- Admin
- #101
Understand all that but we and a couple of other clubs are fans owned, The majority aren't so what their fans think won't come into it, We would go to any EFL meeting with 3000 odd "owners" (Trust Members) voices behind the person representing our club, some think would need the backing of those members to a particular way of proceeding ie null and void, PPG etcThat's how i understood him too.
The reason for mentioning Macclesfield was to demonstrate that fans could easily be influenced by factors that shouldn't come into it, i.e. what's best for their particular club, and any vote of Trust members would probably be influenced in the same way as members are fans too.
Even if we could get beyond that and members could disengage from those factors (which would be nigh on impossible IMHO), in order for there to be anything like a meaningful and informed vote would be a big task. For example, members would have to be issued with all of the relevant information like cash projections applicable to each scenario. The problem there is that we don't currently know exactly how each scenario would work. We'd also need to know things like when matches would be played and how players who would ordinarily be out of contract at the end of June would be treated. We don't know that either yet.
The point i'm making is that there are far too many unknowns at the moment and so it would be a largely futile exercise to hold some sort of vote as the result isn't likely to be very credible.
The Trust might have 3,000+ members but the club only gets one vote at the EFL table. Any club, fan owned or not, could hold a fan poll and go to the EFL with the outcome but they all get one vote too.Understand all that but we and a couple of other clubs are fans owned, The majority aren't so what their fans think won't come into it, We would go to any EFL meeting with 3000 odd "owners" (Trust Members) voices behind the person representing our club, some think would need the backing of those members to a particular way of proceeding ie null and void, PPG etc
One person at the meeting yes but that person is representing 3000 "Owners" but I agree there would be a split decision on which outcome would be best, Just have to look on here to see people's opinions. Someone else on here has just said it's a moving situation and what might be the way forward today could be totally different by Wednesday, This bloody virus is erratic to say the least and very unpredictable, For instance the clubs could play behind closed doors and still players/staff get infected and if someone gets seriously ill or worse then that would be it. As for the Brexit thing, The result I wasn't comparing or the aftermath, It was the fact the Government at the time thought that decision was needing the public's backing not just 650 MPs, This is a huge decision for us as a club going forwardThe Trust might have 3,000+ members but the club only gets one vote at the EFL table. Any club, fan owned or not, could hold a fan poll and go to the EFL with the outcome but they all get one vote too.
That aside, it's the validity of the outcome of a fan/member vote that i'm questioning, never mind the practicalities of setting it up. Without all of the necessary information being made available the result wouldn't really carry any weight IMHO and the problem there is that the necessary information isn't available.
A lot of people thought they were making informed decisions in the Brexit vote and look at how that turned out.
I see that now DB9. It's so bleddy obvious now you've pointed it out.I think the idea of one club taking legal action is that if that club wins the action the EFL couldn't carry on with what it was proposing as it was deemed illegal, Bit like if say a person takes action against the Government because of a pension rule and the judge finds in favour of that person, The Government would have to change things by law because its been deemed they acted unlawfully, So it doesn't need a collective of 72 EFL clubs (I Think) You can't have Peterbourgh winning and the EFL only change things for them and not the others
Sorry I did mean that city should just hold a vote with our fans and that would then give the club the info they needed on how to vote when it comes to the EFL vote.The problem with this though is that people will be influenced by factors which shouldn't really come into it.
For instance, if Macclesfiled held a vote the result would likely be, IMHO, that their fans would want the season to either be declared void or the current standings remain as they are as playing out the remaining fixtures could lead to their relegation. However, City fans, using the same decision making process, would vote for something that allowed matches to be played.
The real question for me though is whether matches can be even played safely, behind closed doors or not, and without harming finances beyond the extent to which they already have been.
I also disagree that the club/trust are not sharing information with us. There has been plenty of recent news around things like furloughing of staff and players agreeing to wage deferrals, for example. I think it's more the case that there isn't really any news to share because those in authority, and whose guidance clubs are waiting for, are dragging their heels somewhat as nobody wants to be the one that makes the decision (that's how it feels anyway) and their are too many interested parties involved.