Could well be Saville who is dropped - though it depends how much he plays for NI. Anyway, I can't see Roberts playing in a position that requires defensive duties so a wing-back role is probably out. Could be 3-4-1-2 or even wide in a 3-4-3 but we may even see a back four if Roberts ends up playing wide in order to give defensive cover - though we'll need a left-back first!
Covid-19 Alert for Wood
OFB
Let's hope he wasn't infected - but perhaps a sign of things to come with the Scotland u19 manager receiving news of a positive test during the game and then the match being abandoned. Hopefully, he doesn't take the train home like the Scottish MP did!
It seems the PL have found a new way to make some cash during Covid and it's been announced that all previously non-televised games will now be available as additional pay-per-view games on Sky Sports Box Office and the BT equivalent. Games will be charged at £15 each with most of that going to the clubs.
Seems quite pricey compared to the EFL's iFollow or indeed our own Matchday Live season pass that probably works out at £4.50 per game for overseas viewers - especially if you consider many supporters will be on reduced incomes or worse and probably won't even be able to watch the games in pubs soon either. btw I'm not entirely sure why UK-based supporters still pay more as they can't exactly go to games.
I would be interested to hear the reasons that Leicester ( the only club to vote against it) gave for their opposition.
Interesting Tweet from the EFL midweek after the England v Wales game in response to calls to restructure the Football League...
24 of @England's 30-man squad named by Gareth Southgate earlier this week have EFL experience.
Nine of tonight's starting XI have played in the EFL.
Where stars are made.
There's also an article in the Guardian (Premier League may not need the pyramid but England and Southgate surely do) that warns against predatory PL moves and argues the case for keeping the integrity of the EFL.
I guess the counter argument to that would be that if Premier League B teams were in the lower leagues, you’d get more English youngsters exposed to “men’s” football and it could therefore be better for developing the next generation.
Another knock-on effect would be on loans. I guess there would be far fewer loans of Premier League youngsters to Leagues One and Two if their B teams played there.
The Premier League is not known for its altruism. Any schemes put forward are for their interests only. Benefits to the EFL would only be secondary.
I did think about that could be their counter-argument but that would most likely result in Premier League clubs signing up even more of the younger talent if they had an opportunity to field more players.
Of course, there's also no guarantee that the youngster they sign up would actually be English either but the consequence is probably the PL clubs basically controlling more players and as a result more of the game.
Would the other teams in the league only be responsible for supplying the 'men' to test their youngsters? Also much would depend on whether the B-Team league is in the third tier as to how these youngsters develop as they would also require the next step before graduating to the the PL.
I guess it ultimately depends on what is the purpose of having football leagues - should it be primarily designed to supply the Premier League with better players or should it remain as a meritocracy of clubs whose supporters invest themselves both emotionally and financially in the hope of seemingly old-fashioned exciting dreams of maybe making their way up the ladder.
Yes, not saying it’s a counter argument I agree with, just that there are two sides to the story as far as developing talent is concerned.
Unfortunately, with fans and the income they generate not being allowed into grounds possibly for the entire season, with some previous match-goers deciding against returning or getting out of the habit, I can imagine 20-30 clubs, maybe more, ceasing to exist. Football finances have long been bonkers and a major incident like COVID could well be the tipping point for many clubs.
I can’t see the Premier League bailing out multiple EFL clubs and even if they did it would likely only be a sticking plaster.
At that point it may be a case of what do we want - two professional divisions or three/four with the third and fourth backfilled with Premier League B teams?
For me, the old ways of lower league clubs generating income with player sales to the big boys died not with Sky money, but with Academies and that fact that teenage talent starts at the top and generally works downwards now, rather than the other way around.
Yes clearly football has been broken for a long time now and that has been a consequence of the wealth gap created between the Premier League and the EFL. The debts and unsustainable wage bills that clubs carried even before Covid is either directly or indirectly a consequence of clubs with ambition (which is most of them) trying to bridge that gap in order to rise through the leagues.
Premier League clubs with deep billionaire-owner pockets think they have an entitlement to buy up all the promising talent to see if any of them can become the next rising star worth tens of millions. Manchester City, for example, currently have 29 players out on loan (only 5 are English incidentally) with a further 17 players shipped out who didn't make it - and Arsenal currently have 48 professional players on their books, who presumably are all in need of competitive football.
No wonder they want to have a B league as they've probably reached their limit but having one could well encourage them to sign up even more players. I suspect most of these players will never make it to play for their owners in the Premier League - just like Chuba Akpom, they'll eventually end up in the Championship to try and kick-start their careers.
As to what happens next if 20-30 clubs go bust is hard to say - FFP has tried to reign matters in but club owners who want to roll the dice in the hope of joining the PL casino have found means to circumnavigate restrictions. The truth is they can walk away if the balance sheet goes pear-shaped - just like the owners of Wigan did. Many of the club owners are simply taking a punt and have no real long-term interest in the clubs they have bought - they are merely vehicles of their vanity that can be written off if the going gets tricky.
In the end the footballing authorities are responsible for the mess that we now have but as in most areas of life there's always someone else to point the finger at. The job of regulators is to regulate for the good of the whole game and not just the powerful who lobby for changes and relaxation of rules that mainly benefit the few.
Early days, but it’s good to see Hartlepools top of the League with 3 wins from 3.
I imagine it’s going to be an offer they can’t refuse....
Will it be equal shares or as is with the PL, will some clubs be more equal than than the others?
This must be resisted at all costs!
Nothing more than a despicable plan to concentrate control ( and the ability to garner more money and power) by the so called “Elite” clubs. The future of ordinary football clubs and their fans is on the line here. That this proposal has come at a time when corona virus is threatening not just football but many other industries is opportunism at its most base and disgraceful manifestation.
Shameful!
Judas Escariot would be casting admiring glances in the direction of Rick Parry.
Interesting......
https://www.planetfootball.com/quick-reads/20-successful-clubs-premier-league-era/
Still not enough to get us included in the vote for the future of the game..
All the same, not too bad a showing for the three NE teams, and especially our goodselves
So the 'big six' are trying to buy total control for a paltry £250m. With no means to stop them re-writing the contract in the future to further entrench their place at the trough of TV cash.
I suspect they don't want or need a football pyramid, and the plan is to reconstitute the pyramid along the line of US Baseball with Major and Minor leagues, and zero relegation.
I also suspect in ten years time or less the TV companies will themselves be frozen out of football and the clubs will sell their product online directly to the consumer.
In my opinion the magic four/six? who are at this moment hogging the money/fame/fortune/best players, are not quite the towering giants they seem. Consider the following, Arsenal, Spurs, Manchester United, Liverpool, are not rich clubs, yes yes, I know they have a lot of money, but as both Arsenal and Spurs are at this moment finding out, having very rich owners who are not stupid rich, is a deadly handicap. They love the football World and have no intention of giving it up. This means that life becomes a deadly game of sign the wonder player just as he emerges from the herd, only instead of being a pleasant pastime, it is a game of Russian Roulete, make a mistake and you are stuck with an immovable lump who is going nowhere for less money, for the next 4/5 seasons. Meanwhile someone from the lower orders is sold to an Arab trillionair who quite simply is going to win the lot, or know why. This was why Newcastle were blocked from one such owner. It never made sense to stop any one rich enough from chasing the dream. Liverpool are, at the moment, actually in top form at the game of finding players, but they know that, lose three and buy three duds, and goodbye the big time, and no idea how long. All this results in the following, get your management man in charge of the Championship, he then sells the product cheaply (very), announce that you are dropping two teams from the Prem. (more chance of getting the turkeys to vote for Christemass ) give two votes to the top Six clubs. Ditto. Get more London Clubs in the Prem, (there are at least four which could make it (plenty of room for some good loans to make the difference). Plenty of help for strugglers when things get tight at the end of the season, know what I mean? Unexpected results, never forget that every London club that is in the Prem means one less away match (quite a good saving of both money and stress)
I've been out of the loop for a few day but have just been catching up on this new proposal put forward by Liverpool and Man Utd. I was interested to read David Conn in the Guardian (Plan to mend football pyramid's great crack should not be swept off table) that he was broadly in favour of the idea but with some reservations.
Of course, the big problem is it essentially gives six clubs a veto on any future proposals or rather hands control of the Premier League to them. While they may seem generous in donating 25% of PL income to the EFL, it does appear to be on the back of two obvious points - one, these clubs have very wealthy owners, who under the new proposals would likely see a relaxation of FFP rules - two, there is going to be an expansion of the Champions League in 2024, which could for example include having six clubs in the PL taking part who would then receive much more money for doing so.
Whatever the merits in parts of the proposal that redistribute the PL wealth, it seems handing control to an elite group of clubs is not exactly going to make the task of the rest any easier to become competitive - what it probably does is even out the hoi polloi who can no longer bridge the gap and perhaps remove the competition in the PL that has inconveniently pushed some of the so-called big six from their usual annual ticket to Champions League qualification.
@werdermouth that 'the big six, plus Everton, Southampton and West Ham' are given a vote but not recent champions Leicester are given a vote should tell you everything about their priorities. Presumably the 'longstanding' criteria was put forwards as a way of including Man City, as other than possessing a hugely wealthy owner and very recent history, I'm not sure how they qualify as a big six club.
Its pathetic they should be ashamed of themselves
Clearly it's big six in terms of wealth and why the rest of the PL clubs would go along with any plan that put them in charge. Apparently it needs 14 clubs to carry any Premier League motion so it's actually hard to see it going through. Why would other clubs vote to make it more likely that they would be involved in a relegation struggle - and why would they vote to end parachute payments given that half of them have a reasonable chance of being relegated in the near future.
Indeed, nine of the current PL have spent less than four years in the top flight with another four clubs (West Ham, Southampton, Leicester and Palace) being members for 6-8 years. Only Everton outside the 'big six' have been long-term members, who probably have a key vote if the non-big six wanted to change the rules in their favour.
Therefore, if they handed power to the big six then their influence is over and their transient term in the top flight may become more precarious.
The proposals seem to be a mixed bag.
Getting rid of the Community Shield and League Cup I could get onboard with. Both are largely reserve fixtures or glorified friendlies in today's game, even further down the pyramid. There is some income to be had from that cup but I would imagine that would be covered in the additional payments offered by the Premier League. I don't have a major issue with the third-bottom Premier League joining the playoffs either, though I prefer the current system. The "rescue fund" and 25% of TV money are a good thing for the EFL, whilst the abandoning of parachute payments could lead to more sensible financial management for promoted, then relegated sides - as so many are - and I don't like the imbalance it can cause in the Championship even though our division remains ultra-competitive.
The reduction in Premier League clubs from 20 to 18 will clearly be a bad thing for all but the top clubs. This will reduce income for those not playing in Europe whilst those in Europe will more than make the money back up via an extended Champions League, thus widening the gap whilst not providing international players with any fewer games or greater rest periods.
Clearly the pick of the negatives, however, would be the shift in power to those top clubs - an absolute nonsense that I can only imagine was thrown in as something that could be rescinded during negotiations to give the impression of flexibility.
If that factor was removed, which it surely will be, as well as the reduction in Premier League clubs, I wonder if the others might get through. My gut is that they would. The sticking ground might be the PL reduction, rather than the power shift.
I'd agree that the Carabao cup may as well go given nobody takes it seriously any more and the Charity Shield is not the season's curtain-raiser it used to be back in the day.
Although, I'm still struggling to see the benefit for the other PL14 clubs needed to vote for the proposal who would then forgo parachute payments and have a greater risk of relegation too.
If you consider the 20 PL clubs shared £2.4 billion last season then 25% of that is I guess £600m - though if you cut the PL by two clubs that saves around £200m in prize money and if you scrap parachute payments then that saves around £260m a season. So the proposal looks like it saves around £460m and they would then add £140m extra to that saving. However, including £260m parachute payments, the PL currently gives the EFL £400m - so if you add the £200m saved by reducing the PL by two clubs then you get the magic figure of £600m that has been dangled!
Therefore it appears to me the proposal costs them no extra money in return for giving control of the PL to the 'big six'. The EFL should check the smoke and mirrors before considering such an offer.
Here's a link to David Squires take on the PL proposal in his Guardian cartoon strip (All hail the saviours of the English football pyramid) - which includes this frame below...
I fully agree with you in your views on the armed robbery being tried at the moment by the top six clubs, but lets get one point straight, Man City plus Chelsea are the only two Clubs who are in the gloriously fireproof position that this bunch are trying to manouevre, being seriously wealthy. Their great fear is slipping out of the zone, (think Liecester being Champions) that has caused them sleepless nights. Their intent is to set in concrete their position in the top six, plus play more matches against the Euro giants (pay per view?). They have a problem, they have got 2/3 turkeys to vote for Chrismass, but they need more to beat the three quarter needed to vote their way, hence the dropping of two Prem places, more will follow until their greed is satisfied. The never ending battle to get the leader of the players union cleared out of their way is another manifestation of their obsession with this project.
I
I’m certainly in favour of reducing the Premier League to 18 clubs as long as the top 6 play in their own League in Europe and 4 are promoted from the Championship. First of all how can the Champions League be called Champions when each European country have only one Champion club, and furthermore how can it be called a League when it is actually a Cup knockout competition in the later stages? As far as I recall the Football League refused permission for their Champions Manchester United to enter the inaugural Champions Cup although Scotland did allow Hibernians to participate and they reached the Semifinal stage before losing to Reims.
Incidentally I have thrown my weight behind the pyramid system but posted it in the Northern League section whether rightly or wrongly, but Jarkko reminds me that West Auckland won the World Cup twice. From little acorns mighty oak trees grow!
As for abolishing the Carabao Cup don’t forget that Boro won it when it was sponsored by Carling. Would abolishing it now diminish Boro’s achievement as winning the FA Amateur Cup twice seems to have been forgotten by today’s generation? I should hope not because we are unlikely to win another major trophy in the lifetime of most of the members of this forum.