Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Cost to EFL clubs of games being played behind closed doors

Not directly WWFC related, but BBC reports: "https://bbc.co.uk/sport/football/51804544..financial impact of measures on EFL clubs could be 'devastating'

Mark Palios, chairman of League One Tranmere Rovers, says many clubs "operate hand to mouth" and playing games without crowds for the rest of the season could cost his team up to £500,000 in lost income.

David Bottomley, the chief executive of League One Rochdale, says playing behind closed doors would be a "huge issue from a financial perspective" and, with six home games remaining, could cost up to £200,000.

Question is, rights and wrongs' of doing so aside and the very valid reasons considered.. if WWFC like other EFL clubs are forced to play games behind closed doors for the remainder of the season what impact could it have on the Blues finances?

«13456710

Comments

  • This may be a dumb question, but could L1 and L2 extend into late May rather than play the games behind closed doors? If everything shuts down for a month, the games could then be moved.

    I know Wembley dates would be lost for playoffs, but if they could not be moved, perhaps the finals could be played at Tottenham Stadium or Old Trafford?

    I may be missing the point, but for clubs at our level it would seem better to move games than lose them.

  • edited March 10

    Games should be delayed rather than played behind closed doors if such measures end up being necessary. Football without fans is nothing - not to mention the detrimental financial impact.

  • I slightly disagree with the "science doesn't support it" argument as that doesn't seem to account for groundhoppers etc. flying in from abroad for games with pub visits either side.

  • Doesn't large amounts of alcohol kill the virus? (Asking for a friend....)

  • Far better to postpone than to play matches behind closed doors . To accommodate this confine the playoff finals to the two teams immediately below the automatic places This gives the season a two week extension. Harsh maybe on us but ....,

  • @Mr67 said:
    Far better to postpone than to play matches behind closed doors . To accommodate this confine the playoff finals to the two teams immediately below the automatic places This gives the season a two week extension. Harsh maybe on us but ....,

    This is exactly what I have been fearing might happen. Just like in 1995, Wycombe Wanderers may achieve their highest ever league position but get denied what should be an opportunity for promotion via the play-offs.

  • @Uncle_T said:

    @Mr67 said:
    Far better to postpone than to play matches behind closed doors . To accommodate this confine the playoff finals to the two teams immediately below the automatic places This gives the season a two week extension. Harsh maybe on us but ....,

    This is exactly what I have been fearing might happen. Just like in 1995, Wycombe Wanderers may achieve their highest ever league position but get denied what should be an opportunity for promotion via the play-offs.

    What happened in 95?

  • We finished 6th in Division Two, the first time that wasn’t enough to make the play-offs.

  • 1995 - There was a restructuring of number of teams in each division so only two went up from tier 3 - the winners and then a play off between the teams that finished 2nd thru 5th. We came 6th.

  • Just one idea there may be others. Anything is better than closed door games imo

  • We better get ourselves back up to 3rd or 4th then!

    But nah, in all seriousness, surely they wouldn't reduce the play-offs - the semis are only four games, no big issue fitting them in if the season is only suspended for a couple of weeks.

    The potentially huge impact on football would be with the Euros - will they still go ahead?

  • edited March 10

    Just promote the top two and the team that had spent the most time in the play-off positions at the point the virus was first reported. Simple.

    👍 👎 ( 2 )
  • From a club survival perspective, I think having Rob Couhig now as the majority shareholder instead of the Trust will be a significant benefit. The club should be more able to ride out the financial loss in match day income than it would have been as things were prior to the majority share sale.

  • @floyd said:
    We finished 6th in Division Two, the first time that wasn’t enough to make the play-offs.

    Oh nooooooooo.......

  • The Prem have started hinting about overturning the 3pm TV ban and showing thrir games for free if games are played behind closed doors, could certainly impact on us financially but delay seems much better all round.

  • If we make the decision to postpone, may be a bit optimistic to believe we will be back up and running quickly enough to finish season by end of May.

    Euro 2020 to become euro 2021?

    God knows what happens with leagues.
    At least with behind closed doors, can get some revenue via iplayer.

  • If WWFC are forced to play games behind closed doors then I assume Phil Catchpole would still be allowed in to broadcast to the chair metropolis? Dressed in full anti viral suit if necessary.

  • edited March 10

    It'd top off a mad season if it all got called off wouldn't it!
    Bury and Bolton and then no one finishes the season after all!> @Stewie63 said:

    If WWFC are forced to play games behind closed doors then I assume Phil Catchpole would still be allowed in to broadcast to the chair metropolis? Dressed in full anti viral suit if necessary.

    There would be 2,000 hard core hanging about in the woods watching half a pitch

    👍 👎 ( 1 )
  • Italy could have play-offs to decide everything if the Serie A season doesn't resume. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/51824172

  • I think moving the Euros to 2021 would be a sensible move given how this virus is spreading, there's not much football happening next summer.

    Would allow for an extension to this season if a couple of weeks off are needed in the delay phase.

    I disagree with the measures being taken abroad to play closed doors games. Clubs could end up crippled financially and fans will gather in pubs indoors where transmitting the virus is more likely than it is outdoors.

    Banning fans from games is unnecessary unless you are going to take extreme measures and completely stop travel and tell people to self-isolate. It won't stop the spread.

    Unfortunately our government who I feel have responded sensibly so far are going to come under pressure to follow the trend of what is happening across Europe. It doesn't need to happen unless we have an Italy-esque escalation.

    👍 👎 ( 1 )
  • We might well see an Italy esque escalation. That's when there would need to be more extreme measures.

  • I'm not sure Italy dealt with the situation well at all, they also have a more ageing population who are worse affected, as well as their extra sociable culture.

    Will be an interesting couple of weeks to see how things develop here.

  • Playing games behind closed doors only makes sense if it’s part of a wider suspension of free movement.

  • Exactly, which isn't really what we are seeing across Europe, with the exception of Italy.

  • Dunning Kruger effect starting to become apparent. Careful, everyone.

  • The virus will probably not peak till well after May, so delaying or having a "break" will not solve the problem. If the initial thinking that the virus does not like warm temperatures are proven to be correct, we need a long warm summer to really halt the spread. So mid to late May before the virus starts to decline. 2 years ago 35 people died each week from flu (over a 6 week period).

  • edited March 10

    If I'm starting to understand it properly, the intention is not to "solve" the problem but to slow down the spread of it so that the medical services can cope with the demand on them. Minimising mass gatherings of people from all parts seems a fair way to help with that.

  • edited March 10
  • @Fit2drop said:
    The virus will probably not peak till well after May, so delaying or having a "break" will not solve the problem. If the initial thinking that the virus does not like warm temperatures are proven to be correct, we need a long warm summer to really halt the spread. So mid to late May before the virus starts to decline. 2 years ago 35 people died each week from flu (over a 6 week period).

    Some Public Health experts were quoted on the news as expecting the numbers to peak in about a fortnight (and I think I heard that numbers are starting to decline in China) but the prediction for the UK does sound overly optimistic.

Sign In or Register to comment.