The coronavirus and the sfa

[The Dude 20,026]

3 minutes ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

Which is exactly what these rules do, if they are to play out in your way.

They shaft us and they benefit celtic.

They shaft Partick and help QoS.

They don't really shaft us though, we're pretty close to bottom of the pile of clubs who get shafted. Even with the best will in the world, the title was mathematically out of our hands. We NEEDED celtic to lose more than just the two Old Firm to overhaul them.

[eejay the dj 31,964]

Just now, Laudrup1984 said:

I can't see anything definitive coming from Tuesday. The ideal solution is obviously to finish the seasons. I think every chance will be given to allow that to happen. I don't think that's wise though as I don't see any football soon.

It's an incredible situation we are all. The situation is changing daily. I have no idea what the resolutions will be but IMO nothing will be resolved anytime soon. The permutations are extraordinary. There is so much at stake on so many levels. Naturally human is more important than anything.

Agreed . Too many options , too many going to be unhappy . Simple solution . Null and Void .

Bookies will take the same stance . They stand to gain most likely with this scenario  Null and Void

 

[piperpete 3,186]

4 minutes ago, Coop said:

That might be a softener to any decision they take.  Whethher our board goes with that is another story if we don't like the outcome of the authorities decision.

This is too big an issue for each country’s Football Authorities to make and it should be done by UEFA for every league in Europe so individual teams are taken out of it from influencing hired hands.

 

I would imagine if every country did the very same thing then it would be easier to accept if it went down the road of awarding leagues to those sitting on top at the shutdown, the proper ruling should be no winners

[The Dude 20,026]

2 minutes ago, Laudrup1984 said:

I can't see anything definitive coming from Tuesday. The ideal solution is obviously to finish the seasons. I think every chance will be given to allow that to happen. I don't think that's wise though as I don't see any football soon.

It's an incredible situation we are all. The situation is changing daily. I have no idea what the resolutions will be but IMO nothing will be resolved anytime soon. The permutations are extraordinary. There is so much at stake on so many levels. Naturally human life is more important than anything.

That's my expectation. UEFA Will announce a suspension of their own competitions and delay Euros to 2021. Domestic FAs will be given until July 31st to complete domestic competitions with the new season officially starting from September.

 

[Laudrup1984 25,100]

Just now, eejay the dj said:

Agreed . Too many options , too many going to be unhappy . Simple solution . Null and Void .

Bookies will take the same stance . They stand to gain most likely with this scenario  Null and Void

 

It's such a crazy situation. In fairness I don't know how all football organisations go about resolving this. I don't envy their position. 

[piperpete 3,186]

8 minutes ago, The Dude said:

But sporting competitions all have different rules on how to handle unfinished events. There's no one single rule which covers every sporting pursuit there is.

 

Is there a rule to hand whoever is on top at any shutdown of a league?

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

Just now, The Dude said:

They will be though because the 2019/20 season will only consist of 30 games. No matter what happens, the final eight games won't be played. Even allowing for us having played 29, that extra three points does nothing for us.

There's more for smaller clubs to lose by voiding the season than there is by ending with the standing as they are 80% of the way through the season.

 

Again, this is purely based on how you are saying things will play out.

You are talking that it is for certain that they will call the 19/20 season complete and valid after 30 games. There are plenty of people saying that if the league cannot be played to its natural conclusion, then the league will be voided in which case it will not have consisted of any games.

You talk about the extra game doing nothing for us, but that does not matter, rules are rules. If these rules are fit for purpose, then they must work in all cases. This would include in a case where two teams were joint at the top, and another team had a game in hand.

Would it be fair to crown a champion who is 1 point ahead, but 2nd place has 3 games in hand? The rules as you want us to accept say that this is fair. I and im fairly sure, any right minded person would say that they are not fair. If the rules are not fair, then they do not hold up.

[Coop 654]

9 minutes ago, Laudrup1984 said:

I can't see anything definitive coming from Tuesday. The ideal solution is obviously to finish the seasons. I think every chance will be given to allow that to happen. I don't think that's wise though as I don't see any football soon.

It's an incredible situation we are all. The situation is changing daily. I have no idea what the resolutions will be but IMO nothing will be resolved anytime soon. The permutations are extraordinary. There is so much at stake on so many levels. Naturally human is more important than anything.

Yeah, it's unprecedented but looking at virologists statements and they say the curve will last until the summer before decreasing because that's the way countries are managing it. If we let it infect everyone the curve would go through the roof very quickly and then drop like a stone but our health services etc couldn't cope so by managing the infection curve, countries are effectively extending the period of the peak infection, albiet that peak is much lower than if nations did nothing.  Listening to them this will take us to the summer.  By that time the majority should have had it and have gained immunity to it.

This UEFA meeting, I think they'll be minded to go in a certain direction but probably wont commit to it immediately.  The big leagues will have the most influence and the rest will tag along but the principle I believe national associations will follow is to take a unified approach.  Doing that minimises the risk of legal action against associations doing their own thing.

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

8 minutes ago, The Dude said:

They don't really shaft us though, we're pretty close to bottom of the pile of clubs who get shafted. Even with the best will in the world, the title was mathematically out of our hands. We NEEDED celtic to lose more than just the two Old Firm to overhaul them.

Listen, if you actually believe this is the case, then I dont think we are ever going to come to a consensus.

I have one final question for you, Do you believe celtic deserve to be awarded a league title this season, granting them 9 in a row? I dont care about what you think will happen, but do you think they deserve to be awarded it?

[bluenoz 30,835]

10 minutes ago, The Dude said:

That's my expectation. UEFA Will announce a suspension of their own competitions and delay Euros to 2021. Domestic FAs will be given until July 31st to complete domestic competitions with the new season officially starting from September.

 

So now you know what UEFA are going to announce at their meeting on Tuesday? Cheers, now that I know the outcome, there is no need for me to await what they have to say.

Go and walk the dug or try and get yer hole.

[The Dude 20,026]

3 minutes ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

Again, this is purely based on how you are saying things will play out.

You are talking that it is for certain that they will call the 19/20 season complete and valid after 30 games. There are plenty of people saying that if the league cannot be played to its natural conclusion, then the league will be voided in which case it will not have consisted of any games.

You talk about the extra game doing nothing for us, but that does not matter, rules are rules. If these rules are fit for purpose, then they must work in all cases. This would include in a case where two teams were joint at the top, and another team had a game in hand.

Would it be fair to crown a champion who is 1 point ahead, but 2nd place has 3 games in hand? The rules as you want us to accept say that this is fair. I and im fairly sure, any right minded person would say that they are not fair. If the rules are not fair, then they do not hold up.

If two teams were tied at the top, there's already a rule in place for what would happen next.

Whether it would be fair to crown a champion with games in hand etc is moot as those aren't the circumstances (although there is the mess with Partick/QOTS to figure out

. I'm only going on what the circumstances are now. Hypotheticals about x having 8 games in hand an a 12 point gap are pointless because nobody is discussing those so I've literally no idea of knowing what would happen in that case.

There's plenty people also saying that you need to have played 30 games for it to count - made up pish - but so far the SPFL are telling clubs that this is how they intend to proceed. Whether that becomes their formal position after Tuesday, we'll see, but the league seem confident that legally these will hold up.

I've seen nothing which counters that either. Precedents from 1940 and mental hypotheticals have no relevance to whats in the rules that they are making the decision based on.

 

[The Dude 20,026]

4 minutes ago, bluenoz said:

So now you know what UEFA are going to announce at their meeting on Tuesday? Cheers, now that I know the outcome, there is no need for me to await what they have to say.

Go and what the dug or try and get yer hole.

No I said thats my expectation. Not that is what they will announce.

[eejay the dj 31,964]

9 minutes ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

Again, this is purely based on how you are saying things will play out.

You are talking that it is for certain that they will call the 19/20 season complete and valid after 30 games. There are plenty of people saying that if the league cannot be played to its natural conclusion, then the league will be voided in which case it will not have consisted of any games.

You talk about the extra game doing nothing for us, but that does not matter, rules are rules. If these rules are fit for purpose, then they must work in all cases. This would include in a case where two teams were joint at the top, and another team had a game in hand.

Would it be fair to crown a champion who is 1 point ahead, but 2nd place has 3 games in hand? The rules as you want us to accept say that this is fair. I and im fairly sure, any right minded person would say that they are not fair. If the rules are not fair, then they do not hold up.

great post mate . You are on a roll last few days

[STEPPS BOY 73,895]

A fucking nonsense to decide league winners and relegation with more than a handful of games to go..

They either play the games at some point or void the league.

[eejay the dj 31,964]

6 minutes ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

Listen, if you actually believe this is the case, then I dont think we are ever going to come to a consensus.

I have one final question for you, Do you believe celtic deserve to be awarded a league title this season, granting them 9 in a row? I dont care about what you think will happen, but do you think they deserve to be awarded it?

I think I know what he will say

[The Dude 20,026]

5 minutes ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

Listen, if you actually believe this is the case, then I dont think we are ever going to come to a consensus.

I have one final question for you, Do you believe celtic deserve to be awarded a league title this season, granting them 9 in a row? I dont care about what you think will happen, but do you think they deserve to be awarded it?

What part of it isn't true? If we win our game in hand and both Old Firms, we still need them to drop more points for us to win the title.

I don't think anyone deserves it until its mathematically sealed. If the league decides the season only consists of 30 games this season then it is what it is.

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, eejay the dj said:

I think I know what he will say

Oh tell us.

[bluenoz 30,835]

Just now, The Dude said:

No I said thats my expectation. Not that is what they will announce.

Exactly, 70 pages of conjecture. Just take a deep breath, a time-out and wait and see what happens. Things are changing by the minute. As I type this, Spain is going into lockdown.

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

Just now, The Dude said:

If two teams were tied at the top, there's already a rule in place for what would happen next.

Whether it would be fair to crown a champion with games in hand etc is moot as those aren't the circumstances (although there is the mess with Partick/QOTS to figure out

. I'm only going on what the circumstances are now. Hypotheticals about x having 8 games in hand an a 12 point gap are pointless because nobody is discussing those so I've literally no idea of knowing what would happen in that case.

There's plenty people also saying that you need to have played 30 games for it to count - made up pish - but so far the SPFL are telling clubs that this is how they intend to proceed. Whether that becomes their formal position after Tuesday, we'll see, but the league seem confident that legally these will hold up.

I've seen nothing which counters that either. Precedents from 1940 and mental hypotheticals have no relevance to whats in the rules that they are making the decision based on.

 

We are talking about the rules and if the rules in place just now are fit for purpose.

The for the rules to be fit for purpose, they have to deal with all situations, not just the ones deemed to be important right now.

If we are to buy the line that the rules are good and we are following them, then we have to accept that if a variant of this virus was to somehow appear next year putting us back in the same position as we are now awarding the title to a club who are level on points but have played 3 more games then the second place team.

If the rules are not fit for purpose, of which they clearly are not in the case of a global fucking pandemic, then we should not be blindly following them. It does nothing for sporting integrity.

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, bluenoz said:

Exactly, 70 pages of conjecture. Just take a deep breath, a time-out and wait and see what happens. Things are changing by the minute. As I type this, Spain is going into lockdown.

It's a fucking football forum, what were you expecting? The heads of Scottish football to be coming and and giving us personal updates?

There's loads of things happening around the world every single day as we sit on here and chat shite about Rangers.

[Redwhiteandblue 3,330]

20 minutes ago, The Dude said:

They will be though because the 2019/20 season will only consist of 30 games. No matter what happens, the final eight games won't be played. Even allowing for us having played 29, that extra three points does nothing for us.

There's more for smaller clubs to lose by voiding the season than there is by ending with the standing as they are 80% of the way through the season.

 

The EPL is giving Liverpool the league, so expect the SPFL to follow suit.

[ritchieshearercaldow 22,137]

4 minutes ago, The Dude said:

If two teams were tied at the top, there's already a rule in place for what would happen next.

Whether it would be fair to crown a champion with games in hand etc is moot as those aren't the circumstances (although there is the mess with Partick/QOTS to figure out

. I'm only going on what the circumstances are now. Hypotheticals about x having 8 games in hand an a 12 point gap are pointless because nobody is discussing those so I've literally no idea of knowing what would happen in that case.

There's plenty people also saying that you need to have played 30 games for it to count - made up pish - but so far the SPFL are telling clubs that this is how they intend to proceed. Whether that becomes their formal position after Tuesday, we'll see, but the league seem confident that legally these will hold up.

I've seen nothing which counters that either. Precedents from 1940 and mental hypotheticals have no relevance to whats in the rules that they are making the decision based on.

 

I’d say precedents from 1940 do have relevance, lawyers use historical precedents all the time. 👍

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, mitre_mouldmaster said:

We are talking about the rules and if the rules in place just now are fit for purpose.

The for the rules to be fit for purpose, they have to deal with all situations, not just the ones deemed to be important right now.

If we are to buy the line that the rules are good and we are following them, then we have to accept that if a variant of this virus was to somehow appear next year putting us back in the same position as we are now awarding the title to a club who are level on points but have played 3 more games then the second place team.

If the rules are not fit for purpose, of which they clearly are not in the case of a global fucking pandemic, then we should not be blindly following them. It does nothing for sporting integrity.

No because it again goes back to the board discretion bit. It would depend on the circumstances, how many games were played, how long the season was to be suspended for,  if/when the games can get played.

If it happens at the exact same time next year and a team several games ahead, one suggestion would be rolling back to the last time they were level on games. But, again, unless we know what the circumstances are, it's almost impossible to know what the reaction would be in any other hypothetical scenario.

If it happened in August, they might just cancel the whole season. If it happens in April they might stick with the results. Every single situation is going to be different.

Do many sports leagues have rules in place in event of a global pnademic stopping play for the first time ever?

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

3 minutes ago, The Dude said:

What part of it isn't true? If we win our game in hand and both Old Firms, we still need them to drop more points for us to win the title.

I don't think anyone deserves it until its mathematically sealed. If the league decides the season only consists of 30 games this season then it is what it is.

The part that you say we are close to the bottom of the pile for clubs getting shafted.

Here is where your argument completely falls apart.

You say you dont think that anyone deserves a title until it is mathematically sealed, but you say they do when it is mathematically sealed. What you are saying is that celtic currently dont deserve to win the league, but if a meeting is held and the league is confirmed as being 29/30 games long, with absolutely no more football being played, then you say that they deserve the title. You have somehow attributed more worth to a team, where a ball has not been kicked all because of paperwork!

Its a fucking nonsense.

[The Dude 20,026]

12 minutes ago, ritchieshearercaldow said:

I’d say precedents from 1940 do have relevance, lawyers use historical precedents all the time. 👍

Jesus christ. They'll cite precedents in law.

What one football league done in 1940 doesn't set a precedent for another in 2020 other wise, we'd be able to demand sanctions when teams use substitutes citing the 1924 rulebook which didn't allow them.