Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2019 10:14:00 GMT
Says the CEO of Portsmouth about the Checkatrade controversy. Apparently in order for B teams to enter the Football league 90% of the 72 clubs have to vote for it. So if eight clubs out of the 72 vote against it, it can never happen. The 90% rule was brought in at their last meeting in the summer and in fact increased from the previous rule of 75%. This is the first I have heard about this and begs the question, what was all the fuss about. Excellent post but it probably won't appease the conspiracy theorists!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2019 10:16:12 GMT
I'm sure the FA or Prem teams will be thinking of a way to sweeten the pot for 90% of teams to vote in their favour. Perhaps they could build us a new 20,000 stadium to win our vote? It would have to be a massive bribe to stop at the minimum 8 clubs voting against it - why would you accept a bribe that would effectively see you demoted with the risk of never returning?
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Mar 7, 2019 10:25:02 GMT
I'm sure the FA or Prem teams will be thinking of a way to sweeten the pot for 90% of teams to vote in their favour. Perhaps they could build us a new 20,000 stadium to win our vote? It would have to be a massive bribe to stop at the minimum 8 clubs voting against it - why would you accept a bribe that would effectively see you demoted with the risk of never returning? I agree, seems unlikely. But I'm sure teams who do want it are probably thinking of a way to make it happen.
|
|
|
Post by I Voted For Kodos on Mar 7, 2019 10:47:09 GMT
I'm sure the FA or Prem teams will be thinking of a way to sweeten the pot for 90% of teams to vote in their favour. Perhaps they could build us a new 20,000 stadium to win our vote? It would have to be a massive bribe to stop at the minimum 8 clubs voting against it - why would you accept a bribe that would effectively see you demoted with the risk of never returning? Doesn't have to be a bribe, just as likely they'll use the stick instead of the carrot next time. Threatening to remove automatic promotion to the Prem is one way they could make the U23 teams seem like a more palatable option.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2019 11:15:26 GMT
It would have to be a massive bribe to stop at the minimum 8 clubs voting against it - why would you accept a bribe that would effectively see you demoted with the risk of never returning? Doesn't have to be a bribe, just as likely they'll use the stick instead of the carrot next time. Threatening to remove automatic promotion to the Prem is one way they could make the U23 teams seem like a more palatable option. As the Chamionship Clubs don't like the split of TV monies I suspect a breakaway isn't a million miles away. If that is the case the EFL would be down to around 48 clubs and even less likely to vote in favour of Prem U23 sides being allowed in.
|
|
|
Post by daniel300380 on Mar 7, 2019 11:30:33 GMT
If the clubs were 100% confident it wouldn’t happen and were happy to get behind the competition, then surely there would have been a concerted effort by clubs to transfer this message to the supporters? That would then mean more revenue for the clubs. Although our club and others have paid lip service to supporting the competition, they haven’t gone out of their way to quash supporters fears. That suggests to me that the clubs aren’t happy with the competition and are even in some ways tacitly supporting a boycott. The clubs voted for them to come into this competition, so they are happy for it. They voted against them joining the league though. Said it from the start, the 2 are separate, this was a rubbish trophy anyway, until the late stages. The league is different and clubs understand that. Money talks, so clubs clubs vote yes in the future. But this tournament or a boycott won't have any bearing on that. Never got the boycott myself.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2019 11:42:53 GMT
Says the CEO of Portsmouth about the Checkatrade controversy. Apparently in order for B teams to enter the Football league 90% of the 72 clubs have to vote for it. So if eight clubs out of the 72 vote against it, it can never happen. The 90% rule was brought in at their last meeting in the summer and in fact increased from the previous rule of 75%. This is the first I have heard about this and begs the question, what was all the fuss about. I'm sure that's exactly what Port Vale fans thought about the prospect of playing Stoke U21 in a competitive game. You're assuming the current structure will remain intact and the 90% rule would apply going forward. The prospect of Championship clubs breaking away is real and its far from inconceivable the majority of clubs would accept U21 team presence should they stand to financially benefit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2019 11:44:37 GMT
If the clubs were 100% confident it wouldn’t happen and were happy to get behind the competition, then surely there would have been a concerted effort by clubs to transfer this message to the supporters? That would then mean more revenue for the clubs. Although our club and others have paid lip service to supporting the competition, they haven’t gone out of their way to quash supporters fears. That suggests to me that the clubs aren’t happy with the competition and are even in some ways tacitly supporting a boycott. The clubs voted for them to come into this competition, so they are happy for it. They voted against them joining the league though. Said it from the start, the 2 are separate, this was a rubbish trophy anyway, until the late stages. The league is different and clubs understand that. Money talks, so clubs clubs vote yes in the future. But this tournament or a boycott won't have any bearing on that. Never got the boycott myself. Of course it will Daniel. What do you think the motivations of the clubs entering U21 teams are?
|
|
|
Post by tomylil on Mar 7, 2019 11:53:11 GMT
Says the CEO of Portsmouth about the Checkatrade controversy. Apparently in order for B teams to enter the Football league 90% of the 72 clubs have to vote for it. So if eight clubs out of the 72 vote against it, it can never happen. The 90% rule was brought in at their last meeting in the summer and in fact increased from the previous rule of 75%. This is the first I have heard about this and begs the question, what was all the fuss about. The boycott was about the Trophy being downgraded as a practice tournament for Premier league rich kids. They add fuckall to the tournament and should f**k off to a European super babby league or go on loan to play against proper people.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Mar 7, 2019 11:56:00 GMT
Says the CEO of Portsmouth about the Checkatrade controversy. Apparently in order for B teams to enter the Football league 90% of the 72 clubs have to vote for it. So if eight clubs out of the 72 vote against it, it can never happen. The 90% rule was brought in at their last meeting in the summer and in fact increased from the previous rule of 75%. This is the first I have heard about this and begs the question, what was all the fuss about. The boycott was about the Trophy being downgraded as a practice tournament for Premier league rich kids. They add fuckall to the tournament and should f**k off to a European super babby league or go on loan to play against proper people. Or better still, not get hoovered up and forgotten by the Chelseas of this world and actually play football for an EFL club.
|
|
|
Post by Fetch on Mar 7, 2019 12:05:06 GMT
Says the CEO of Portsmouth about the Checkatrade controversy. Apparently in order for B teams to enter the Football league 90% of the 72 clubs have to vote for it. So if eight clubs out of the 72 vote against it, it can never happen. The 90% rule was brought in at their last meeting in the summer and in fact increased from the previous rule of 75%.This is the first I have heard about this and begs the question, what was all the fuss about. So what if they bring it down to 50% in the future? The fact that it's even a proposition in the first place is insulting, threatening the league status of some historic clubs just because premier league clubs stockpile youngsters that they don't play.
|
|
|
Post by BishopstonBRFC on Mar 7, 2019 12:31:31 GMT
Says the CEO of Portsmouth about the Checkatrade controversy. Apparently in order for B teams to enter the Football league 90% of the 72 clubs have to vote for it. So if eight clubs out of the 72 vote against it, it can never happen. The 90% rule was brought in at their last meeting in the summer and in fact increased from the previous rule of 75%. This is the first I have heard about this and begs the question, what was all the fuss about.It became fashionable to boycott it. Did it? What's fashionable about being told you aren't a Rovers fan because you're boycotting something you see as potentially harmful to the club you support? I'd much rather go to the game than not.
|
|
|
Post by BelieveItWhenIAmSatInIt on Mar 7, 2019 12:39:42 GMT
'What was all the fuss about?'
I mean seriously now, if you cannot see what all the 'fuss' was about then I absolutely despair!
The fuss was very much warranted and more to the point, I would argue that the fuss was the very thing that indeed forced the tightening of these rules in the fist place.
Well done to all who have refused to acknowledge this mockery of a competition over the last 48 months! In my opinion, it is the fuss that we have made that has safeguarded the integrity of the football league for the foreseeable future.
And also, please I mean no offence to those who chose to attend these games! I do not agree with you, but I respect your right to make your own decisions on these things.
Now, can we all be friends again please?
Yours sincerely A non scab ;-)
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Mar 7, 2019 13:11:19 GMT
The boycott was about the Trophy being downgraded as a practice tournament for Premier league rich kids. They add fuckall to the tournament and should f**k off to a European super babby league or go on loan to play against proper people. Or better still, not get hoovered up and forgotten by the Chelseas of this world and actually play football for an EFL club. The same Chelsea that's just be fined, not allowed to enter into the transfer market for 2 years, along with a fine for the FA for buying under age players?
|
|
|
Post by mehewmagic on Mar 7, 2019 13:19:46 GMT
...This is the first I have heard about this and begs the question, what was all the fuss about. Surely it's not a zero sum game though?. Some people do not want ANY non-EFL club / team in the competition, and I would respect that. It was our competition; for LGE 1 & 2 clubs only (yes, I realise some conference clubs were let in for some years in the past...). The issue of potential creep towards u23's into the EFL is just one issue.
|
|
|
Post by mehewmagic on Mar 7, 2019 13:24:20 GMT
It would have to be a massive bribe to stop at the minimum 8 clubs voting against it - why would you accept a bribe that would effectively see you demoted with the risk of never returning? Doesn't have to be a bribe, just as likely they'll use the stick instead of the carrot next time. Threatening to remove automatic promotion to the Prem is one way they could make the U23 teams seem like a more palatable option. True but that would merely encourage championship clubs and those with serious ambitions (done may say delusions...) to vote for it. Many LGE 2 (& even LGE 1) clubs would be even more inclined to vote against if bully boy tactics were used. The beauty of true democracy; one club, one vote.
|
|
|
Post by warehamgas on Mar 7, 2019 13:42:05 GMT
The EFL are between a rock and a hard place. They have upset the Championship clubs over the lack of consultation over the current TV deal and I think that over the next 5-10 years the impetus for PL2 from the Championship clubs will gather momentum and may come to pass. This would leave League 1 and League 2 clubs as a rump under the EFL. This danger of a breakaway is the biggest threat imo to us as a lower league football club. The EFL with only 48 under funded clubs would be unable to withstand the pressures that come from the PL. The EFL gets a lot of stick, much of it from me, but in the end they are driven by the clubs and are no longer in control of events. The FA are equally helpless and are also at the mercy of the PL clubs. The sad thing is English football has been sleepwalking into this for over twenty years since the PL formation and I’m afraid it’s too late to change now. This leaves clubs like Rovers vulnerable to the whims of others. Sorry state of affairs. UTG!
|
|
yattongas
Proper Gas
Posts: 13,904
Member is Online
|
Post by yattongas on Mar 7, 2019 13:49:33 GMT
Says the CEO of Portsmouth about the Checkatrade controversy. Apparently in order for B teams to enter the Football league 90% of the 72 clubs have to vote for it. So if eight clubs out of the 72 vote against it, it can never happen. The 90% rule was brought in at their last meeting in the summer and in fact increased from the previous rule of 75%. This is the first I have heard about this and begs the question, what was all the fuss about. He’s 98
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Mar 7, 2019 14:07:06 GMT
Or better still, not get hoovered up and forgotten by the Chelseas of this world and actually play football for an EFL club. The same Chelsea that's just be fined, not allowed to enter into the transfer market for 2 years, along with a fine for the FA for buying under age players? It's just two transfer windows not 2 years but there's already suggestions the ban will be overturned. I didn't realise the FA also copped a £390K fan, surprised the press didn't make more of that.
|
|
|
Post by farmygas on Mar 7, 2019 14:08:27 GMT
Or better still, not get hoovered up and forgotten by the Chelseas of this world and actually play football for an EFL club. The same Chelsea that's just be fined, not allowed to enter into the transfer market for 2 years, along with a fine for the FA for buying under age players? You must have a very unblemished view of the footballing world if you think that won't be overturned.
|
|