Championship 2022/23 Thread

[Super_horns]

Rooney complaining about bad language and disrespect words.

Pot kettle black ?

Rotherham chairman Tony Stewart responds to Wayne Rooney criticism after Championship win over Derby

Derby boss Wayne Rooney accused Rotherham chairman Tony Stewart of being a bit disrespectful during Wednesdays Championship match; Stewart denied there was any foul language; There are some good losers and there are some bad losers and that goes in the latter category.

www.google.co.uk

 

[beaufighter]

Also, a liar. Tony Stewart is a gentleman and has said he will not tolerate bad language in the directors area. As someone else has said, only Rooney can be upset by the crowd at a behind closed doors game lol. Must be something in the air at Derby as their match day thread is littered with complaints about someone shouting come on Rotherham throughout the game, well, boo hoo. Not one complaint there about bad language or disrespect though, go figure as the Americans might say.

 

[Atavistic]

Great to see that Coventry have agreed a new 10-year deal to return to the Ricoh Arena. Allows them to return to Coventry while also giving them plenty of time to plan a longer-term solution to ensure they remain in the city and don't end up groundsharing in places like Northampton and Birmingham.

 

[thewwfc]

Definitely better to have a stadium in the right location (to state the obvious), but all I can say is I'm glad we got rid of Wasps when we did, rugby has a shitty impact on the pitch (even when you have a half-artificial one like we got put in).

 

[Super_horns]

Rotherham’s next 2 games off now.

Going to be a very busy end of season for them.

 

[beaufighter]

Looking like 3 games a week to end of season. Some clubs fans and Aitor Karanka seem to think we are doing it on purpose to gain an advantage. These people must be insane.

 

[SF_]

Looking like 3 games a week to end of season. Some clubs fans and Aitor Karanka seem to think we are doing it on purpose to gain an advantage. These people must be insane.

Fucking brutal schedule, it'd be a serious effort to stay up and avoid injuries.

 

[beaufighter]

I agree SF. I was fancying our chances of staying up a few weeks ago but it’s all gone tits up now.

 

[CCFC_Charlie]

Genuinely no idea when we're going to play Rotherham, they've got no space left to fit the game in and we won't be happy if they try and make us play in the international break as we'll be without Leo Ostigard. Going to be a tricky one to figure out.

 

[Super_horns]

They play us a week on Tuesday - guess that will be in doubt ?

 

[Super_horns]

Finished 1-1 between Swansea and Blackburn.

Well done Blackburn.

 

[That Fat Centre Half]

Our Rotherham game has been re-arranged for the 4th May, so becomes penultimate game of the season for us now, so we are basically carrying a game in hand on everyone for the rest of the season now, with the exception of Rotherham of course!

 

[Kenneth E End]

Surprised to see that we've slipped to 16th overnight.

Wycombe now need more than 1ppg to stay up - they are 12 (effectively 13) points off safety with 11 games to go. They are gone.

Sheff Wed 7 points behind with 12 games left. Increasingly difficult, but not impossible.

I can't see anyone from Forest upwards being drawn into the battle now. 3 from the current bottom 7.

 

[That Fat Centre Half]

Rotherham have some further Covid issues as Paul Warne wont be able to be at the games due to self isolation.

Its a tricky time and a big slice of luck involved so dont mean to point fingers at Rotherham too much, but surely they need to be reviewing there protocols they have in place there? After we had our outbreak that led to the QPR being postponed Jones mentioned we had perhaps got a bit lax and had tightened up our approach in light of new variants. This is at least the second lot of games they have had to cancel and the second lot of games Warne himself will miss.

 

[Super_horns]

They will probably beat us tomorrow!

10 days off resting whilst we have had 2 tricky games.

I presume there is a set number who have to be isolating before a game gets called off as we had 3 out on a couple or occasions but still played.

Mind you our cause wasn’t helped by 2/3 breaking COVID rules over the past year so we probably didn’t have a leg to stand one!

 

[beaufighter]

Seen the news on BBC today that we have had 25 positive results! On Tuesday players who should have in bed were on the bench and those merely unfit to play started. We would have lost to Watford in any event, even with a fully fit team, but at what point does player welfare override football considerations?

There also seems to be no question that Rotherham followed all correct procedures and protocols and this was a freak occurrence, but still, the mind boggles really. This, combined with the requirement to get all the fixtures played means we are basically down IMO. I just hope we can keep up the yo-yo factor and see you all again in a couple of seasons.

 

[Super_horns]

People might remember this from before on the Grimsby site:

Football League Prediction Calculator

Enter future match predictions in your chosen division and see what the final league table might look like

thefishy.co.uk

This was my final table - a win on the final day sees us get 2nd!

Pos Team PGD Pts

1 Norwich 46+29 100
2 Watford 46+26 91
3 Swansea4 6+17 90
4 Brentford46+26 88
5 Barnsley 46+883
6 Bournemouth 46+18 79
7 Reading 46+11 74
8 Cardiff 46+17 72
9 Middlesbrough 46+8 72
10 Bristol City 46-9 67
11 Stoke 46-1 63
12 QPR 46-4 59
13 Luton 46-11 57
14 Millwall 46+1 56
15 Blackburn 46+8 55
16 Nott'm Forest 46-8 52
17 Derby 46-14 51
18 Coventry 46-16 50
19 Huddersfield 46-1 149
20 Preston 46-9 46
21 Birmingham 46-19 46
22 Rotherham 46-11 45
23 Sheff Wed 46-20 33
24 Wycombe 46-36 28

 

[Kenneth E End]

Barnsley's GD is certainly shite...

 

[Kenneth E End]

Urrr... wasn't expecting this:

Ten Championship clubs placed under a transfer embargo last month

EXCLUSIVE BY MIKE KEEGAN: Sportsmail can reveal that almost half of the league was subject to a registration ban which has led to claims the integrity of the competition has been undermined.

www.dailymail.co.uk

I find it hard to believe considering how well we are run as a club (wage caps etc). and how ambitious we have been of late in our stadium project, however:

1. Jones has already talked about contract "restrictions"
2. LTFC haven't yet filed their accounts for last season, which is later than the previous year.

I think the fans probably deserve to get some sort of response to this although the pandemic and lack of fans really is going to hit us more than most.

In regards to the other clubs, each of them have a link where they frankly have / had poor ownership and a history of massive overspending.

 

[Atavistic]

While I'm sure it's not true for all the clubs affected, it at least for Coventry and Luton sounds like an administrative issue, where the Government allowed a three-month extension on filing accounts at Companies House while the EFL did not change their rules to reflect that. Huddersfield and Stoke are already off the list for that reason, and I imagine several of the other clubs will soon follow suit.

The only ones I could see more long-term issues for would be Birmingham, Derby and Sheffield Wednesday given the general financial issues surrounding them.

 

[That Fat Centre Half]

Club responded to this already this morning. Full statement linked below but seems to be they just needed some extra time to get the accounts signed off through the auditing process, companies house were willing to oblige but the EFL not so much. As you might expect, selective reporting by that rag of a newspaper

Club Statement | Response to news report of transfer embargo - Luton Town FC

In response to an article published by a newspaper this morning, Luton Town Football Club has issued the following response:

www.lutontown.co.uk

 

[Kenneth E End]

While I'm sure it's not true for all the clubs affected, it at least for Coventry and Luton sounds like an administrative issue, where the Government allowed a three-month extension on filing accounts at Companies House while the EFL did not change their rules to reflect that. Huddersfield and Stoke already off the list for that reason, and I imagine several of the other clubs will soon follow suit.

The only ones I could see more long-term issues for would be Birmingham, Derby and Sheffield Wednesday given the general financial issues surrounding them.

A club statement has confirmed that for LTFC. The EFL really are something else considering what has been happening in this division in recent seasons.

 

[Super_horns]

It is the Mail so might have some inaccuracies in the article !

 

[Super_horns]

I guess it does show if you have a manager who organises and motivates the players well then the better teams will come out on top but it’s certainly not been easy for us and Bournemouth at times - particularly away from home.

 

[Kenneth E End]

I guess it does show if you have a manager who organises and motivates the players well then the better teams will come out on top but it’s certainly not been easy for us and Bournemouth at times - particularly away from home.

Yeah having those huge parachute payments are such a burden.

 

[Super_horns]

Yeah having those huge parachute payments are such a burden.

We scored about 6/7 goals away from home up till about February and quite frankly played more like a team that should have been about 12th.

Clinging onto a point at Wycombe/QPR and Sheffield Wednesday and losing to Huddersfield and a Barnsley term who at the time were at the bottom.

Playing for a 0-0 v Bristol City/Nottingham Forest.

And you guys would have got something if a crossbar had been an inch or two higher.

If it was supposed to be a clear advantage it certainly wasn't showing in the performances of the players and management - I guess they didn't like each other so didn't want to untie and put in the expected efforts.

That is why I say teams still need the right set up and motivation to show their strengths and advantages.

Stoke and Huddersfield have such payments I think and struggled since coming down.

Like with anything having the money is all very well but you still need to put the work in and show the will to want and win.

 

[Atavistic]

It's easy for the clubs without them to blame the parachute payments boogeyman for everything, and while I can't deny that they do have an impact they aren't the be all and end all, as Huddersfield are currently proving by being utterly mediocre even with them. On the other side of things, Leeds got promoted last year without parachute payments, we did it the season before and of course Huddersfield did in 2016/17. And you've got Brentford again firmly in the picture without parachute payments, as well as both Barnsley and Reading.

Having the money helps, but it doesn't mean much if you don't spend it wisely. Getting recruitment right, regardless of the amount of money your club has to play with, is far more important than having the parachute payments. That, and getting in a good manager rather than one of the usual has-beens on the merry-go-round.

I'm sure I've said this before, but I do think covid has made things easier for all relegated clubs that aren't in financial turmoil (i.e. everyone but Wigan) and harder for promoted clubs than normal, as there was far less transfer activity in both the summer and January than would normally be the case. I'm sure Watford expected to lose Sarr in the summer, while we fully expected the departures of Aarons, Buendia and Cantwell. Equally, I'm sure Coventry and other promoted teams would have had a bit more financial flexibility to improve their squads in the transfer market and managed the step-up better than they have done.

At the same time, I do agree with a statement I saw in another thread that the Championship is generally far less competitive a league than people make it out to be, and this covid-affected season has made that more apparent than ever (again, though, finances at least partially responsible for that). The teams promoted from League 1 scarcely finish outside the bottom five in their first season, just above them you have a few dross teams who never go down because of the gap between League 1 and the Championship (Birmingham the most notable example here), then the mid-table lot who are perpetually there and a few usual suspects at the top end. Commentators just call it the most competitive because it's a cheap cliche and because there's usually at least one team that comes out of nowhere (compared to the previous season) to put themselves into the promotion picture.

I am actually curious now, though: has there ever been a season when all three teams relegated from the Premier League went straight back up again? I know it's happened with the teams relegated to League 1 once a few years ago (that year Blackburn went down), but I can't think of a year where it's happened with the sides relegated from the Premier League (and I'm not convinced this will be the year either, as I still think and hope Bournemouth will narrowly miss out on the play-offs).

 

[SF_]

Just because some clubs utterly waste them (I.E Stoke) it doesn't mean parachute payments aren't the most unfair and ridiculous thing in world football.

Just an attempt to make the Premier League a closed shop.

 

[Super_horns]

I think this would be the first time.

Must say we don't really deserve to be as far ahead as we are but guess that does show even if we are rubbish there are the players to get a result regardless of the performance which probably is a key difference to others I accept.

Think a Bournemouth had it right elsewhere.

Lot's of talented players going through the motions and not really putting in the effort until recent weeks when they have worked out their Premier league ambitions might be slipping away from them.

 

[chicowintry]

In the Premiership/Premier League era:
- 10 seasons with no relegated side returning (5 since parachute payments introduced)
- 12 seasons with one relegated side returning (6 since parachute payments introduced)
- 5 seasons with two relegated sides returning (2 since parachute payments introduced)
- 0 seasons with three relegated sides returning

Closest seasons to all three returning:
1997/98. Forest (finishing 20th in 1996/97) won the league, Boro (19th) came second and Sunderland (18th) lost in the play-off final after finishing third.
2006/07. Sunderland (20th in 2005/06) won the league, Birmingham (18th) came second and West Brom (19th) lost in the play-off final after finishing fourth.

Other seasons where all three finished in top 6:
2003/04. West Brom (19th in 2002/03) came second, Sunderland (20th) lost in play-off semi-finals after finishing third and West Ham (18th) lost in play-off final after finishing fourth.
2011/12. West Ham (20th in 2010/11) won play-offs after finishing third, Birmingham (18th) lost in play-off semi-finals after finishing fourth and Blackpool (19th) lost in play-off final after finishing fifth.

Average position of relegated teams is actually *only* 8th/9th.

This is only looking at seasons post-relegation, might be interesting looking into how teams receiving parachute payments in subsequent seasons fared but that'd take a little more work. The system has changed a few times I believe - I think it started off 2 years, then eventually was 4 years and now it's 2 or 3 (you only get the third year if you spend more than one season up there before relegation).

What I will say about Norwich is that they didn't have a pot to piss in when they achieved their back-to-back promotions from League One to the Premier League. And they spent the money clearing debts rather than splashing out on players. So no parachute payments helped them there - also they stayed up for 3 years that time. So it can be done. We then spent money in the third season and got relegated... so yeah... there's that. Bounced back with parachute payments, were shit again, panicked and spent big in January... it didn't work. Finished 8th and 14th with parachute payments. Then first season without them we win the league - going back spending smart (eg. Krul, Pukki on free transfers, Emi for ~£1.4m, promoting the youth). Then we chose to invest in infrastructure (improving the training facilities and academy) rather than gambling it away on players. And yes, we got relegated but before injuries struck we were doing okay (6 points from first five games having played champions-to-be Liverpool, defending champions Man City & Chelsea) and over December when players started returning we became competitive again - just frustratingly couldn't turn leads into points (we took lead in I think 7 of 9 games but only won one of them grr). We did go on to pick up another couple of wins to revive our survival hopes pre-Covid but admittedly we were beyond pathetic when the league resumed. And that's what people remember, those last 9 games, which is why people are writing us off already. I feel like I took a turn somewhere... we were talking parachute payments... haha... sorry. I think my general point was I agree money has fucked football but going after parachute payments feels very much like trying to treat the symptom not the cause. They became a thing *because* of how ridiculous spending is in the top flight not the other way round.