Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Lee Bowyer on Talksport very soon

Bowyer on Jim White Show soon.
«13

Comments

  • On now.
  • I'm sorry but I have to disagree with LB when he says "Fairest way is halfway through season so it's judged when everyone played each other once". That is no fairer than taking it after 37 games have been played.

    If we can't finish the season then it should be voided with no relegation and no promotion. It is a 46 match season. Not 23 and not 37. To decide it any other way is simply ridiculous.
    I agree, we might have played say West Brom away whilst Luton have played West Brom at home. How is that equal.
  • I'm sorry but I have to disagree with LB when he says "Fairest way is halfway through season so it's judged when everyone played each other once". That is no fairer than taking it after 37 games have been played.

    If we can't finish the season then it should be voided with no relegation and no promotion. It is a 46 match season. Not 23 and not 37. To decide it any other way is simply ridiculous.
    I agree, we might have played say West Brom away whilst Luton have played West Brom at home. How is that equal.
    But we've played Leeds at home while others have played them away. 
  • edited May 12
    Ferryman said:
    I'm sorry but I have to disagree with LB when he says "Fairest way is halfway through season so it's judged when everyone played each other once". That is no fairer than taking it after 37 games have been played.

    If we can't finish the season then it should be voided with no relegation and no promotion. It is a 46 match season. Not 23 and not 37. To decide it any other way is simply ridiculous.
    I agree, we might have played say West Brom away whilst Luton have played West Brom at home. How is that equal.
    But we've played Leeds at home while others have played them away. 
    Exactly... Thats why a season is over 46-games rather than 23-games

    Means that no team has a single advantage over the other in terms of any games played and is why its only fair that titles | promotion | relegation should be decided once all games have been played

    e.g. You can also add that we'd played Barnsley | Luton | Wigan away
  • I'm sorry but I have to disagree with LB when he says "Fairest way is halfway through season so it's judged when everyone played each other once". That is no fairer than taking it after 37 games have been played.

    If we can't finish the season then it should be voided with no relegation and no promotion. It is a 46 match season. Not 23 and not 37. To decide it any other way is simply ridiculous.
    I agree, we might have played say West Brom away whilst Luton have played West Brom at home. How is that equal.
    Some animals are more equal than others. ,😉
  • Ferryman said:
    I'm sorry but I have to disagree with LB when he says "Fairest way is halfway through season so it's judged when everyone played each other once". That is no fairer than taking it after 37 games have been played.

    If we can't finish the season then it should be voided with no relegation and no promotion. It is a 46 match season. Not 23 and not 37. To decide it any other way is simply ridiculous.
    I agree, we might have played say West Brom away whilst Luton have played West Brom at home. How is that equal.
    But we've played Leeds at home while others have played them away. 
    But half the teams would have played one more home than away. And home advantage for that one game could well be the difference between being relegated or not.

  • Sponsored links:


  • edited May 12
    I've just got this horrible feeling that the EFL will look at the 3 clubs in the bottom 3 (Us, Barnsley and Luton) and say 'oh well, they are least likely to feel they have a case to stay up' and send us all down back to where we were 12 months ago. It's wrong, I know, but I can see it happening. Hope I am wrong.
  • I'm sorry but I have to disagree with LB when he says "Fairest way is halfway through season so it's judged when everyone played each other once". That is no fairer than taking it after 37 games have been played.

    If we can't finish the season then it should be voided with no relegation and no promotion. It is a 46 match season. Not 23 and not 37. To decide it any other way is simply ridiculous.
    I agree with Bows. 

    IF there is to be relegation it would be the fairest way, and certainly fairer than cutting off the season. But nothing would be perfect.
  • Simply scrap relegation from the Prem irregardless of footy restarting.  Run the premiership as a 22 team league next year, promote two teams from each division up a tier.

    It is imperfect: you could instigate a playoff between bottom team and potential play off candidates of division below, but to get agreement on this added structure and logistics might be impossible.  The next season Premiership teams to be offered exclusion from League Cup:  Also 4 teams to be relegated from Prem, for next two seasons with three promoted.

    Yes some teams would lose out, but teams would also benefit from results and efforts made.  
  • Redrobo said:
    I'm sorry but I have to disagree with LB when he says "Fairest way is halfway through season so it's judged when everyone played each other once". That is no fairer than taking it after 37 games have been played.

    If we can't finish the season then it should be voided with no relegation and no promotion. It is a 46 match season. Not 23 and not 37. To decide it any other way is simply ridiculous.
    I agree with Bows. 

    IF there is to be relegation it would be the fairest way, and certainly fairer than cutting off the season. But nothing would be perfect.
    So Bromley, who were top at the half way stage in the National League, would get promoted to the Football League when, with 38 games played, they sit in 13th place and 18 points behind the current leaders Barrow?

    If we were Barrow I think we would be rightly very upset that a competition, that is meant to be of 46 games duration, elects to promote a side that has zero chance of automatic promotion based on all known results.
  • Redrobo said:
    I'm sorry but I have to disagree with LB when he says "Fairest way is halfway through season so it's judged when everyone played each other once". That is no fairer than taking it after 37 games have been played.

    If we can't finish the season then it should be voided with no relegation and no promotion. It is a 46 match season. Not 23 and not 37. To decide it any other way is simply ridiculous.
    I agree with Bows. 

    IF there is to be relegation it would be the fairest way, and certainly fairer than cutting off the season. But nothing would be perfect.
    So Bromley, who were top at the half way stage in the National League, would get promoted to the Football League when, with 38 games played, they sit in 13th place and 18 points behind the current leaders Barrow?

    If we were Barrow I think we would be rightly very upset that a competition, that is meant to be of 46 games duration, elects to promote a side that has zero chance of automatic promotion based on all known results.
    The fact that there are winners and losers does not mean that it is not fairer.
  • If the season was to resume now, thanks to the ownership shambles and rubbish window, I can see us going down anyway. 

  • If they scrap the season they should also extend players contract's that was due to expire in June until the next transfer window at least!
  • Redrobo said:
    Redrobo said:
    I'm sorry but I have to disagree with LB when he says "Fairest way is halfway through season so it's judged when everyone played each other once". That is no fairer than taking it after 37 games have been played.

    If we can't finish the season then it should be voided with no relegation and no promotion. It is a 46 match season. Not 23 and not 37. To decide it any other way is simply ridiculous.
    I agree with Bows. 

    IF there is to be relegation it would be the fairest way, and certainly fairer than cutting off the season. But nothing would be perfect.
    So Bromley, who were top at the half way stage in the National League, would get promoted to the Football League when, with 38 games played, they sit in 13th place and 18 points behind the current leaders Barrow?

    If we were Barrow I think we would be rightly very upset that a competition, that is meant to be of 46 games duration, elects to promote a side that has zero chance of automatic promotion based on all known results.
    The fact that there are winners and losers does not mean that it is not fairer.
    Or that it is equally unfair - two wrongs don't make a right and when there is no provision within the rules of a competition for such a scenario then it has to be voided. You cannot make them retrospective. It really is that simple.
  • Sponsored links:


  • If they scrap the season they should also extend players contract's that was due to expire in June until the next transfer window at least!
    “They” have no power to vary contracts unilaterally, and many clubs would want to release some players anyway.
  • Redrobo said:
    Redrobo said:
    I'm sorry but I have to disagree with LB when he says "Fairest way is halfway through season so it's judged when everyone played each other once". That is no fairer than taking it after 37 games have been played.

    If we can't finish the season then it should be voided with no relegation and no promotion. It is a 46 match season. Not 23 and not 37. To decide it any other way is simply ridiculous.
    I agree with Bows. 

    IF there is to be relegation it would be the fairest way, and certainly fairer than cutting off the season. But nothing would be perfect.
    So Bromley, who were top at the half way stage in the National League, would get promoted to the Football League when, with 38 games played, they sit in 13th place and 18 points behind the current leaders Barrow?

    If we were Barrow I think we would be rightly very upset that a competition, that is meant to be of 46 games duration, elects to promote a side that has zero chance of automatic promotion based on all known results.
    The fact that there are winners and losers does not mean that it is not fairer.
    Or that it is equally unfair - two wrongs don't make a right and when there is no provision within the rules of a competition for such a scenario then it has to be voided. You cannot make them retrospective. It really is that simple.
    I agree, but the discussion followed what Bows said, so that is what we were discussing.
  • Greenie said:
    End the 19/20 season now. no winners no relegation.
    Start season 20/21 in August/September and add the points from the 19/20 season when we get to the end of the 20/21 season. 
    So someone benefits from having beaten Norwich twice this season against someone who lost to Liverpool twice already?

    how is that fair ? 
  • If they scrap the season they should also extend players contract's that was due to expire in June until the next transfer window at least!
    How can you force someone’s contract to be extended without the players consent?
  • When was the last time a season was interrupted, 1939/40? What happened then, void and restart in 1946? 

    I appreciate that it was 80 years ago but if I owned a team that was relegated after 37 games, I would go down the legal route claiming this as precedence. 
  • edited May 12
    If they scrap the season they should also extend players contract's that was due to expire in June until the next transfer window at least!
    “They” have no power to vary contracts unilaterally, and many clubs would want to release some players anyway.
    I would also say that "they" can not change the rules 3/4 the way through the season. You start a season knowing that after 46 league games the bottom 3 go down & the top 2, plus 1 out of the next 4 go up. No ifs or buts. If you can't finish the season then its null & void. 
    If they can't finish the season then wouldn't the EFL need to put forward some proposals to the clubs on how to finish the season (as it stands, null and void, PPG etc) and clubs would have to vote on an outcome
  • Lee Bowyer was just on 5 Live Sport
  • If they scrap the season they should also extend players contract's that was due to expire in June until the next transfer window at least!
    How can you force someone’s contract to be extended without the players consent?
    Don't force them, but offer a contract extension for 6 months or a year, if they want to earn a living they'll sign it, otherwise the majority will be sitting around jobless as most clubs wont be signing players at the moment.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out!