Lrrr

Didn't it say if they had dropped this season their revenue or costs would still be mid table championship

Aus/NZ have offered too IF it were to be held in Aus the sceptic in me would say great practice for all English players for future Ashes series plus 2020 WC

Can you imagine if the 4 day games get played abroad and we end up playing on a dust bowl that turns from day 1 ?

At least it should mean no 'The 16.4' for another year

The message has always been 'when safe to do so', whether that takes a few months then so be it, given essential workers can now book a test its not unreasonable to think tests could be available for footballers/other staff in that time, by which time most other industries will have returned to work often in as closer working environment as football and as easy to pass on the virus.

The Dutch league only called it because their government banned any professional sport until September, we haven't

Hands were tied by their government, interesting call on their choice of finishing though seems they've picked and chosen their preferred things, no champions but the top 2 will go into the champions league so they have kept the season to account to some degree. So over here, Liverpool not champs, but champions league with Man City (provisionally), Leicester and Chelsea. Imagine telling Leeds fans they'd finish top of the table but not go up

.

Plymouth chairman Hi everyone, I thought I would write a note to update you on what is going on at Argyle, and more broadly in the English Football League, to answer some of the questions posed by this virus-induced crisis. Football clubs are obviously suffering financially from inability to play matches – they have no revenue, yet have continuing costs, including wages, for both players and non-football staff. At Argyle we have reduced the impact of that problem by furloughing most staff, thus taking advantage of the government support scheme, but promising to top up all wages until June 30. We chose that date because it is the end of our financial year, and the date at which most player and loan contracts end. The club will, of course, lose money over that period, and I, as the major shareholder, will finance that loss. We have been helped in managing cash flows by action taken by the EFL and the Premier League to accelerate payments due to us, and by HMRC in allowing us to delay payments of PAYE taxes that we owe (we do not owe any VAT). We have renegotiated some payment terms with our larger suppliers, but have committed to making our own payments to the smaller, often local, businesses that rely on us. In the longer run, we need to manage the club so that our financial future is secure. That means that we need to be able to plan for a resumption of football, and income to cover our costs. The nature of the virus, however, means that that is impossible. We simply do not know when we will be able to resume playing football at all, let alone in front of the Green Army. We do not want to play behind closed doors and believe that a resumption of football should not take place until it is safe for crowds to come and watch. That is partly for financial reasons; we need the revenues generated on match-day to pay the players - and no crowds means no revenues, unless some other body is prepared to fund our expenses. More importantly, if it is not safe for a crowd to watch a contact sport, how can it be safe for a participant? We would respect any individual player who said he did not want to play until assured it was completely safe. We suspect, therefore, that this season will not be completed in the normal way - by playing the remaining matches. Alternatives include completely voiding the season, or halting it now, with those in the promotion positions being promoted (after adjusting for games in hand, based on average points per game already earned). This would mean promotion to League One for Argyle, but, believe it or not, that is not our priority. We think this is the fairest solution to an impossible situation. Note that we do not suggest relegation based on current league positions. In thinking about the long-term future of football and the solvency of clubs, we support increased enforcement of existing EFL rules that govern how much clubs can spend on player wages - their largest expense, and the one that most often leads to financial calamity. We think the current system needs some tweaks, but that increased monitoring of clubs’ finances and stronger enforcement against clubs breaking the rules and spending beyond their means would go a long way to making football more financially sustainable. We would oppose any attempt to impose a “one size fits all” limit on player wages for each club in any division. We believe that clubs with greater resources should be able to pay higher aggregate levels of wages, and/or have larger squads. The important criterion for us is that clubs’ revenues and expenses should match, or, if expenses exceed revenues, the shortfall should be made up with shareholders’ equity (not debt). We believe that players’ wages are contracted and that clubs have an obligation to fulfill those contracts. We would not support a collective agreement to cut players’ wages. We recognize, however, that budgets for future seasons will be drastically reduced and new contracts are highly unlikely to be offered on terms similar to those given in previous years. In the short-term, we also think that, once football is safe to restart, the transfer window should remain open for a continuous period, enabling clubs in financial stress to realise the value of player contracts where they are no longer in a position to pay contracted wages. We think this crisis provides an opportunity to reset English football and the financial structures that support it. So, we also believe we should: Restructure Academy compensation schemes, allowing clubs with successful academies to preserve the value of their players, and receive proper compensation for players who switch to other clubs in pursuit of professional contracts. Such restructuring would not only provide fair compensation, but help with the redistribution of wealth from upper echelons of the football pyramid. Unify all the lower leagues in the football pyramid, enabling more extensive promotion and relegation between them. The result would be more fluidity throughout the pyramid, enabling clubs to find a level appropriate to their resources, without needing to face administration and without the apparent stigma of leaving the EFL. We do not support restructuring the league into geographically-based divisions. We have let the EFL know our position on these issues, but recognise that we will not always have our own way! There is a wide range of opinion within the League, reflecting the wide range of individual club circumstances. The elected Board and the executives are working hard to find solutions that are best for the League as a whole. The Argyle board accepts that the wider interest – the survival of an effective football pyramid — is the goal we should all be trying to reach. We own our stadium, are almost entirely debt free and I am prepared, in the short-term, to provide the financial support to see us through this difficult time. Make no mistake though, this crisis has presented an existential threat to all football clubs. We are stronger than most, but not invincible. Thank you for your support. Simon

Like assemblies used to be at school, file out once the row in front of you had left, would it be quicker or slower of getting out the Dolman?

Would have thought they'd have owed the remainder of what was left for the season, but then upon the start of a new season they'd have received a big fresh wad of money again, its not being re-run the current season would be voided or called as is and then a new season starting. Clubs aren't going to hand back the whole seasons worth of money as sky still showed a product for those games where they were on tv, so it would just be the last 9 games worth (or however many is left)

Depends when lockdown is lifted what social distancing measures remain and the definition of 'mass gathering', some will have to be relaxed or a lot of people still won't be able to return to work, if this extent allows then games can be played behind closed doors as a lot of people working at a football game (say approx 100) don't need to come in contact with each other. Dutch league looks over because their government specifically banned events which includes sport until September 1st, it wasn't the leagues decision. Personal opinion would be that the premier league should help all clubs in the league see this through without repayment if we really are 'all in this together'. The league makes by far more then enough to help, based on an website with an educated guess of prize money break down for this season if you took 1% of each clubs proposed prize money you'd have over £24,000,000, so a few percent and you could see every l1/l2 club through this period.

IF we reached a point where no more games this season could be played I would rather a vote to finish the season as is rather than null and void. If you look at the premier league table, do Spurs deserve another season of champions league football (if there is one) over Leicester being 10 points behind? Do Arsenal deserve another season of Europa league over Wolves/Sheffield Utd? Do Norwich deserve another season of premier league riches when they're adrift at the bottom of the table, in league 1 would Bolton deserve to go through another season of a -12 points deficit or allow them a season in league 2 level on points. leagues like Scotland and National league aren't null and voiding they're calling as is, allow the last several months of sport to still mean something, whether it means ppg calculations or tables as they are. Also the non leagues have had to end as they can't afford to wait it out, l2/l1 may not be able to but championship and prem can afford to wait it out, look abroad to other countries have their domestic leagues called it quits yet? Its not like English leagues are different.

In case anyone didn't see this at the time

Point was if that calculating with lansdown already putting in all he’s allowed to under ffp and a lack of match day revenue, comments for lansdown to be the one paying may not be fair

Because at the moment they can afford to wait it out compared to non-league clubs

Perhaps something to consider, under current FFP rules owners can only put in so much money per season, perhaps Lansdown can't pay staff/player wages if he wanted too because it would exceed the amount he can help cover losses for the club given we push the boundaries anyway.

There won't be one during the season but its a case of whether you're still deferring wages because of the lack of income, Sheffield Utd as said for example have deferred a portion for the rest of 2020, if a champ club does that and say season ends November (hypothetical) the rule would embargo them

Barca sell title rights to Nou Camp for 1 season/year to raise money for coronavirus

Sheffield Utd players agree partial pay deferral including bonuses until end of 2020

I wouldn’t go that far I would say clubs need to show with accounts that they can afford another player and that it won’t hurt them financially while they’re paying back the deferred wages

Solidarity yes, which as you've said they've got and can give out as and when. However if true that it looks like league 1 clubs also get an end of season amount of over 600,000 each the voiding the season deprives them of that money, hence why they'd vote to finish as opposed to void. Also as said its why Championship/Premier league clubs wouldn't finish, because they could see out this period and then finish

Just reading up, only found info on league one but it says all clubs share an equal fund on end of season (approx 667,000) in addition to solidarity payments and tv. So finishing their season early would get them that much each, voiding the season wouldn't as voiding implies the season never happened and as such no money for finishing the season. Hence where the vote for finishing early comes in, if the clubs feel they need that money they can vote to finish season with positions as are. However PL and championship clubs who can afford to tide themselves over until its feasible to play again want to see out the season to a conclusion.

Its not that they'd be left to rot, its a case they'd get their end of season money from the league for their position to help their financial position to pay players/staff