Just read that thread on the Oxford forum. They are deluded. Any of our remaining ten games can surely be the game in hand. It's not just the Coventry one???
But as it stands the current EFL position is we COULD still play about 100 matches to complete the season but NOT an extra 5 for the play-offs. That's just nonsense, isn't it. It doesn't matter who the teams involved are as far as that argument goes.
However IF the EFL just accepted to run a play-off competition then it could be:-
Coventry promoted as Champions
Rotherham promoted in second
Oxford, Fleetwood, Peterborough and Wycombe in the play-offs using the weighted PPG system.
Wycombe, Oxford, Portsmouth and Fleetwood in the play-offs using a non weighted PPG system.
If the EFL decide to just promote 3 teams outright - Coventry, Rotherham and Oxford/Wycombe then I'd expect at least Wycombe/Oxford and Fleetwood, Peterborough and Portsmouth to object.
While with a play-off competition I'd expect it would only be Peterborough or Portsmouth who would object depending on which PPG system is used.
With Oxford, Fleetwood and Wycombe into the play-offs under both systems is seems much fairer IMHO to run a televised BCD completion.
@WanderingDays said:
Just read that thread on the Oxford forum. They are deluded. Any of our remaining ten games can surely be the game in hand. It's not just the Coventry one???
Technically that cov game was one that was displaced though wasn't it? Hence it being the game in hand?
To be honest the guy is a keyboard warrior of the highest order - I think you only have to read through some of his Covid-19 related tweeting and retweeting to get a better idea of the man. I've little surprise his reaction is so full-blown.
He's probably got himself a get out of jail free card now though, considering earlier in the season he very publicly stated he'd resign if Posh weren't promoted this season.
I actually don't mind Peterborough as a club - they always seem to play some nice football. But their owner (and current manager) don't half get drunk on sour grapes. This is not ideal for anyone - even whoever goes up in 3rd, or whoever wins a playoff, but suing really seems like a loss of perspective, considering this is not some sinister EFL plot, but a reaction to a very serious pandemic. The sooner everyone realizes that "ideal" went out the window for this season a long time ago, the better.
Don't forget if they don't run a play-off competition it breaks the EFL's own rules about how they decide who is promoted, as well as using a new system - PPG - to decide on final placings. I can accept the need for PPG, I don't accept the need to scrap the play-offs.
Of course there will be objections, but why create more by not having the play-offs?
I think one could argue voiding still punishes success and rewards failure, and maybe the likes of Leeds and Coventry sue? It's a tough one either way. Whatever happens, there will be some angry clubs!
If they do want to void, though, I hope they can at least just call it "unfinished" instead, so that all the stats, appearances and goals remain on the official record. To me it is pouring salt in the wound to consider our magical season as non-existent, even if we know it happened. We would never have officially been top of the table, or seven points clear, etc. At least if you call it unfinished, it does not also tarnish that.
Can you imagine a couple of seasons from now being briefly top, and Phil Catchpole being obliged to say "Wycombe are now top of League One for the first time...officially." Or Bayo never being the top scorer in the league history of Wycombe, despite having broken the record? Or "No left back has ever scored a hattrick that included two direct corners."? I really don't see the upside of voiding v unfinished.
If there are playoffs it will only be to for the TV money involved. Trying to get in a position where clubs are able to put out a fit team just for a couple of games in front of an empty stadium would probably cause more problems that it would solve, not least the cost (and morality) of a Covid-19 testing programme that would be needed.
I'm still not sure of the sanity of trying to simply carrying on with normal relegation and promotion as if this was a normal season.
Look at how tight it is between Tranmere and Wimbledon for the 3rd relegation place and then rule arbitrarily that one of them will have to be relegated. Hard to see how that is fair on either of them.
That then takes us back to the 'no relegation' argument, which is probably fairer and likely to cause less litigation threats but then its had to see the Premier accepting 3 extra clubs next year and therefore I think it difficult to see how we could reasonably expect 3 teams to be promoted from League 1 this season
The fact that Scotland and a France have already implemented Ppg has to be significant? There would be far less controversy if a Europe wide system was used for leagues who decide to cancel rather than void or play on
@chairboyscentral said:
Does anyone know how the vote actually works? Are teams asked to vote on every conceivable solution or just a shortlist?
My understanding is that it works like this...
I don’t believe it’s even a shortlist. The EFL would propose a resolution to end the season and declare the leagues complete using a method they think works best/will pass the vote (possibly having listed the options they have abandoned and why). I think the EFL operates a 75% approval threshold for a resolution like this*. If the resolution is not passed by a vote, they can theoretically either resubmit it as is, tweak it and resubmit or propose something else.
I’d say successful legal action would be unlikely unless there’s a procedural issue or if the EFL do not present sufficient/accurate information for clubs to make a decision. ‘Fairness’ isn’t likely to be grounds for an appeal if 75% plus vote for something and have all the information needed.
*I don’t know if this is 75% of the total or whether it’s done on a ‘groups’ basis - for example, the vote in Scotland required 75% of each of three groups - the Premiership, Championship and L1/L2 combined.
Can I suggest a scenario in the Premier League which could occur to any team at any time.
Lets assume the Premier League get to play all their games up to the final match. In the last week West Ham are scheduled to play Watford but half a dozen of the Hammers squad are tested positive two days before the game. Watford are third from bottom level on points with Villa but having a two goal deficit. Watford obviously can't play their last game. Villa lose their last game 1-0 so are still ahead by just one goal.
Do Watford get relegated as West Ham are unable to put a team out even after isolation as other players or staff subsequently test positive?
@bookertease said:
To be honest I’m not too worried about how the league standings are decided. As the alternative is to void the season anything other than that is preferable in my view.
Basic PPG is probably the simplest way to sort it (and obviously favours us) but I’ve no strong objection to using a more weighted process to decide.
Out of curiosity anyone remember how to get that link to the predicted positions with various degrees of confidence that was updated constantly on some website based on form, opponents, phases of the moon, etc. I’m curious to know where everyone would have ended up using that.
I may be on my own in here but personally I really don’t want us to get promoted (although I’d love to see us 3rd in the ‘final’ table). I’d find it really hard to celebrate (other than in the way @Manboobs suggests, which I must admit did almost make me change my mind).
Also a disrupted season in the Championship where we may not be able to watch games in person for half of it would be a thoroughly miserable experience.
I think unfortunately the reality is that the EFL have decided that this weighted system is the way to go.
The article in the Athletic and tweets by the head of sport at the Times and Henry Winter all but confirm it for me.
I can’t see why teams with nothing to play for would vote against it either unfortunately, it also doesn’t help our case that many clubs get fed up of our on the pitch antics at times.
@Vincey said:
I think unfortunately the reality is that the EFL have decided that this weighted system is the way to go.
The article in the Athletic and tweets by the head of sport at the Times and Henry Winter all but confirm it for me.
I can’t see why teams with nothing to play for would vote against it either unfortunately, it also doesn’t help our case that many clubs get fed up of our on the pitch antics at times.
I hope I’m wrong.
Anyone thinking that a vote will be based on how much each club likes or hates Wycombe are pretty paranoid.
I'd rather not go up having conducted ourselves with dignity than go up through self-serving. If the League can't spot the motive behind the proposal of weighted PPG, they're even more out of touch than we thought.
@Vincey said:
I think unfortunately the reality is that the EFL have decided that this weighted system is the way to go.
The article in the Athletic and tweets by the head of sport at the Times and Henry Winter all but confirm it for me.
I can’t see why teams with nothing to play for would vote against it either unfortunately, it also doesn’t help our case that many clubs get fed up of our on the pitch antics at times.
I hope I’m wrong.
Anyone thinking that a vote will be based on how much each club likes or hates Wycombe are pretty paranoid.
I’m not saying anything will be based on that but it’s certainly not going to help our case.
@chairboyscentral said:
I'd rather not go up having conducted ourselves with dignity than go up through self-serving. If the League can't spot the motive behind the proposal of weighted PPG, they're even more out of touch than we thought.
What is the motive and who is proposing this method?
@Vincey said:
I’m not saying anything will be based on that but it’s certainly not going to help our case.
@chairboyscentral said:
I'd rather not go up having conducted ourselves with dignity than go up through self-serving. If the League can't spot the motive behind the proposal of weighted PPG, they're even more out of touch than we thought.
What is the motive and who is proposing this method?
@Vincey said:
I’m not saying anything will be based on that but it’s certainly not going to help our case.
Are you embarrassed by our 'on the pitch' antics?
Absolutely not. We play to our strengths and win football matches.
The way the likes of Winter have picked up on it suggests there's been a leak. Rather than just Oxford chancing it by getting their preference out there.
Comments
Mick Jagger once refused an offer of an Oxford concert because the Rolling Stones "don't play three quarters of a stadium gig."
(I may have made part of that up)
I heard they refused because they didn't like the colour of the fence and weren't allowed to paint it black.
Just read that thread on the Oxford forum. They are deluded. Any of our remaining ten games can surely be the game in hand. It's not just the Coventry one???
But as it stands the current EFL position is we COULD still play about 100 matches to complete the season but NOT an extra 5 for the play-offs. That's just nonsense, isn't it. It doesn't matter who the teams involved are as far as that argument goes.
However IF the EFL just accepted to run a play-off competition then it could be:-
Coventry promoted as Champions
Rotherham promoted in second
Oxford, Fleetwood, Peterborough and Wycombe in the play-offs using the weighted PPG system.
Wycombe, Oxford, Portsmouth and Fleetwood in the play-offs using a non weighted PPG system.
If the EFL decide to just promote 3 teams outright - Coventry, Rotherham and Oxford/Wycombe then I'd expect at least Wycombe/Oxford and Fleetwood, Peterborough and Portsmouth to object.
While with a play-off competition I'd expect it would only be Peterborough or Portsmouth who would object depending on which PPG system is used.
With Oxford, Fleetwood and Wycombe into the play-offs under both systems is seems much fairer IMHO to run a televised BCD completion.
Technically that cov game was one that was displaced though wasn't it? Hence it being the game in hand?
Darragh MacAnthony won't go down without a fight.
To be honest the guy is a keyboard warrior of the highest order - I think you only have to read through some of his Covid-19 related tweeting and retweeting to get a better idea of the man. I've little surprise his reaction is so full-blown.
He's probably got himself a get out of jail free card now though, considering earlier in the season he very publicly stated he'd resign if Posh weren't promoted this season.
Bring it on mate..Rob C will batter him.
I actually don't mind Peterborough as a club - they always seem to play some nice football. But their owner (and current manager) don't half get drunk on sour grapes. This is not ideal for anyone - even whoever goes up in 3rd, or whoever wins a playoff, but suing really seems like a loss of perspective, considering this is not some sinister EFL plot, but a reaction to a very serious pandemic. The sooner everyone realizes that "ideal" went out the window for this season a long time ago, the better.
Don't forget if they don't run a play-off competition it breaks the EFL's own rules about how they decide who is promoted, as well as using a new system - PPG - to decide on final placings. I can accept the need for PPG, I don't accept the need to scrap the play-offs.
Of course there will be objections, but why create more by not having the play-offs?
Surely if you just void the season it saves legal challenges from any team.
I think one could argue voiding still punishes success and rewards failure, and maybe the likes of Leeds and Coventry sue? It's a tough one either way. Whatever happens, there will be some angry clubs!
If they do want to void, though, I hope they can at least just call it "unfinished" instead, so that all the stats, appearances and goals remain on the official record. To me it is pouring salt in the wound to consider our magical season as non-existent, even if we know it happened. We would never have officially been top of the table, or seven points clear, etc. At least if you call it unfinished, it does not also tarnish that.
Can you imagine a couple of seasons from now being briefly top, and Phil Catchpole being obliged to say "Wycombe are now top of League One for the first time...officially." Or Bayo never being the top scorer in the league history of Wycombe, despite having broken the record? Or "No left back has ever scored a hattrick that included two direct corners."? I really don't see the upside of voiding v unfinished.
If there are playoffs it will only be to for the TV money involved. Trying to get in a position where clubs are able to put out a fit team just for a couple of games in front of an empty stadium would probably cause more problems that it would solve, not least the cost (and morality) of a Covid-19 testing programme that would be needed.
I'm still not sure of the sanity of trying to simply carrying on with normal relegation and promotion as if this was a normal season.
Look at how tight it is between Tranmere and Wimbledon for the 3rd relegation place and then rule arbitrarily that one of them will have to be relegated. Hard to see how that is fair on either of them.
That then takes us back to the 'no relegation' argument, which is probably fairer and likely to cause less litigation threats but then its had to see the Premier accepting 3 extra clubs next year and therefore I think it difficult to see how we could reasonably expect 3 teams to be promoted from League 1 this season
The fact that Scotland and a France have already implemented Ppg has to be significant? There would be far less controversy if a Europe wide system was used for leagues who decide to cancel rather than void or play on
The Bundesliga is due to resume next weekend and one team have already had to go into isolation. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52601471
My understanding is that it works like this...
I don’t believe it’s even a shortlist. The EFL would propose a resolution to end the season and declare the leagues complete using a method they think works best/will pass the vote (possibly having listed the options they have abandoned and why). I think the EFL operates a 75% approval threshold for a resolution like this*. If the resolution is not passed by a vote, they can theoretically either resubmit it as is, tweak it and resubmit or propose something else.
I’d say successful legal action would be unlikely unless there’s a procedural issue or if the EFL do not present sufficient/accurate information for clubs to make a decision. ‘Fairness’ isn’t likely to be grounds for an appeal if 75% plus vote for something and have all the information needed.
*I don’t know if this is 75% of the total or whether it’s done on a ‘groups’ basis - for example, the vote in Scotland required 75% of each of three groups - the Premiership, Championship and L1/L2 combined.
Can I suggest a scenario in the Premier League which could occur to any team at any time.
Lets assume the Premier League get to play all their games up to the final match. In the last week West Ham are scheduled to play Watford but half a dozen of the Hammers squad are tested positive two days before the game. Watford are third from bottom level on points with Villa but having a two goal deficit. Watford obviously can't play their last game. Villa lose their last game 1-0 so are still ahead by just one goal.
Do Watford get relegated as West Ham are unable to put a team out even after isolation as other players or staff subsequently test positive?
My understanding of the process is similar to Nedd's. The key question is what the EFL propose.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/soccer-predictions/league-one/
This website has the updated predictions after each game based on various weightings. Btw it’s a good website for political polling etc. too
Some alternatives to PPG https://chairboyscentral.com/2020/05/09/settling-league-one-six-creative-suggestions/
I think unfortunately the reality is that the EFL have decided that this weighted system is the way to go.
The article in the Athletic and tweets by the head of sport at the Times and Henry Winter all but confirm it for me.
I can’t see why teams with nothing to play for would vote against it either unfortunately, it also doesn’t help our case that many clubs get fed up of our on the pitch antics at times.
I hope I’m wrong.
Anyone thinking that a vote will be based on how much each club likes or hates Wycombe are pretty paranoid.
I'd rather not go up having conducted ourselves with dignity than go up through self-serving. If the League can't spot the motive behind the proposal of weighted PPG, they're even more out of touch than we thought.
I’m not saying anything will be based on that but it’s certainly not going to help our case.
Our ‘on the pitch antics’. What, by scoring more goals than the opposition?
I agree with you. I’ve read and listened to enough opposition reviews to know the general consensus though.
What is the motive and who is proposing this method?
Are you embarrassed by our 'on the pitch' antics?
@Right_in_the_Middle Well who are the only team who stand to gain from that method?
Absolutely not. We play to our strengths and win football matches.
The way the likes of Winter have picked up on it suggests there's been a leak. Rather than just Oxford chancing it by getting their preference out there.