Coronavirus and football.

[ramAnag]

option c dismissed by the intellectuals, well I never,
1. no one- players/officials/bystanders have to take any risks
2. Just one player testing positive has massive implications for his team or any they have played, throwing everything up in the air.
3. Someone will take offence to the results, however they turn out and launch a legal challenge.
4. Players have the option of not taking part/ Unions advising they don't for safety

Let me ask a question.
If Kim feedme Un or a mad mullah sparked a war, would you still be screaming for the season to be finished?
My club is still in with a shout.
I wouldn't ask any of them to risk their families, for a game of football. Would you?

I have absolutely no idea what this has got to do with ‘mad mullahs’, ‘Kim feedme Un’ or ‘intellectuals’...although you seem to have just insulted GP.

Neither am I ‘screaming for the season to be finished’...I totally accept GP’s points about player safety...but I am suggesting the need for the outcomes of the season to be ‘resolved’...not necessarily ‘finished’/completed. I did say ‘finish’ it only if player safety can be guaranteed.

Let me put it another way. A Championship season involves - usually and providing no one goes bankrupt - the playing of 1104 matches.
To date 888 of those matches have been completed this season.
IMO it makes more sense for the season to be resolved by predicting the outcome of the remaining matches, on the basis of the known outcome of the 888 matches already played, than by abandoning the season.

That is my suggestion, not a ‘scream’. It is not remotely ‘intellectual’ and I don’t think Derby are ‘in with a shout’ anyway.

[Trickytreesreds]

I have absolutely no idea what this has got to do with ‘mad mullahs’, ‘Kim feedme Un’ or ‘intellectuals’...although you seem to have just insulted GP.

Neither am I ‘screaming for the season to be finished’...I totally accept GP’s points about player safety...but I am suggesting the need for the outcomes of the season to be ‘resolved’...not necessarily ‘finished’/completed. I did say ‘finish’ it only if player safety can be guaranteed.

Let me put it another way. A Championship season involves - usually and providing no one goes bankrupt - the playing of 1058 matches.
To date 851 of those matches have been completed this season.
IMO it makes more sense for the season to be resolved by predicting the outcome of the remaining matches, on the basis of the known outcome of the 888 matches already played, than by abandoning the season.

That is my suggestion, not a ‘scream’. It is not remotely ‘intellectual’ and I don’t think Derby are ‘in with a shout’ anyway.

Well your suggestion is wrong.
In no way can it take into account loss of form/surge of form/injuries/sending offs/suspensions/weather (even snow lol)

Any club just out side the play offs say, will be claiming that they are due a run of form and your way denies them.
IE, law suit pending.

They either play, or don't play. End of.

So I ask anyone again. Would you risk your family over a game of football?

[ramAnag]

Well your suggestion is wrong.
In no way can it take into account loss of form/surge of form/injuries/sending offs/suspensions/weather (even snow lol)

Any club just out side the play offs say, will be claiming that they are due a run of form and your way denies them.
IE, law suit pending.

They either play, or don't play. End of.

So I ask anyone again. Would you risk your family over a game of football?

My ‘suggestion is wrong’ is your opinion...nothing more.

‘Would you risk your family over a game of football?’ Arguably the stupidest question I’ve heard, and seeing as I have twice now referred to player safety being a pre-requisite, not terribly relevant, but the answer is...of course not!

You just seem to have come in search of a ‘fight’. Look elsewhere...your own site perhaps...I’m really not interested.

[Geoff Parkstone]

I have absolutely no idea what this has got to do with ‘mad mullahs’, ‘Kim feedme Un’ or ‘intellectuals’...although you seem to have just insulted GP.

Neither am I ‘screaming for the season to be finished’...I totally accept GP’s points about player safety...but I am suggesting the need for the outcomes of the season to be ‘resolved’...not necessarily ‘finished’/completed. I did say ‘finish’ it only if player safety can be guaranteed.

Let me put it another way. A Championship season involves - usually and providing no one goes bankrupt - the playing of 1104 matches.
To date 888 of those matches have been completed this season.
IMO it makes more sense for the season to be resolved by predicting the outcome of the remaining matches, on the basis of the known outcome of the 888 matches already played, than by abandoning the season.

That is my suggestion, not a ‘scream’. It is not remotely ‘intellectual’ and I don’t think Derby are ‘in with a shout’ anyway.

Your maths is still rubbish

In the championship there are 552 matches in a normal season:

24 teams play 46 matches each = 1104, but there are two teams in each match, thus 1104/2 = 552 matches in all

Assuming your doubling up is consistent, I assume thus that 444 matches have been played and not 888


Context check. There are 46 rounds of matches in a season, and each round features 12 matches = 552

[ramAnag]

Your maths is still rubbish

In the championship there are 552 matches in a normal season:

24 teams play 46 matches each = 1104, but there are two teams in each match, thus 1104/2 = 552 matches in all

Assuming your doubling up is consistent, I assume thus that 444 matches have been played and not 888


Context check. There are 46 rounds of matches in a season, and each round features 12 matches = 552

Yep...can’t disagree. Maths is rubbish and I was multitasking which gave me no chance. Interesting it took you to pick it up. Just call me Priti

The point still stands though. Why is wiping out the vast majority (safe ground there) of results better than having an informed guess on the remaining minority as a means of resolving the season?

[Geoff Parkstone]

You just appear to have come in search of another fight. Look elsewhere...your own site perhaps.

Tricky may not articulate his point well, but I believe he is right. Artificially ending the season is too volatile a way to do so and there is no provision for it. Any artificial formulae will see winners and losers created and thus will result in discord.

The sensible options appear to be abandon or play. To my mind playing might work, although as a player I'm not sure Id be happy to do so: especially since many games would be meaningless for their teams, and getting more so as the season progressed. Its not like anyone else going back to work - there is zero social distancing, plenty of physical contact and most of all, vast amounts of spitting. You don't get that in your average branch of "New Look" or garden centre. Maybe players would need to wear masks - after all they do for busted cheeks, jaws etc. Thus abandon and focus on what we might be able to do - resume play when the tide is further out - maybe September, junk the two cup competitions and hopefully play next league season in full. Starting with no crowd and maybe introducing in the new year.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Yep...can’t disagree. Maths is rubbish and I was multitasking which gave me no chance. Interesting it took you to pick it up. Just call me Priti

The point still stands though. Why is wiping out the vast majority (safe ground there) of results better than having an informed guess on the remaining minority as a means of resolving the season?

Of the self evident senior political innumerates, you seem more like a Dianne than a Priti

[macstheman]

Gordon Taylor has said play matches behind closed doors with reduced minutes each half!! He reckons this will be safer for the players!
Mmm I'll have to think about that one, can't get my head around it yet!!

[Geoff Parkstone]

Maybe they wont need to spit as much in a half hour half?

[Trickytreesreds]

My ‘suggestion is wrong’ is your opinion...nothing more.

‘Would you risk your family over a game of football?’ Arguably the stupidest question I’ve heard, and seeing as I have twice now referred to player safety being a pre-requisite, not terribly relevant, but the answer is...of course not!

You just seem to have come in search of a ‘fight’. Look elsewhere...your own site perhaps...I’m really not interested.

On the contrary, you was fishing for one yesterday(not on your own either)
So if its a stupid question, why is it still on the table?

Condescending squadron leader