The Premier League are currently still ploughing ahead with “Project restart” in the midst of a global pandemic which has tragically seen over 275,000 people lose their lives to-date.
The plan involves playing the remaining 90+ games behind closed doors and most likely at around ten neutral grounds around the country. There has also been discussions regarding an increase to five substitutes per game and matches being played over a shorter period than 90 minutes.
With the league season being played under changed to the first two-thirds of the season, the required changes would need a majority vote of 14 of the 20 Premier League clubs.
However, each individual club will vote with their own interests at heart rather than the competition as a whole. This includes the notion of £762million of TV money being at risk if the campaign is not finished.
Neil Dawson wrote…
How they can put this to a vote when there is so much vested interest is beyond me. I know the rules dictate a vote but the rules also dictate a season has to finish before promotion and relegation and they seem prepared to throw that out the window so why not the vote?
It should be a mandatory decision. They should also bear in mind precedence. That’s why they can’t increase the numbers in case this happens again next season. Similarly to me, you can’t do points per game because if the same happens twelve games into next season they can’t do that either…
Null and void is the only fair solution as you don’t have to prove the unprovable.
As it is the only fair solution prepare for anything but this to happen.
I think the vote on whether to continue or not isn’t as clear cut as we think. There are number clubs who benefit higher up the league from Points Per Game.
If the 1st vote was to continue the behind closed doors I can see Chelsea & Manchester United potentially voting against it as this puts their Champions League position at risk, whereas with PPG they keep their current position.
Southampton, Brighton, Watford and ourselves would vote against a straight PPG on the table as this keeps us in the Premier League for another season. I can see Aston Villa, Norwich , West Ham & Newcastle voting to get the season going. Norwich & Villa are in a no-win situation they’re relegated under PPG so would want the chance to try and get out of it. West Ham are relegated if home and away weighting PPG is implemented again so would want to get out off it. Newcastle are still in the FA Cup and are nearly safe they may think there an opportunity for a European place up for grabs in the cup that also the case for Arsenal.
Wolves, Burnley, will want the season to start as they are worse off under PPG and Wolves will still think they have a chance of Champions League. Sheffield United will be thinking about Champions League and the FA Cup, however, qualify the UEFA cup under PPG. Crystal Palace are better off under PPG so will money talk? Everton league position stays the same under PPG so would vote to resume to give it a go.
All we’re hearing from the officials in charge of the PL through either leaks or secret journalist briefings are the plans to restart and not a word on the opposition to them. By publically making their case those clubs are giving a voice to the other side of the argument which deserves to be heard. Making out that they are distasteful is hugely misrepresenting their position.
In fact, what I find distasteful is pretending there is no difference in the games being played at neutral venues with no fans and different rules concerning subs. For example, we’ve finished a game with 10 men this season due to injuries so why should there suddenly now be five subs available? Doing all of that under the auspices that it will generate a fair outcome when it’s as transparent as can be that it’s only about getting the tv money and dropping a crown on Liverpools head.
The plans to finish the season are an absolute sham and a disgrace to football. Well done to Brighton and Watford for not being afraid to point it out.