UPTHEPORT wrote:How they going to get round one club missing last round of games surely that puts that club at disadvantage gate money and other clubs know what they need to do if it's in a promotion or relegation battle

They'll stick to the existing fixtures and one club will finish a week before the others. The reason for all kicking off simultaneously is to prevent teams mutually benefiting from (say) a draw when they know both will succeed. That is highly unlikely to happen with another 11 fixtures to be played.

Also, the idea that a club finishing the week before is going to do anything but play their best if they have any possibility of promotion or relegation is a little far fetched.

The only issue is if a particular goal difference target is needed, and even then that supposes teams in those close battles aren't already trying their best to achieve it.

Also, it didn't stop the Premier League letting Man U v Bournemouth happen midweek after the last round of fixtures in 2016 with Europa League qualification on the line.

SJG99 wrote:

UPTHEPORT wrote:How they going to get round one club missing last round of games surely that puts that club at disadvantage gate money and other clubs know what they need to do if it's in a promotion or relegation battle

They'll stick to the existing fixtures and one club will finish a week before the others. The reason for all kicking off simultaneously is to prevent teams mutually benefiting from (say) a draw when they know both will succeed. That is highly unlikely to happen with another 11 fixtures to be played.

Also, the idea that a club finishing the week before is going to do anything but play their best if they have any possibility of promotion or relegation is a little far fetched.

I haven't said they wouldn't play to the best of ability

My concern is the team that finished a week early could be at a disadvantage say they finished on 70 points the team below knows exactly what they have to do so if they where on 67 points but have a slightly worse goal difference they can plan ahead

My idea is you tell all clubs now the last 3 games are subject to change then the fl can say right Trumpton fc with 3 games to go can't go up can't go down they miss the last round of fixtures

That solves it it's not perfect but its better than the alternative

excessbee wrote:Can't agree. However, I do feel for Mansfield who were denied promotion by Bury's reckless pursuit of promotion spending money they did not have, even to the point of not paying staff.

Edit: Add to that the local businesses who have been screwed for 75% of the monies owed to them. Money that was surely built up over a long time, not just for services in the last couple of months.

I was thinking more along the lines of the long suffering fans of the club. Yes, there is a case to be made against the free spending antics of the club owners but the fans feel the brunt of the emotional pain.

I suspect that the current owner accepts that the club will fold in its current mode. He is unwilling to take on the previous debt personally even though he only paid £1 for the club. He won't be out of pocket in the long run as he will be able to sell the land and move on. Someone else suggested that the best idea for the club would be to drop several divisions and then attempt to move back up with a new stadium and a new club. I agree. Take the hit now and plan for the future.

As things stand, the club without a game on the final day would be Fleetwood. Probably mid-table.

pembsexile wrote:

excessbee wrote:Can't agree. However, I do feel for Mansfield who were denied promotion by Bury's reckless pursuit of promotion spending money they did not have, even to the point of not paying staff.

Edit: Add to that the local businesses who have been screwed for 75% of the monies owed to them. Money that was surely built up over a long time, not just for services in the last couple of months.

I was thinking more along the lines of the long suffering fans of the club. Yes, there is a case to be made against the free spending antics of the club owners but the fans feel the brunt of the emotional pain.

I suspect that the current owner accepts that the club will fold in its current mode. He is unwilling to take on the previous debt personally even though he only paid £1 for the club. He won't be out of pocket in the long run as he will be able to sell the land and move on. Someone else suggested that the best idea for the club would be to drop several divisions and then attempt to move back up with a new stadium and a new club. I agree. Take the hit now and plan for the future.

Directors moving in to control a club on its knees and land being sold, where have we heard that before.

NearlyDead wrote:Found it: Daily Telegraph article on EFL debts.

And I see Southend were listed on today's company court winding-up list... presumably a hang over from HMRC's petition earlier in the year.

Interesting reading that. It seems Macclesfield and Oldham are in big trouble too, The EFL could actually lose 4 teams this season , unlikely , but possible.

Maybe it is time to increase the promotion spaces from the conference as the financial penalties for losing your league space are too severe.

UPTHEPORT wrote:

SJG99 wrote:

UPTHEPORT wrote:How they going to get round one club missing last round of games surely that puts that club at disadvantage gate money and other clubs know what they need to do if it's in a promotion or relegation battle

They'll stick to the existing fixtures and one club will finish a week before the others. The reason for all kicking off simultaneously is to prevent teams mutually benefiting from (say) a draw when they know both will succeed. That is highly unlikely to happen with another 11 fixtures to be played.

Also, the idea that a club finishing the week before is going to do anything but play their best if they have any possibility of promotion or relegation is a little far fetched.

I haven't said they wouldn't play to the best of ability

My concern is the team that finished a week early could be at a disadvantage say they finished on 70 points the team below knows exactly what they have to do so if they where on 67 points but have a slightly worse goal difference they can plan ahead

My idea is you tell all clubs now the last 3 games are subject to change then the fl can say right Trumpton fc with 3 games to go can't go up can't go down they miss the last round of fixtures

That solves it it's not perfect but its better than the alternative

The team that's 3 points behind will be trying to win the game by as many goals as they can, just as they would anyway.

As for "last 3 games subject to change", it's completely unworkable. Clubs will have home and away plans on different dates, maybe hotel bookings and training venues arranged in advance, plenty of things can change from 3 weeks out as well, deliberately meddling in the fixture order is far more dubious as far as fairness and integrity goes than anything done on the pitch.

Alan G Bryant wrote:

pembsexile wrote:

excessbee wrote:Can't agree. However, I do feel for Mansfield who were denied promotion by Bury's reckless pursuit of promotion spending money they did not have, even to the point of not paying staff.

Edit: Add to that the local businesses who have been screwed for 75% of the monies owed to them. Money that was surely built up over a long time, not just for services in the last couple of months.

I was thinking more along the lines of the long suffering fans of the club. Yes, there is a case to be made against the free spending antics of the club owners but the fans feel the brunt of the emotional pain.

I suspect that the current owner accepts that the club will fold in its current mode. He is unwilling to take on the previous debt personally even though he only paid £1 for the club. He won't be out of pocket in the long run as he will be able to sell the land and move on. Someone else suggested that the best idea for the club would be to drop several divisions and then attempt to move back up with a new stadium and a new club. I agree. Take the hit now and plan for the future.

Directors moving in to control a club on its knees and land being sold, where have we heard that before.

Indeed. Was thinking along the same lines myself.

Bolton going under could possibly help solve the issue of final day fixtures. There is a natural cut off after 23 matches when every team has played every other. If it were possible reorganise the second half season's fixtures to reschedule Bury v Bolton as a final day fixture then the remaining 22 teams have a standard last day level playing field. Somehow, however, I think Bolton might manage to wriggle off the hook.

Financial penalties have been mentioned. What I don't understand is the 12 point reduction for a club when they enter a CVA. Seems like a double whammy to me. I understand that the EFL want to give out a warning to clubs not to get into this situation. However, sometimes things get out of control and then you get another smack from the league. Not exactly helpful.

The only good thing to come out of all this is that hopefully the message will get out to everyone that there is not a bottomless pit of money available. Particularly in the lower leagues. Bury, Bolton, and now apparently Macclesfield and Oldham. Time for all clubs to reign in their finances. Thank goodness for our recent cup run and that we haven't gone on a wild spending spree.

Best change that to Macclesfield.

excessbee wrote:Bolton going under could possibly help solve the issue of final day fixtures. There is a natural cut off after 23 matches when every team has played every other. If it were possible reorganise the second half season's fixtures to reschedule Bury v Bolton as a final day fixture then the remaining 22 teams have a standard last day level playing field. Somehow, however, I think Bolton might manage to wriggle off the hook.

Bolton will be fine. Will be relegated, but will survive. If they did also go, shifting the final day fixtures to swap to the Bury/Bolton date would be logically smart but might breach a bunch of EFL guidelines about numbers of successive home and away fixtures, matches (eg derbies) that aren't allowed to be final game of the season, etc. It's never as easy as it looks.

excessbee wrote:Best change that to Macclesfield.

Oops, well spotted. Thanks.

pembsexile wrote:Financial penalties have been mentioned. What I don't understand is the 12 point reduction for a club when they enter a CVA. Seems like a double whammy to me. I understand that the EFL want to give out a warning to clubs not to get into this situation. However, sometimes things get out of control and then you get another smack from the league. Not exactly helpful.

The only good thing to come out of all this is that hopefully the message will get out to everyone that there is not a bottomless pit of money available. Particularly in the lower leagues. Bury, Bolton, and now apparently Macclesfield and Oldham. Time for all clubs to reign in their finances. Thank goodness for our recent cup run and that we haven't gone on a wild spending spree.

It's a bigger double whammy for the small businesses who get screwed over by the CVA when the big boys agree to take a percentage on the debts. It is more likely that small businesses are also supporters of the club so take a knock to their business when their club underpays them and then watch the club struggle because of the points deduction. Worst case scenario, you could lose your business and your club.

The EFL has outlined what it will do in the event Bury don't meet the deadline. The last paragraph seems to admit the possibility that they could be readmitted to the league next summer in L2.

https://www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk/s ... ne-3233892