Concerning news from government and advisors?

Malabus · 29 Mar 2020, 18:08

This lockdown could take up to six months (if people do as they're told).
This leaves the current season in serious doubt to be completed.
Think it will be sooner than later a decesion will be made.

RegencyCheltenhamSpa · 29 Mar 2020, 18:28

Did you expect it to be any less?

This is why others and I have been saying finish this season starting late 2020 or even 2021.

Swindon away on Boxing Day anyone?

Malabus · 29 Mar 2020, 18:40

RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:Did you expect it to be any less?

This is why others and I have been saying finish this season starting late 2020 or even 2021.

Swindon away on Boxing Day anyone?

That's like cancelling season 20/21, clubs would go bust. That's not a solution.

Ihearye · 29 Mar 2020, 19:11

Looks like Sweden may be the only ones getting to play football this season

RegencyCheltenhamSpa · 29 Mar 2020, 21:06

Ihearye wrote:Looks like Sweden may be the only ones getting to play football this season

Belarus:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... ier-league" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/foo ... 32331.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

RegencyCheltenhamSpa · 29 Mar 2020, 21:16

Malabus wrote:
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:Did you expect it to be any less?

This is why others and I have been saying finish this season starting late 2020 or even 2021.

Swindon away on Boxing Day anyone?
That's like cancelling season 20/21, clubs would go bust. That's not a solution.

And if they have to refund tv companies and sponsors this season, miss out on league, promotion and Wembley final prize money, etc they will as well.

There are ten or so games left. Get it done in 5-7 weeks playing Saturday-Tuesday. The next season can be condensed, even if the format, dates and number of games etc changed.

One random idea just made up on the spot - split L1 and L2, maybe Championship in to North and South for example for one season so 22 games rather than 46. Get it done in less than half the time if you play more midweek. Then revert back to normal for the following season. The Prem is OK as the money is so huge they will just play whenever and wherever for the TV deals.

It is unbelievably massively preferable to finish this season for many reasons on and off the pitch and then alter/delay next season when everyone is in the same boat than it is to cancel this season.

Ihearye · 30 Mar 2020, 05:41

Sadly, the winds of change seem to be blowing in the direction of scrapping the season. If this drags on into the summer.

CTFCfan99 · 30 Mar 2020, 11:12

Scrapping the season would be an insult to every team that's put in the time, effort and money to get to where they have this so far. There's no reason next season can't be delayed and condensed - we only need about 6 weeks to finish this season.

RegencyCheltenhamSpa · 30 Mar 2020, 11:56

CTFCfan99 wrote:Scrapping the season would be an insult to every team that's put in the time, effort and money to get to where they have this so far. There's no reason next season can't be delayed and condensed - we only need about 6 weeks to finish this season.

Completely agree. And an insult to fans to. If the season is scrapped then I have essentially paid £375 for 18 meaningless friendlies. Whether from the Club and FA I would want that money returned and wouldn’t bother next season.

If the season is complete and the sporting integrity and competition is maintained then I would happily pay £375 for a condensed or reduced season next season to help the club.

tunnelvision · 30 Mar 2020, 15:04

There's no guarantee that next season could be completed so, as others have said, finish this season first. We'll be in a better position later to decide whether next season is viable or not, or if perhaps, some form of condensed competition could be held instead.

horlickfanclub · 31 Mar 2020, 10:57

If the season is scrapped I won't be asking for a refund and would pay ahead now for any future footballI have been well entertained by a great squad. Those that spit their dummy out do not care about the staff and players who work for the club.
I would happily give the saving I am making by suspending my Sky Sports sub. to CTFC.

Shade · 31 Mar 2020, 12:06

horlickfanclub wrote: Those that spit their dummy out do not care about the staff and players who work for the club.
I would happily give the saving I am making by suspending my Sky Sports sub. to CTFC.

Some people aren't in the obviously privileged position you are, especially now that they are out of work for however long, and they need the money themselves.

RegencyCheltenhamSpa · 31 Mar 2020, 14:30

For me it is sporting integrity. If football becomes a game where competition can be nulled and voided half way through when there are obvious ways to complete the competition then what is the point of having staff and players at the club or watching games.

horlickfanclub · 31 Mar 2020, 15:17

Great edit Shade. Do you work for the Mail group?

RegencyCheltenhamSpa · 31 Mar 2020, 15:48

National League suspended indefinitely but the NL saying they are looking at how best to conclude the season. Sounds like they still want promotion and relegation to take place, and rightly so.

If all leagues revert to points per game to determine final positions then our draws will indeed cost us as I have warned throughout.

Plymouth (3rd currently): 68 points from 37 games = 1.8379 points per game.

Cheltenham (5th currently): 64 points from 36 games = 1.7778 points per game.

We would overtake Exeter though (4th currently): 65 points from 37 games = 1.7568 points per game.

Assuming that play offs don’t happen would they promote us as the 4th best side?

CTFCfan99 · 31 Mar 2020, 16:22

IMO points per game is not a fair way to decide the final table anyway as it does not take into account the strength of teams faced so far. For example, Team A may have 60 points having played all the bottom sides twice, while Team B may have 59 points from the same number of games but having played all of the top teams.

RegencyCheltenhamSpa · 31 Mar 2020, 17:08

CTFCfan99 wrote:IMO points per game is not a fair way to decide the final table anyway as it does not take into account the strength of teams faced so far. For example, Team A may have 60 points having played all the bottom sides twice, while Team B may have 59 points from the same number of games but having played all of the top teams.

Barring completing all the games, what fairer method would you suggest?

paperboy · 31 Mar 2020, 17:44

RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:
CTFCfan99 wrote:IMO points per game is not a fair way to decide the final table anyway as it does not take into account the strength of teams faced so far. For example, Team A may have 60 points having played all the bottom sides twice, while Team B may have 59 points from the same number of games but having played all of the top teams.
Barring completing all the games, what fairer method would you suggest?

Well said RCS.

No formula is perfect and a club will simply back proposals that benefit themselves.

CTFCfan99 · 31 Mar 2020, 18:02

RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:
CTFCfan99 wrote:IMO points per game is not a fair way to decide the final table anyway as it does not take into account the strength of teams faced so far. For example, Team A may have 60 points having played all the bottom sides twice, while Team B may have 59 points from the same number of games but having played all of the top teams.
Barring completing all the games, what fairer method would you suggest?

Exactly, there's no obvious fair way to do it - therefore they should complete the season when safe to do so

RegencyCheltenhamSpa · 31 Mar 2020, 19:46

CTFCfan99 wrote:
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:
CTFCfan99 wrote:IMO points per game is not a fair way to decide the final table anyway as it does not take into account the strength of teams faced so far. For example, Team A may have 60 points having played all the bottom sides twice, while Team B may have 59 points from the same number of games but having played all of the top teams.
Barring completing all the games, what fairer method would you suggest?
Exactly, there's no obvious fair way to do it - therefore they should complete the season when safe to do so

That is my preference too. But if they decide it can’t be finished?

Malabus · 31 Mar 2020, 22:52

RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:Assuming that play offs don’t happen would they promote us as the 4th best side?

According to some expert on twitter we would go up as the fourth promotional team, based on that principal.

Ihearye · 01 Apr 2020, 05:33

Malabus wrote:
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:Assuming that play offs don’t happen would they promote us as the 4th best side?
According to some expert on twitter we would go up as the fourth promotional team, based on that principal.

Well there is an oxymoron for you!

RegencyCheltenhamSpa · 01 Apr 2020, 06:20

Ihearye wrote:
Malabus wrote:
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:Assuming that play offs don’t happen would they promote us as the 4th best side?
According to some expert on twitter we would go up as the fourth promotional team, based on that principal.
Well there is an oxymoron for you!

Professionals and experts do use Twitter too.

Though I do not believe Malabus follows any

Ihearye · 01 Apr 2020, 07:54

The vast majority of utterances on twitter are from dilettantes as opposed to experts