So Stevenage, Tranmere, Bolton and Southend all set to be relegated. Plays offs are to go ahead - but no confirmation of timing or funding right now. No expanded play offs in league one so Peterborough and Sunderland both miss out.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52758193" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
EFL Update - Stevenage set to be relegated and lg1 on PPG
Moderators: Admin, Ralph, asl, Robin
https://www.ctfc.com/news/2020/may/efl- ... us-update/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"3. If a scenario arises whereby the Play-Offs cannot be played, the EFL Board will determine the appropriate course of action."
Can anyone see a scenario where we would not be promoted in this circumstance? We finished fourth, beat Col U away/drew home, drew Exeter away, beat Northampton home/away.
"3. If a scenario arises whereby the Play-Offs cannot be played, the EFL Board will determine the appropriate course of action."
Can anyone see a scenario where we would not be promoted in this circumstance? We finished fourth, beat Col U away/drew home, drew Exeter away, beat Northampton home/away.
Apart from the financial minefield that the playoffs will hand out to the 4 unfortuante teams. I still can't understand the logic behind holding them.Teams can't play to avoid relegation, teams can't play to get into the auto promotion slots, teams can't play to get into a playoff place. As these are all decided by PPG. However, the final playoff position has to be played for. How does that fit in with all the other decisions that have been taken? This saga has dragged on for weeks. For safety reasons, the league was stopped, for safety reasons, no more games should be played .... except ........
Brian Rix
Brian Rix
Six that I was aware of, all towards the playoffs. Maybe Tranmere too.Si Robin wrote:They haven't but the EFL have confirmed that a vote will be made on a 51% basis - Only 9 teams have backed continuing publically (I think) so it means the vote is likely to bring the season to an end.
I can kind of understand the logic to playing them. The rules are that teams finish in 1st to 3rd are automatically promoted, the bottom club is relegated. 4th to 7th play for the last promotion spot. All the league have done is call the final positions. Therefore 4th to 7th play off.Ihearye wrote:Apart from the financial minefield that the playoffs will hand out to the 4 unfortuante teams. I still can't understand the logic behind holding them.Teams can't play to avoid relegation, teams can't play to get into the auto promotion slots, teams can't play to get into a playoff place. As these are all decided by PPG. However, the final playoff position has to be played for. How does that fit in with all the other decisions that have been taken? This saga has dragged on for weeks. For safety reasons, the league was stopped, for safety reasons, no more games should be played .... except ........
Brian Rix
Then again, I can see your counter argument and agree with it. No more games means no more games.
-
- Posts: 29811
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Congratulations Barrow on a long awaited return to the football league.
My thoughts on whether there should be play offs or not.....as long as we end up getting promoted I don’t care either way.
My thoughts on whether there should be play offs or not.....as long as we end up getting promoted I don’t care either way.
I just don't see how its fair (Nor safe) that the play off's are played.
Just promote on the top 4 PPG average. Its the only fair way and before anyone asks, I genuinely don't know if CTFC would be 4th based on the PPG.
Playing the play offs is a joke IMO. We could of finished in the top 3 if the season had of continued yet we have to go in the play offs. Same for teams chasing a play off place. They could of made it if the season continued so they have missed out
Just promote on the top 4 PPG average. Its the only fair way and before anyone asks, I genuinely don't know if CTFC would be 4th based on the PPG.
Playing the play offs is a joke IMO. We could of finished in the top 3 if the season had of continued yet we have to go in the play offs. Same for teams chasing a play off place. They could of made it if the season continued so they have missed out
-
- Posts: 29811
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Exeter will say the same though. They have been in the top three more than us this season and could argue they would have got in the top three again.
The key game would have been us vs Exeter, and our away game at Swindon.
At least now it is fair both us and Exeter get a chance. The right result will be a Cheltenham vs Exeter play off final.
If we do face Exeter in the play off final I hope the game is played at Ashton Gate, not Wembley. AG is already being suggested as a neutral venue for Premiership rugby union games due to being able to implement social distancing of players, staff and fans easily (with restricted numbers). The match would be nothing more than a means to an end, it needs a professional approach and is just a game which needs to be won - it is not a day out or an ‘event’ so no need to be played at Wembley.
The key game would have been us vs Exeter, and our away game at Swindon.
At least now it is fair both us and Exeter get a chance. The right result will be a Cheltenham vs Exeter play off final.
If we do face Exeter in the play off final I hope the game is played at Ashton Gate, not Wembley. AG is already being suggested as a neutral venue for Premiership rugby union games due to being able to implement social distancing of players, staff and fans easily (with restricted numbers). The match would be nothing more than a means to an end, it needs a professional approach and is just a game which needs to be won - it is not a day out or an ‘event’ so no need to be played at Wembley.
- Hubert Parry
- Posts: 2443
- Joined: 22 Jul 2011, 09:09
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52680375" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
On the basis of Julian Tagg's comments, Exeter might be better placed to compete in the playoffs financially. I would be surprised if we had similar levels of cash reserves.
On the basis of Julian Tagg's comments, Exeter might be better placed to compete in the playoffs financially. I would be surprised if we had similar levels of cash reserves.
There will be no need for fans social distancing, as there would be no fans.RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:Exeter will say the same though. They have been in the top three more than us this season and could argue they would have got in the top three again.
The key game would have been us vs Exeter, and our away game at Swindon.
At least now it is fair both us and Exeter get a chance. The right result will be a Cheltenham vs Exeter play off final.
If we do face Exeter in the play off final I hope the game is played at Ashton Gate, not Wembley. AG is already being suggested as a neutral venue for Premiership rugby union games due to being able to implement social distancing of players, staff and fans easily (with restricted numbers). The match would be nothing more than a means to an end, it needs a professional approach and is just a game which needs to be won - it is not a day out or an ‘event’ so no need to be played at Wembley.
On the basis of that article and the playoffs costing approx £400,000. How is it right for the EFL to burden 4 teams with that debt, while others get a free ride? This is a disaster waiting to happen, would rather the club survived that go into a playoff lottery after 10 weeks of inactivity.Hubert Parry wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52680375
On the basis of Julian Tagg's comments, Exeter might be better placed to compete in the playoffs financially. I would be surprised if we had similar levels of cash reserves.
-
- Posts: 29811
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Players and staff are needed though. Most of the stuff about Ashton Gate and rugby is focusing on the dressing room and off pitch set up.Ihearye wrote:There will be no need for fans social distancing, as there would be no fans.RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:Exeter will say the same though. They have been in the top three more than us this season and could argue they would have got in the top three again.
The key game would have been us vs Exeter, and our away game at Swindon.
At least now it is fair both us and Exeter get a chance. The right result will be a Cheltenham vs Exeter play off final.
If we do face Exeter in the play off final I hope the game is played at Ashton Gate, not Wembley. AG is already being suggested as a neutral venue for Premiership rugby union games due to being able to implement social distancing of players, staff and fans easily (with restricted numbers). The match would be nothing more than a means to an end, it needs a professional approach and is just a game which needs to be won - it is not a day out or an ‘event’ so no need to be played at Wembley.
-
- Posts: 29811
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
On the basis of that article only a max of three teams in L2 will have debt - Exeter seem to have plenty of cash in the bank to pay for it without needing debt.Ihearye wrote:On the basis of that article and the playoffs costing approx £400,000. How is it right for the EFL to burden 4 teams with that debt, while others get a free ride? This is a disaster waiting to happen, would rather the club survived that go into a playoff lottery after 10 weeks of inactivity.Hubert Parry wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52680375
On the basis of Julian Tagg's comments, Exeter might be better placed to compete in the playoffs financially. I would be surprised if we had similar levels of cash reserves.
If we have to fork out to play in the play offs then it makes promotion an imperative. A bit like when we went down to the NL, it was a promotion or bust situation. Is this the same again?
- Hubert Parry
- Posts: 2443
- Joined: 22 Jul 2011, 09:09
Yes, therefore it is not a risk worth taking, especially as failure coupled with a disastrous season next year would mean we drop out of the League.
-
- Posts: 29811
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
That article is the first time I have seen any mention or speculation of a proposed salary cap. Where did that come from?
I imagine that the EFL want to get the vote passed then worry about the play-offs afterwards. Suspect that they are not overly confident that they will take place and if that happened that could put the 4th promotion spot in jeopardy as League One and the Championship might vote to have one less of their own relegated.Robin wrote:https://www.ctfc.com/news/2020/may/efl- ... us-update/
"3. If a scenario arises whereby the Play-Offs cannot be played, the EFL Board will determine the appropriate course of action."
Can anyone see a scenario where we would not be promoted in this circumstance? We finished fourth, beat Col U away/drew home, drew Exeter away, beat Northampton home/away.
I did think that I saw a while back that the EFL would foot the testing bill ,but haven't seen that confirmed anywhere recently.
Paul Godfrey has said that all 4 potential play-off teams are in dialogue regarding the costs and saying that it is unfair that 4 clubs should foot the costs on their own-I'm not sure you can have your cake and eat it though. Maybe they will come to an arrangement whereby the winners assist the other three financially if need be.
MD has said that we are in dialogue regarding our loan players.
Not sure whether JDH will be training already with Villa.
-
- Posts: 29811
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
I suspect many teams will envy the wealth of our majority shareholder
-
- Posts: 31
- Joined: 01 Apr 2016, 16:20
Simon Keswick?RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:I suspect many teams will envy the wealth of our majority shareholder
-
- Posts: 29811
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Yes, he is our largest shareholder (about 25%), closely followed by CTFC Investments Limited who hold about 22% and are registered in the Cayman Islands - I don’t want to speculate who might ultimately be behind them.RubyRedRobin wrote:Simon Keswick?RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:I suspect many teams will envy the wealth of our majority shareholder
-
- Posts: 31
- Joined: 01 Apr 2016, 16:20
Interesting about the offshored ownership, didn't realise that. Would be interesting to find out who, but probably impossible to tell 100%.RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:Yes, he is our largest shareholder (about 25%), closely followed by CTFC Investments Limited who hold about 22% and are registered in the Cayman Islands - I don’t want to speculate who might ultimately be behind them.RubyRedRobin wrote:Simon Keswick?RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:I suspect many teams will envy the wealth of our majority shareholder
-
- Posts: 29811
- Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Ruby Red obviously missed it.Si Robin wrote:This was brought up 2 and 5 years ago
http://robinsnestforum.co.uk/viewtopic. ... an#p290507
Agree with this 100%Ihearye wrote:Apart from the financial minefield that the playoffs will hand out to the 4 unfortuante teams. I still can't understand the logic behind holding them.Teams can't play to avoid relegation, teams can't play to get into the auto promotion slots, teams can't play to get into a playoff place. As these are all decided by PPG. However, the final playoff position has to be played for. How does that fit in with all the other decisions that have been taken? This saga has dragged on for weeks. For safety reasons, the league was stopped, for safety reasons, no more games should be played .... except ........
Brian Rix
Decide the full league positions on a PPG average then award promotion/ relegation based on that.