johnmcfcagain
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 6 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 159
Like many, I suspect, I really struggle with this whole question. First things first, above all else, my position is that given the suffering of so many at this time and all the risks to so many, the 2019/20 season should be declared finished. The decision then is whether to null and void it or do an average points per game to sort out a table. The FA have said that null and void is not an option as far as I understand? So Sergio gets to keep the records he has broken this season and the Dippers get the title of course.
But, as immoral as we might think it, football is a business and must seek ways to survive - like any other business you can care to mention. And thus, if enough people are happy to watch on TV around the world why would they not take that option? Every other facet of human life will involve risk as we come out of lockdown, from opening schools to opening shops, pubs, cafes, restaurants etc. Risks to staff and to customers. So of course football is going to try to survive by playing behind closed doors, at a managed risk to everyone.
And, as we all know, the fittest (I.e. Premier League clubs) will have a product to sell and will probably survive whilst the lower league clubs will fall in droves. The Huddersfield Chairman has said as many as 60 clubs could fold. An exaggeration maybe, but who knows? He may be bang on. It mirrors the natural world where the fittest survive.
I still love City as the club I have followed man and boy since 1970, and am full of wine-fuelled bitterness about the current state of the game and remorse at the passing of Glynn Pardoe. But I am no longer wedded to the club having given up my season ticket at the end of last season to purchase one at my exiled town club, Stourbridge FC (7th tier or 3rd tier non league whose season was declared null and void by the FA weeks ago).
Is it greed to play on behind closed doors for TV and armchair fans? Or is it the way every business should, and will, instinctively respond? And there are jobs and family livelihoods at stake. Not everyone who works for a Premier Club will be on a Premier wage. It's no different to any other business. And clubs like my Stourbridge FC will have to take its chances.
Sad as it is to write it down in such terms.
But, as immoral as we might think it, football is a business and must seek ways to survive - like any other business you can care to mention. And thus, if enough people are happy to watch on TV around the world why would they not take that option? Every other facet of human life will involve risk as we come out of lockdown, from opening schools to opening shops, pubs, cafes, restaurants etc. Risks to staff and to customers. So of course football is going to try to survive by playing behind closed doors, at a managed risk to everyone.
And, as we all know, the fittest (I.e. Premier League clubs) will have a product to sell and will probably survive whilst the lower league clubs will fall in droves. The Huddersfield Chairman has said as many as 60 clubs could fold. An exaggeration maybe, but who knows? He may be bang on. It mirrors the natural world where the fittest survive.
I still love City as the club I have followed man and boy since 1970, and am full of wine-fuelled bitterness about the current state of the game and remorse at the passing of Glynn Pardoe. But I am no longer wedded to the club having given up my season ticket at the end of last season to purchase one at my exiled town club, Stourbridge FC (7th tier or 3rd tier non league whose season was declared null and void by the FA weeks ago).
Is it greed to play on behind closed doors for TV and armchair fans? Or is it the way every business should, and will, instinctively respond? And there are jobs and family livelihoods at stake. Not everyone who works for a Premier Club will be on a Premier wage. It's no different to any other business. And clubs like my Stourbridge FC will have to take its chances.
Sad as it is to write it down in such terms.