting and analysing future fixtures based on games remaining, home and away and the weather.

The only reason you don't want it voided is because you won't go up. You're shouting and having a pissy fit over others demanding whats in their clubs interest when you're doing it more than anyone. You don't deserve to go up because you haven't secured it. Get over it.

Of course it is - I haven’t pretended otherwise. We’d go up any which way the season panned out other than voiding it. Why would I want a fantastic season to go unrewarded?

It makes no odds to me whether you or Cheltenham go up - but one of you has to. I’d say any of the top 5 deserve to go up, but there’s only 4 spaces up for grabs. Voiding isn’t going to happen so really I don’t give a shit which method is used to sort out league positions but to put forward solutions that benefit your club is understandable but not the whining when a solution that doesn’t favour you is suggested.

 

[Indian Dan]

The funny thing is even if we did a subjective method based on clubs current form and upcoming result, I'm pretty damn sure Exeter had the weakest form of the Top 5 by a country mile. They were dropping like a stone of late!

Which is why their suggestion of doing ppg based on 36 games and forgetting the one extra game Exeter have played has come to the fore. Unsurprisingly, knocking off their last game - which was a defeat - would see them overtake Cheltenham on ppg. If that last game had been a win I’ll bet you a penny to a pound of dog shit they wouldn’t have suggested it.

 

[Blue Lion]

Which is why their suggestion of doing ppg based on 36 games and forgetting the one extra game Exeter have played has come to the fore. Unsurprisingly, knocking off their last game - which was a defeat - would see them overtake Cheltenham on ppg. If that last game had been a win I’ll bet you a penny to a pound of dog shit they wouldn’t have suggested it.

And if PPG is considered unfair as it is then deliberately discounting games, thus further reducing an already incomplete sample of games, would be insane!

 

[T.A]

That's why I said base ppg off when we both played the same amount of games (36)?

I dont want anyone to go up because nobody has earnt it, as the table shows.

This will hit you hard. Life isnt fair.

 

[Devon_Lad]

Of course it is - I haven’t pretended otherwise. We’d go up any which way the season panned out other than voiding it. Why would I want a fantastic season to go unrewarded?

It makes no odds to me whether you or Cheltenham go up - but one of you has to. I’d say any of the top 5 deserve to go up, but there’s only 4 spaces up for grabs. Voiding isn’t going to happen so really I don’t give a shit which method is used to sort out league positions but to put forward solutions that benefit your club is understandable but not the whining when a solution that doesn’t favour you is suggested.

There are about 6 different ways you can work it out.

1 is fair - void it - we don't benefit from it.
4 ways would see us go up
1 way would see us stay down.

I'm not arguing for the 4 ways that see us go up. I want it voided. That is my preferred option and what is likely to happen, be it via the courts or the solution clubs come up with, it is what will ultimately happen from a legal point of view.

If you want to do it on ppg then why shouldn't it be done from when we were all on the same games? If cheltenham were above us and we won a game when they didn't play so played a game extra and that took us above them, they'd be fuming.

Take it from an equal footing with games played rather than this silly approach of an arbitrary finishing line. Any way you look at it, besides from voiding it, is unfair and teams lose out. Nobody loses out from voiding it as nobody has secured any position in the top 4 flights, so nobody deserves anything. You won't agree because wahhhh Swindon won't go up. You haven't earned it. You're leading the table at a meaningless time in the season ffs. You can't say your better than anyone when you havent played the same games as any other team to actually compare. The reason the season finishes after 46 games is because then the table is finally true, accurate and meaningful - it's not now.

 

[Indian Dan]

That's why I said base ppg off when we both played the same amount of games (36)?

I dont want anyone to go up because nobody has earnt it, as the table shows.

Make your mind up.

You want ppg over 36 games - when unsurprisingly you get promoted.

Next sentence you don’t want anyone going up

 

[Devon_Lad]

Make your mind up.

You want ppg over 36 games - when unsurprisingly you get promoted.

Next sentence you don’t want anyone going up

I dont want anyone going up - I want it voided. But if you have to use ppg and that's what teams demand then it should be done from the same point. How can anyone argue otherwise hahahaha

 

[TrinidadsNumberOne]

So even if it threatens the existence of Exeter, a club with no benefactor, a club that borrowed money from the PFA to pay player wages not too long ago, a club totally reliant on transfer income to sustain themselves, you'd want the season voided?

 

[Devon_Lad]

So even if it threatens the existence of Exeter, a club with no benefactor, a club that borrowed money from the PFA to pay player wages not too long ago, a club totally reliant on transfer income to sustain themselves, you'd want the season voided?

This isn't about my club - I've made that position quite clear..

The season, from both a legal position and a common sense position should be voided.

If I wanted whats best for my club I'd say we are fourth so promote us no matter what, points on the board are the only thing that count and that would be a more thought through approach than others have had on here. But I'm not. I want it voided.

 

[Jerry]

A void season would also be a breach of a contract which would cause the immediate renegotiation of the current deal should Sky wish to pursue it whereas a PPG would constitute a completed season (as the season wasn't exactly for nothing) with clubs only having to pay back the current season.

You keep saying this but is it actually a fact?

I can't see how Sky would be any happier with either scenario, they still don't get the games to show and they've still lost loads of subscribers and advertising revenue.

 

[TrinidadsNumberOne]

You keep saying this but is it actually a fact?

I can't see how Sky would be any happier with either scenario, they still don't get the games to show and they've still lost loads of subscribers and advertising revenue.

No one is going to win in any scenario. But Alan Nixon, Matt Slater and the Football League Paper have referred to the fact that Sky are happy for now to not demand a rebate as long as the season is still existent. Which it is despite its suspension. But people genuinely think broadcasters are happy to lose subscribers AND let the football clubs keep the money for games not played! That's ludicrous!

If Sky didn't have a problem though, the season would've been voided ages ago. But it's not just Sky, it's BT and other worldwide broadcasters too. And £765 million is an awful lot of money to just give up and let the Premier League charitably have. That sum covers the total of remaining games for just this season and it could have a devastating effect on future seasons. It would be liable to be repaid in any other business and football isn't special, which people need to realise.

Other sports in England will suffer greatly too. But football is where the money is and, as a result, will be the biggest loser if a season was declared void and the broadcasters took legal action to recoup losses.

 

[Huntsman94]

But there are fans of clubs that this doesn’t affect want null and void out of pure spite - not wishing any club to get promoted but rewarding failing shite clubs.

"Failing shite clubs" - Bit harsh. Yes we had been in the bottom 3 for most of the season but as has already been mentioned, we had a very tricky Winter period to negotiate plus the FA Cup.

We strengthened the squad in January which was a tactical decision to do at the beginning of the season to prepare for the exact scenario we found ourselves in. With the squad gelling we were just hitting form and, as the Peterborough owner has said, we have had a habit of making late runs to secure playoff positions etc in the past couple of years and this was no different (apart form a relegation battle which was expected given two years ago we were up against North Ferriby and now we're up against Portsmouth etc)

I get that you want to reward promoted teams over relegated ones but your obsession with making sure we aren't playing League One football next season is odd.

 

[Jerry]

No one is going to win in any scenario. But Alan Nixon, Matt Slater and the Football League Paper have referred to the fact that Sky are happy for now to not demand a rebate as long as the season is still existent. Which it is despite its suspension. But people genuinely think broadcasters are happy to lose subscribers AND let the football clubs keep the money for games not played! That's ludicrous!

If Sky didn't have a problem though, the season would've been voided ages ago. But it's not just Sky, it's BT and other worldwide broadcasters too. And £765 million is an awful lot of money to just give up and let the Premier League charitably have. That sum covers the total of remaining games for just this season and it could have a devastating effect on future seasons. It would be liable to be repaid in any other business and football isn't special, which people need to realise.

Other sports in England will suffer greatly too. But football is where the money is and, as a result, will be the biggest loser if a season was declared void and the broadcasters took legal action to recoup losses.

Don't disagree with any of this, but your earlier point was specifically arguing for PPG as you said the broadcasters would be happier with this.

I still don't see why they would be? Financially it makes no difference to them surely?

 

[Indian Dan]

"Failing shite clubs" - Bit harsh. Yes we had been in the bottom 3 for most of the season but as has already been mentioned, we had a very tricky Winter period to negotiate plus the FA Cup.

We strengthened the squad in January which was a tactical decision to do at the beginning of the season to prepare for the exact scenario we found ourselves in. With the squad gelling we were just hitting form and, as the Peterborough owner has said, we have had a habit of making late runs to secure playoff positions etc in the past couple of years and this was no different (apart form a relegation battle which was expected given two years ago we were up against North Ferriby and now we're up against Portsmouth etc)

I get that you want to reward promoted teams over relegated ones but your obsession with making sure we aren't playing League One football next season is odd.

Tbf, I really meant Bolton and Southend.

Well, if at least 3 teams from L2 have got to go up, then 3 clubs from L1 have to come down. The fact it happens to be Tranmere doesn’t fill me with any sort of glee.

 

[Huntsman94]

Tbf, I really meant Bolton and Southend.

Fair enough. My preferred method, which I doubt would get any sort of look in, is to promote the current top 3 form League Two (Swindon, Crewe and Plymouth), relegate the three from League One (Bury by default, Bolton and Southend, and then chuck us in a playoff type system with AFC Wimbledon and the 4 from League Two. That way at least you can say the final position has been earnt. You don't have the mass cost of testing every team in the league as it would just be 6 teams and you'd get a situation that the majority of clubs would probably be happy with.

 

[Indian Dan]

I just can’t see there is any appetite for any more games from most L1 and L2 clubs.

 

[TrinidadsNumberOne]

Don't disagree with any of this, but your earlier point was specifically arguing for PPG as you said the broadcasters would be happier with this.

I still don't see why they would be? Financially it makes no difference to them surely?

I said there was two alternatives if the PL didn't continue the season. I didn't say both were perfect and I stated both would come with losses to clubs. Just the losses for voiding will almost certainly be significantly higher than a season decided by PPG. Which is why I've said PPG will happen down here if it happened in the Prem.

The ideal solution is for the Premier League to complete the season for the sake of football's finances from the PL to non league. And for the sake of our clubs, we have to hope it can occur. As ridiculous as that sounds...