Punishment for the 6 clubs?

[Blarmy]

3 minutes ago, Arkie Bennett said:

By extension of that flawed argument, banning a player for being sent off, violent conduct etc unfairly penalises the fans who have to put up with their team being weakened.

Exactly. There’s no way of punishing the club without punishing the fans. Even big fines will, as the clubs are likely to spend less on the back of that. It’s just feel good posturing. 

[urban fox]

15 minutes ago, Blarmy said:

Exactly. There’s no way of punishing the club without punishing the fans. Even big fines will, as the clubs are likely to spend less on the back of that. It’s just feel good posturing. 

Plus they will just put up ticket prices squeezing rank and file fans out in favour of the corporates.

[Wolfox]

Bring back the birch

[majaco]

. I detest the sense of entitlement that the hyped 6  have.  The fear they have of other clubs doing better than them is a load of Boris.  The fact that the owners think they can financially shield themselves from competition is foul.  They are continually making money from ripping off fans.  It never sits comfortably with me , it reveals part of my personal hypocrisy, that I support players who earn more in a week than I do in a year.  Their wages are paid by the rich owners squeezing money out of fans, working people who want to enjoy sport.

 

What has swayed me about the need to severely punish these clubs is that clubs are punished for their financial misdemeanours when they go into administration.  The hyped six's owners would potentially  bankrupt many clubs.  While doing this they would put football behind a paywall making it less accessible to young fans.

 

Perhaps football has a limited life; when I was a kid, we would play on  the road.  Perhaps the pandemic will have caused a stop I  football with kids being unable to play.  The Super league would have exacerbated this situation.  The financial greed of the owners is another strand of financial incompetence.

 

The Super lLeague threatened to destroy the Premier League, the pyramid,  and other competitions.

 

Hit he entitled six hard with sanctions and punishments.

[SemperEadem]

[Langston]

3 minutes ago, SemperEadem said:

 

Poor from us.

[urban fox]

6 minutes ago, SemperEadem said:

Difficult position for us really. As the ones who supposedly are at the forefront of the challenge to these so called elite, we stand to benefit most from any immediate punishment. I think we are being a bit cagey here as we don’t want to be accused of feathering our own next so to speak.

this is why any points deductions should be from next season. If that happened we would soon see which players/managers are loyal and up for a fight or mere mercenaries and wanting away.

[Corky]

1 hour ago, Arkie Bennett said:

By extension of that flawed argument, banning a player for being sent off, violent conduct etc unfairly penalises the fans who have to put up with their team being weakened.

And teams have had whole grounds shut for racist behaviour and violence yet not every fan who attended would've joined in. In pretty much any punishment like this, somebody innocent or not involved will get affected.

 

I think the clamour from journalists and pundits for players not to be included in any punishment is down to their status- journalists want to talk to Jordan Henderson, Harry Maguire etc, and the managers. If they are seriously advocating for them to be hit hard by this then access may change. You know how paranoid and difficult clubs and people can be.

 

 

 

[Number 6]

The more I think about the more I feel like a points deduction next season is best.

 

- most of this season was done anyway so seems retrospect to do it this season.

- would add interest to next season (e.g will Arsenal go down? Who wins the title? Who gets top 4)

- balance of power in the summer transfer window as they all become relatively less attractive in the short term.

Edited 25 April 2021 by Number 6

[st albans fox]

How many clubs need to agree to get a monumental decision through the premier league ? 
 

answer is 14

 

will all 14 agree to a points deduction sanction ?   the answer is no because self interest will get involved. The big six are dealing with the others all of the time and it’s likely to be quite simple for some of the 14 to be carved off via off the record agreements on loans etc etc 

 

plus as referenced above, we are of a conciliatory tone and some others will be too. A legally binding agreement from the six that they simply cannot throw their weight around in future etc etc will be a good outcome. One club = one vote and perhaps the majority required for fundamental change should be upped to 75%.  No more watering down of finance away from the others ....
 

 

Edited 25 April 2021 by st albans fox

[reynard]

2 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

How many clubs need to agree to get a monumental decision through the premier league ? 

14 I believe. Though there have been quotes of 75%.

[Matt]

2 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

How many clubs need to agree to get a monumental decision through the premier league ? 

Surely you'd think its a majority vote?

 

But I fear i'm being very naive there.

 

I mean the 'big 6s' vote clearly holds more power from what we've seen before to clearly outweigh 14 other clubs.

[Corky]

6 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

How many clubs need to agree to get a monumental decision through the premier league ? 

15

[st albans fox]

5 minutes ago, reynard said:

14 I believe. Though there have been quotes of 75%.

 

5 minutes ago, Matt said:

Surely you'd think its a majority vote?

 

But I fear i'm being very naive there.

 

I mean the 'big 6s' vote clearly holds more power from what we've seen before to clearly outweigh 14 other clubs.

 

3 minutes ago, Corky said:

15

I’ve edited my post - 14 (actually 2/3)

Edited 25 April 2021 by st albans fox

[reynard]

14 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

How many clubs need to agree to get a monumental decision through the premier league ? 
 

answer is 14

 

will all 14 agree to a points deduction sanction ?   the answer is no because self interest will get involved. The big six are dealing with the others all of the time and it’s likely to be quite simple for some of the 14 to be carved off via off the record agreements on loans etc etc 

 

plus as referenced above, we are of a conciliatory tone and some others will be too. A legally binding agreement from the six that they simply cannot throw their weight around in future etc etc will be a good outcome. One club = one vote and perhaps the majority required for fundamental change should be upped to 75%.  No more watering down of finance away from the others ....
 

 

I think the speed of the "repentence" and breakdown of the ESL has probably saved them.

 

Some good will come of it in the short terms as there will be no chance these 6 clubs will get enhanced power in terms of voting or redistribution of funds and much less influence on committees.

 

It is possible the 14 could get away with a suspended points deduction for so many years in the event of similar behaviour or indeed any behaviour that brings the league into disrepute. Anything else would likely end up in the courts for a considerable period of time.

 

Personaly I'd like to see a ban on all US owners but doubt there's any chance of that happening.

We'll have to see if the sting in the tail comes from the Government review. I think that will just be a lot of hot air in all honesty with a few minor changes.

 

[Steve Earle]

I'm pleased to see reports of our club's 'conciliatory' approach to this. But there simply has to be a meaningful punishment to deter it from happening again.

 

I'd like to see UEFA impose a ban on the dirty dozen from all UEFA club competitions for a season. As for the Premier League, it probably has to be a points deduction to have any teeth, but for next season, and modest: 5-10 points?

[Webbo]

The argument against punishing the fans is that it was (possibly) the fans that stopped this. If you punish them, will they protest next time they try this? The desire for revenge can sometimes be self defeating. 

[Corky]

We're probably holding back because we've got the most to gain from any European bans/ points deductions and we'd be looking at our own situation the most rather than joining in.

 

 

[sacreblueits442]

45 minutes ago, Steve Earle said:

I'm pleased to see reports of our club's 'conciliatory' approach to this. But there simply has to be a meaningful punishment to deter it from happening again.

 

I'd like to see UEFA impose a ban on the dirty dozen from all UEFA club competitions for a season. As for the Premier League, it probably has to be a points deduction to have any teeth, but for next season, and modest: 5-10 points?

...if it ever happened again,  there will not be a climb down,  they will just go!!!

  Football supporters are so fickle after a few moments they would have talked themselves into the move being a good thing.

  A points deduction of 5-10 points will be (no pun intended) pointless and would make the relevant controlling organisations look like lap dogs.

[Muzzy_Izzn’t]

I’m not sure if someone has mentioned this already, so apologies if so.... but the notion that there shouldn’t be any points deductions or bans from European competitions because it is ‘unfair on the player and fans’ who had nothing to do with the decision is ridiculous.

 

Does that same logic get applied when clubs go into administration? I’m pretty certain that’s not down to the players or fans..

[Aus Fox]

Imagine a scene where a 20 point deduction has to be voted on, and approved by 15 clubs.

The non break away clubs all vote in favour, but the deduction looks dead.

Step forward Man City, who vote to stay in the title race and relegate Arsenal.

 

In all seriousness a points deduction is the only way of dealing with this, the same as clubs who went into administration. The cynic in me says they are waiting to see what’s the biggest point deduction they can give without relegating Arsenal or Spurs.

[foxfanazer]

1 minute ago, Aus Fox said:

Imagine a scene where a 20 point deduction has to be voted on, and approved by 15 clubs.

The non break away clubs all vote in favour, but the deduction looks dead.

Step forward Man City, who vote to stay in the title race and relegate Arsenal.

 

In all seriousness a points deduction is the only way of dealing with this, the same as clubs who went into administration. The cynic in me says they are waiting to see what’s the biggest point deduction they can give without relegating Arsenal or Spurs.

I think. Its be better to enforce any points deductions for the start of next season personally 

[Dahnsouff]

There won’t be a point deduction, no chance and those comparing it to administration are missing the point. It’s not a just point, but it’s realistic, as these clubs are essential to success of this league and the CL. I get it’s both fashionable and just that clubs should be punished so, but I can see no world that this happens, and view it far more important to:

• Remove the elements responsible from such clubs
• Put legislature/measures in place to prevent it happening again

Be happy enough if both points were implemented

[SemperEadem]

Feel like we are some sort of scabs, they are just going to either sit on the fence or snuggle up and let them get off the hook.

[Motty]

They have to be punished by either relegation and a European ban, for the next season and then for the next 2 seasons they qualify 

Or 5 seasons out of Europe and 35 points deducted this season. If that means some get relegated, well they should have played like a big 6 team shouldn't they.

 

I know that this is most unlikely but they all showed there absolute lack of respect and a selfishness of the highest order. Those teams still in it should be removed from European competitons with immediate effect.