Week 23: Clubs Talking Turkey When Claiming Fowl Play
Because of the impact caused by the coronavirus, they had a vote the other day on whether to still hold Christmas this year, or if it should be put off for a year until 2021. As I stood in line to emphatically tick the box which said YES to it – my favourite time of year – a turkey stood behind me in the queue. I acknowledged him (or her) with a stuttered mumbling and rather awkwardly looked away.
‘It’s alright’ they said after a few seconds, perhaps sensing the tension. ‘I’m voting for Christmas too’
I turned back to them, shocked that they were – quite literally – sticking their neck out like this. ‘You are?’
‘It’s the right thing to do. Kids love Christmas, it brings families together and helps to share joy around the world. This year, more than ever, we need some of that, don’t you think?’
I nodded thoughtfully. ‘I guess. But I’m still a little surprised.’
The turkey smiled and we waited to cast our vote. But after I was done, I saw him/her coming out of the booth looking pensive. ‘Had a last minute change of heart’ they said. Turns out they’d also remembered that Christmas meant having their head chopped off, all their feathers removed; then having their insides taken out and unceremoniously shoved up their arse. And that’s before we even get to the oven bit.
But there was no need for an explanation. Turkeys don’t – and shouldn’t – vote for Christmas. Why would they? Under any circumstances? And I’m fine with that, even if I voted the other way.
They aren’t to blame for it. Even if they could or do see the greater good, any benefits or even the rationale of it all (they were probably bred for the very purpose of ending up on a dinner table after all), when self- interest, and preservation, kicks in, they’ll look after themselves first. It’s what we all do.
It’s why we can’t blame the EFL clubs for last week’s voting that saw League One follow League Two in concluding their seasons early, with standings agreed using an ‘agreed’ formula, with promotion, relegation and play-offs to come as normal.
To summarise for anyone who has been too busy on Netflix, using the preferred unweighted points-per-game system (PPG), most of the placings remained as they were when then pandemic caused the postponement of the remaining games in mid-March. In League Two, the top three stayed the same although Swindon overtook Crewe at the top on PPG and both those two clubs and Plymouth will go up. At the bottom, Macclesfield’s potential points deduction means nothing is 100% confirmed. The four clubs in the play-off places are unchanged.
League One was a little more complicated. Top two, Coventry City and Rotherham, were promoted to the Championship, while Wycombe’s game in hand meant they jumped up to third (from eighth) in the final table and into the play-offs at the expense of Peterborough United, who joined Sunderland and Doncaster in a clutch of teams just outside the top six but only by a few point and all with realistic ambitions of getting into it, had the season restarted.
At the bottom, because of Bury’s plight, only three relegation places lay in wait and Bolton and Southend had long occupied two of them. The final spot was taken by Tranmere who had a game in hand but went down on the PPG method, leaving MK Dons and AFC Wimbledon united in relief – about the first thing they’ve ever agreed on – just outside the bottom three.
To also summarise the reactions, Coventry and Rotherham thought the voting reached exactly the right conclusion, Wycombe were happy enough too as were MK and Wimbledon. Peterborough and Tranmere thought the final outcome was completely wrong, and both were vocal. Peterborough’s Darren McAnthony roasted the EFL and called it a ‘sh*tshow’ while Barry Fry, the club’s Director of Football said he felt ‘cheated’ and that it was his ‘biggest disappointment in 60 years in the game’ which, considering he managed Birmingham City for some of it, is really saying something. Tranmere, although a little less emotional, also felt let down. They had proposed an alternative solution that looked at results over three years instead; a solution that would have seen them stay up potentially at someone else’s expense if you can believe that or see 25 teams compete in League One next season.
One of the issues was form. Posh had been on fire before the virus got in the way, so it was reasonable to assume they would have been hard to stop. Tranmere too had seen an upturn (or uptick if we’re using scientific advisor speak) in results in the games before lockdown and had invested in players in the January transfer window based on their predicament. Of course, COVID-19 has thus far proved to have little respect for anything and certainly not the current form tables or the fact you’d just signed Andy Cook on loan.
Now, before I go further, I have absolute sympathy for both clubs and their views. I’m not saying they are wrong but that it was a problem that could not be fixed with 100% satisfaction. I sympathise with all clubs who found themselves in that predicament, in fact, and the EFL too. Because it really was an unprecedented scenario that was always going to produce losers, whichever way it fell. The EFL had to put it to a member vote because that was the protocol but any vote would have been as fraught with self-interest and WIIFM. If there had been different ways of slicing the data, other clubs that fell on the wrong side of it would be crying ‘fowl’ instead.
Nothing was ever going to please everyone. If they’d voided the leagues, how would Coventry – top despite playing away in every game – have felt? Or Crewe or Swindon, or Barrow for that matter? If they had gone with Tranmere’s – rather bizarre in my opinion – three-year option, how would the other clubs that ended up going down – because they were crap in 2017/18 have reacted, I wonder?
The reality is that nearly all the clubs voted for what suited them and, according to reports, it wasn’t even close. And the reactions are exactly as you’d expect; those in favour – everyone who got what they wanted, those against – any club that didn’t. It’s turkeys and Christmas all over again.
The clubs agreed this voting system so they can hardly complain when it doesn’t work. You could say the vote was always going to go the way it did but how else could it have gone? Why would a club vote for a scenario that has negative consequences for them? Would their fans/shareholders/players/sponsors accept that?
Only one, that I know of, did something like that and it was Port Vale. They saw that continuing the season was the wrong option for them and fellow clubs and voted to end it, even though they still had a decent chance of making the play-offs (they were a place and a point outside the top 7). But this makes them more an outlier, to use a popular term right now, because it was a rare gesture and even then, it was still the vote that made sense for the club. Finances in the lower leagues will be severely tested in the coming months so choosing to play games in empty stadiums that would gobble-gobble up cash was a huge risk for any of them, especially when it’s only a play-off place at stake and even then, a 25% chance of success. The gamble doesn’t really justify the means in most cases and that’s why clubs took the decision they did.
And cold hard cash will always trump any remaining integrity. It’s hard enough for most lower league clubs without having a season curtailed so that has put many of their futures in some jeopardy. But money has always been key. That die was cast in 1992, I’m afraid, and getting the genie back in that particular bottle is a challenge too far.
It isn’t confined to the EFL either. In Scotland, the three to-be-relegated clubs (when they voted to end the season) began pleading with their peers to vote for a league reconstruction that would ‘do the right thing’ and see no clubs relegated and two more promoted from non-league. On the surface, it seemed like the best option but it didn’t happen as there wasn’t enough support – in other words, it didn’t benefit the other clubs enough, leaving the ones supporting it as mainly those that stood to gain.
At least now, there is a way forward and those involved in the play-offs can get ready for action again, while the rest can prepare for next season although you sense the current blame game is far from over in either country.
And while the turkeys have got months to go before they have to worry about the result of their vote, we’re approaching the longest day of the year and another period of warm weather (which is good because about a dozen scientific advisors to the government are about to be hung out to dry) and football is back – behind closed doors at least – on the sporting calendar.
So while scientists get thrown under the bus for any lockdown missteps that were made, someone in football now needs to take the rap for the way some clubs now feel.
I get why. Blame is a useful tool because it deflects and also makes us feel better. Apart from the one getting blamed. I’ve worked for a few people at organisations who blamed all the time – one director once memorably said [and meant it] ‘we used to have a blame culture here but that was all Bob’s [who had left] fault.’
Had it been a deliberate joke it would have been a really good one. But the truth is, in football, no one had ever anticipated this scenario might happen. If it had it would have been clearly written in the rules and regulations and there would be no need for voting.
So with the considerable benefit of hindsight, you could say the Football League or the member clubs’ representatives should have put something in the rulebook a hundred-odd years ago that covered this.
In the absence of that, and when something so unique and precedent-shattering happens, you have to go with the majority. That, in itself, is the best greater good we can find because it’s democratic and everyone gets a say. As with any vote, such as the Christmas one, there will be plenty of winners and unfortunately, some losers too.
But a turkey can’t get up off the plate on Boxing Day and say they can’t believe what a sh*tshow this all is and that they don’t agree with it. They might not have voted for Christmas, but I did and so did the majority so it’s happening. And if they don’t like it….
…they can go pluck themselves.
Now, did anyone not see that coming?
words Darren Young, D3D4 columnist