The big debate on EFL’s proposals to play behindclosed-doors
The EFL last week wrote to all 71 clubs playing in their divisions to advise of their plans to resume the campaign in front of empty stadiums over a 56-day spell, when safe to do so.
Our team of Sunderland AFC writers cast their eye over the EFL proposals and deliver their verdicts on potentially playing games behind-closeddoors in a bid to complete the 2019-20 campaign, with all football currently suspended due to the coronavirus pandemic. Phil Smith – ‘There is no easy solution, but for the longterm, playing behind-closeddoors in the short might be the least worse option’
“The EFL' s plans come with the significant caveat that as of yet, we don't know when or if it will be safe to resume the current season.
So broadly speaking, the plan to resume behind-closed doors in June, while undoubtedly optimistic, is reasonable enough and at least gives clubs clarity in terms of giving their players a leave of absence/furlough leave in the interim period. There is no easy solution that can satisfy everyone.
No one wants games behind-closed-doors and there is no doubt it will take so much of the emotion out of the game that otherwise makes it so special. No one wants to win titles or play-offs in front of empty stands.
Similarly, it is going to raise major issues for clubs that not only rely on gate money, but need to be able to start raising money for next season, whenever that maybe, as soon as possible to get them through the current cash flow crisis.
It's hard to see how next season can begin with this one simply null and voided, though.
The legal consequences will without a doubt be vast and that will hang over any sense of a 'new beginning' that starting a new campaign will bring.
The game is going to be changed perhaps beyond recognition by the time it returns and the financial implications are vast. There is no easy solution, but for the long-term, playing behind closed doors in the short might be the least worse option.” Mark Donnelly ‘No matter how much we love football, health, after all, is the most important thing right now.’
“While supporters and clubs are starting to accept the
– fact that the 2019-20 may not be played to a conclusion, football' s governing bodies remain staunch in their belief that the current campaign will - and must - be completed.
The latest plan formulated by the EFL proposes that with games played behind-closeddoors, the season could finish in 56 days. And that includes the play-offs.
It seems fanciful at best. No plan at this point will be perfect, but there are plenty of flaws to be poked in the logic of playing behind-closed-doors.
While it would allow games to be completed, and would alleviate concerns over social distancing and drawing upon healthcare resources, there are natural consequences for clubs. The most pressing of those would be in terms of finances, with sides deprived of ticketing, retail and other income which is usually associated with a match day.
There is also the question of players' health. Yes, they could be tested before games - but is that really where we should be sending our limited supply of testing kits? And say a player is asymptomatic, but is then found to have tested positive. Presuming the squad are training as a group, the entire club would have to go into lockdown. As too would any sides they had played in the previous fortnight (which could be as many as four, under the plans ).
You would essentially then have to shut the league down, and we' d be back to square one.
For me, therefore, it has to be back to the drawing board - and perhaps the governing bodies could start to entertain the notion that football may not finish? No matter how much we love football, health, after all, is the most important thing right now.”
Richard Mennear ‘It could be months before a) any football is played and b) any football is played in front of a crowd.’
“Football is scrabbling
– around for viable options to try and conclude the 2019-20 campaign when safe to do so.
And that's the biggest sticking point, at this stage nobody knows when it will be safe to do so. The daily death toll of the coronavirus pandemic has almost hit the 1,000 mark across the UK.
Football, quite rightly, is taking a back seat like every other sport, with all efforts focused on stopping the spread of the disease and helping reduce the number of deaths.
The EFL last week revealed its proposals to conclude the campaign including games being played behind-closeddoors over a 56-day period.
It is important for clubs to have some sort of timetable and plan to work towards for financial planning reasons but at the moment it is almost impossible to plan with any degree of clarity.
It could be months before a) any football is played and b) any football is played in front of a crowd.
Behind-closed-doors games would at least mean the campaign can be concluded without a need to declare it either null and void or decided another way, such as points-per-game, but what about the financial implications for those clubs that rely so heavily on gate receipt money and commercial/hospitality revenue?
Yes, football at this moment doesn't really matter but it is a business with thousands of people relying on it for employment so planning for all eventualities is key.
The EFL are in between a rock and a hard place currently as even if games go behindclosed-doors then there are then issues around the health and safety of the players and back room staff and what happensif a player or staff member tested positive for corona virus, would everything go back to square one?
It is a deeply complex issue but of all the options, playing behind-closed-doors looks to be the most viable option to conclude the campaign - given it would avoid the legal ramifications of other options but when that will be, nobody knows.”