If you listen to the podcast of the assistant League Secretaries there was a brief mention of the potential lawsuits coming off an artificially derived season that wasn't in the rules at the start. Can't believe the National League would be any more keen to get in that scenario, as Chairmen with vested interests are likely to have deeper pockets than the League. Those league's target is to preserve as many clubs as they can to get through to any restart, although club owners seem to get more myopic the further up the Pyramid you go.

I cannot see the point in any continuation using loans and not grants especially if clubs start taking self preservation measures and deciding not to play. Anyone seriously imagine the National League will go for the terrible PR of sanctioning clubs in that scenario if there is a likely abandonment coming down the track anyway?

The more serious question, seeing as grants probably aren't going to be forthcoming indefinitely down the track, if at all, is how many clubs will be prepared to start a new season in August/whenever, with the ensuing expenditure, if there is a reasonable probability of further abandonment. However much the current vogue is to 'stay safe', at at least our level and below, the majority of clubs just aren't self sufficient in 'safe mode' or more restrictive on the current wages players are used to. Something is going to have togive. No matter how callous you are branded, there will come a point the safety vs sustainability question will have to be debated. 

TheGhostOfJodyBrown wrote:

---

When you've had teams in this league have a covid positive in the camp then isolate him but carry on playing then it shows you something needs to be done. How you can allow that is beyond me.

 

I cannot see how we are in trouble financially this season we had £30,000 a month and a wage bill of about 4 grand. It seems we are nicely in credit this season with a few quid for bills too.

-- Edited by TheGhostOfJodyBrown on Friday 22nd of January 2021 07:27:21 PM

---

Each week we would still have rent and utility bills along with travel costs, kit, maintenance etc, maybe even PPE costs? I would guess we also had the 4k budget based on sponsorship, fans, bar sales, programmes, friendly games etc that we lost out on as the grant didn't start until October. If we got through Aug and Sep without accruing much debt then the 30k we had each month should leave us ok (hopefully), but I doubt too nicely in credit? We also had no grant in January so I wonder how many players,if any, are on a contract where we still need to meet some of the weekly wages. Would have been more of a worry if we had a 'King style' budget as the 30k wouldn't have been enough and there must be a few clubs losing out with budgets exceeding that amount this season based on larger attendances than ours.

Without another grant I can't see many teams getting in debt and continuing the season (interest free loan or not). The only slight possibility is starting again in  late Feb/March, with fans or a grant, until the end of May with 2 games a week, although as we've played the fewest we would have to play a few weeks with 3 games. And that's all without further postponements! 

I think there would be plenty of players wanting to play twice a week. I wouldn't myself and would prefer to stay as safe as possible but at least the club have the 15 minute version of Covid testing. 

GaryH wrote:

---

I think there would be plenty of players wanting to play twice a week. I wouldn't myself and would prefer to stay as safe as possible but at least the club have the 15 minute version of Covid testing. 

-- Edited by GaryH on Sunday 24th of January 2021 01:30:39 PM

---

A 15 minute test doesn't stop you from catching it, especially in their work\private environment.

 So how do you square that with the whole mantra of 'stay safe'. Or are you conceding that other factors come in to play, like they need the money, and therefore it is personal rather than institutional decision? And if that is the case, how does it apply to just football and not wider society?

Polo wrote:

---

I think Matt arranged it for the club.

---

 Decent 

stafford wrote:

---

GaryH wrote:

---

I think there would be plenty of players wanting to play twice a week. I wouldn't myself and would prefer to stay as safe as possible but at least the club have the 15 minute version of Covid testing. 

-- Edited by GaryH on Sunday 24th of January 2021 01:30:39 PM

---

A 15 minute test doesn't stop you from catching it, especially in their work\private environment.

 So how do you square that with the whole mantra of 'stay safe'. Or are you conceding that other factors come in to play, like they need the money, and therefore it is personal rather than institutional decision? And if that is the case, how does it apply to just football and not wider society?

---

 I agree about the tests but if all players and officials are testing in this way then the risk must be quite minimal and something players are happy taking the risk for.  In fact I'm not aware of a player at any club who has said they will not play due to the Covid risk, although there must be some for their own safety and those living at home with vulnerable relatives.

I think the whole stay safe message is plain to see but sometimes needs 'except football' in brackets after it! The other factors I think are not so much the money but young people simply wanting to and allowed to play football. It will be weird in years to come to tell people that football was exempt from the wider society rules, considering it's not essential, but with safety measures I've seen first hand at Welling it outshines things you see in wider society like supermarket shopping.

Now here is a thought. Assuming the season re-starts before everyone, of all age groups, is vaccinated why not make clubs that have players with a +ve test forfeit, rather than postpone, the match? 3 points going to the healthy team, who would be awarded a 1-0 victory if the home side & a 2-0 victory if the away side. If both teams have a +ve civid test, declare a 0-0 draw.

Wed not then get a backlog of fixtures and it would be in the clubs best interests to ensure their players keep to the guide.

As an alternative let a result be declared by the equivalent of the pools panel that used to meet when bad weather prevented play.

This obviously assumes that the league will not simply be declared null and void.

Danson Mark wrote:

---

Polo wrote:

---

I think Matt arranged it for the club.

---

 I believe that this is the case. It's definitely not happening at every club even though the £30k per month grant was supposed to ensure that it was. 

---

 I am pretty sure one of Concords reasons for refusing to play was they could not afford to pay for testing. 

Scrap the season. Work out PPG as a near-final table, then give the option to teams to continue in a mini-league starting on the PPG weighted points table. You might have 8-10 teams competing for promotion and if they lose out, but can afford it, then their choice. Past games aren't worthless, promotion still an option, clubs who don't want to get in debt won't.

But this completely changes the rules!!!

Wallop wrote:

---

Or get on with it, like many who are unable to have the luxury of working from home.
If you are told to go to work, then why not be allowed to stand on an open terrace for a couple of hours?
Seeing that I have to use public transport and work amongst others all day, why not let me decide if I wish to go over PVR for a couple of hours?
This rant isnt aimed at the club or its supporters, but government in general.

---

 I've no idea on what your job is but I assume that it's essential. Can non-league football be classed as any more essential than concerts, theatre and all other forms of entertainment that have fallen foul of the pandemic?

GaryH wrote:

---

Scrap the season. Work out PPG as a near-final table, then give the option to teams to continue in a mini-league starting on the PPG weighted points table. You might have 8-10 teams competing for promotion and if they lose out, but can afford it, then their choice. Past games aren't worthless, promotion still an option, clubs who don't want to get in debt won't.

But this completely changes the rules!!!

---

Good idea..... but instead of playing out the mini league, teams have to get on zoom, nominate a player or fan and they have to compete at darts instead! #socialdistancedetc