I've said it before . . .
I've said it before . . .
. . . and I'll be boring and say it again:
The football season should be from March to October.
The football season should be from March to October.
Re: I've said it before . . .
Or even just definitely not December/January. Nobody at this level will have any summer tournaments to worry about. A winter break and a June finish would work fine.
-
- Posts: 1260
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 8:40 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: I've said it before . . .
FA Grants / Loans for drainage improvements and weather covers may be a better way.
The FAs are sitting on a mountain of TV money and frittering a lot of money away on ineffective "initiatives" and paying off for their badly located & operated Wembley 2.
Good pitches promote better quality football, more support more income for initiatives, so FA assistance seems like a no-brainer to me.
The FAs are sitting on a mountain of TV money and frittering a lot of money away on ineffective "initiatives" and paying off for their badly located & operated Wembley 2.
Good pitches promote better quality football, more support more income for initiatives, so FA assistance seems like a no-brainer to me.
Re: I've said it before . . .
Do the FA get mountains of TV money? I thought most of their stuff was free to air (FA Cup, England (Mens/Womens) - thought most TV money went to the Premier League?Neil Johnson wrote:The FAs are sitting on a mountain of TV money and frittering a lot of money away on ineffective "initiatives" and paying off for their badly located & operated Wembley 2.
Not sure what initiatives you are talking about - I don't even know what Wembley 2 is? Are you referring to the current National Stadium or Burton?
Most money the FA seem to be allocating out on initiaves is on grass roots football not semi-professional. They are building facilities to increase participation amongst groups who traditionally have lower participation (wheelchair football / blind football / walking football and women's football).
You are going to have a hard time convincing then the best supported team at our level of the pyramid is worth an allocation of funds.
Re: I've said it before . . .
footballs been august to may for 130+ years .
No reason to change it whatsoever.
No reason to change it whatsoever.
Think before posting
Re: I've said it before . . .
No, I don't suppose there is if you enjoy watching s*** football on s*** pitches in s*** weather.BUSHEAD wrote:footballs been august to may for 130+ years .
No reason to change it whatsoever.
-
- Posts: 6025
- Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 10:47 am
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: I've said it before . . .
Football is a really strange sport, in that there is a real opposition to any sort of change.BUSHEAD wrote:footballs been august to may for 130+ years .
No reason to change it whatsoever.
As soon as new idea is suggested (winter break, change season times, new technology, different kick off times, 3G pitches) there is instant opposition because "it's not the way it should be done".
New ideas are rejected out of hand by traditionalists who don't want any change, and believe football is only "proper football" when it's played on muddy grass pitches at 3 o'clock on a Saturday in front of working class crowds.
That's not a dig at you personally Bushead (although I do disagree with you, there are plenty of reasons to change the season times - such as fewer postponed games meaning less financial strain for less well-off clubs, and better weather potentially encouraging more fans).
I just find it really curious that any change is dismissed, purely because it's not the way it's always been done.
Re: I've said it before . . .
Does anyone know beyond "that's how it's always been" the objections?
Instantly there is a conflict with international tournaments - they would need to move to winter but given they are on better pitches anyway they can survive that.
Assume players would prefer to have a chance to go on holiday in the summer when their kids are off rather than the winter when they are not? This is also applicable to fans.
I hate football on dry summer pitches myself. I do much prefer a wet pitch but given the work which goes into pitches at all level it is probably easier to get a baked pitch slick than a sodden pitch dry.
Instantly there is a conflict with international tournaments - they would need to move to winter but given they are on better pitches anyway they can survive that.
Assume players would prefer to have a chance to go on holiday in the summer when their kids are off rather than the winter when they are not? This is also applicable to fans.
I hate football on dry summer pitches myself. I do much prefer a wet pitch but given the work which goes into pitches at all level it is probably easier to get a baked pitch slick than a sodden pitch dry.
- theoriginalfatcat
- Posts: 6718
- Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: I've said it before . . .
Interesting post, I suppose in a world of change, people (mostly working age men?) like to enjoy things the way they always have been - but looking back, it seems obvious that the standard of football, and stadiums are much better now than they were, back in the 70's.Darlogramps wrote:As soon as new idea is suggested (winter break, change season times, new technology, different kick off times, 3G pitches) there is instant opposition because "it's not the way it should be done".
New ideas are rejected out of hand by traditionalists who don't want any change, and believe football is only "proper football" when it's played on muddy grass pitches at 3 o'clock on a Saturday in front of working class crowds.
So from the above list -
Winter breaks,-- could be a good idea in theory, especially for lower league clubs without undersoil heating etc. But when would it be? As each winter is different. Would it cover Xmas? When some big crowds turn out.
Change season times, -- might work to kick off earlier.
New technology,-- what's come in so far has been good - I like the assistants behind the goals too.
Different kick off times, -- don't really bother me.
3G pitches, -- bloody awful things, I can't stand them - "it's not the way it should be done".
Profile pic
Feethams the Panda. 28 Jan 2012.
Now extinct!
Feethams the Panda. 28 Jan 2012.
Now extinct!
Re: I've said it before . . .
if people havent realised - it rains alot during the summer here as well.
if it aint broke, dont fix it.
if it aint broke, dont fix it.
Think before posting
Re: I've said it before . . .
winter breaks would never work as our weather at any point is unpredictable.
Think before posting
-
- Posts: 6025
- Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 10:47 am
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: I've said it before . . .
Ignoring the unnecessary sarcasm, it's nowhere near as wet in the summer as it is in the winter, and if it does rain heavily, the warmer temperatures makes it more likely for the pitches to recover.BUSHEAD wrote:if people havent realised - it rains alot during the summer here as well.
For instance, in the Women's Super League (which runs March to October), no games were called off last season, despite the pitches they play on being poorer quality than the majority of the Football League.
I'd also question your cliched assertion "If it ain't broke don't fix it." We haven't had a home in two and a half months (a quarter of the season). That's hardly evidence of the current system working perfectly is it?
Again, more games are postponed November to January than they are March to May.BUSHEAD wrote:winter breaks would never work as our weather at any point is unpredictable.
But the winter break isn't purely about postponed fixtures. Germany, France, Spain and Italy all have some form of winter break, whereas in England we do not.
Having a winter break would allow players to recuperate, reduce the likelihood of injuries, allowing an improved second half of the season.
There's compelling evidence to show that England's players are massively fatigued when it comes to the end of the season. At the 2002 and 2010 World Cups, we didn't score a single goal in the second half of a match - suggesting players are tired. Indeed it's something Sven Goran Eriksson and Fabio Capello both cited as a reason for failures at major tournaments.
I know we're veering off-topic here, but you've just proved my original point. Any new ideas are rejected out of hand in football, with their benefits ignored, purely because it's "not the way things have been done."
Last edited by Darlogramps on Sun Jan 03, 2016 11:36 am, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Posts: 6025
- Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 10:47 am
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: I've said it before . . .
Exactly, plus FIFA have shown they're already willing to move the Qatar World Cup, so it's hardly an issue.lo36789 wrote:Does anyone know beyond "that's how it's always been" the objections?
Instantly there is a conflict with international tournaments - they would need to move to winter but given they are on better pitches anyway they can survive that.
Possibly, but then again how many people take holidays during different times of the year? And holidays are more expensive in the summer anyway.lo36789 wrote:Assume players would prefer to have a chance to go on holiday in the summer when their kids are off rather than the winter when they are not? This is also applicable to fans.
To some extent I'm playing devil's advocate. Switching to March-October seasons will never happen, because of the uproar from the traditionalists. August to May is of course "how it's always been done."
But I just found it odd that some in this thread would reject the idea out of hand, even though there are clear benefits of playing Spring to Autumn.
Of course there are cons to it as well, some of which you've listed, but it's certainly worth considering.
Re: I've said it before . . .
Try this for a radical idea.
Start a week earlier, finish 2 weeks later and leave January fixture free but allow any teams that have a fixture backlog due to catch up ( weather permitting of course ). It could also be used to play one of the tin pot cup competitions.
Start a week earlier, finish 2 weeks later and leave January fixture free but allow any teams that have a fixture backlog due to catch up ( weather permitting of course ). It could also be used to play one of the tin pot cup competitions.
- theoriginalfatcat
- Posts: 6718
- Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: I've said it before . . .
It is a good idea. I like it.dfc4me wrote:Try this for a radical idea.
Start a week earlier, finish 2 weeks later and leave January fixture free but allow any teams that have a fixture backlog due to catch up ( weather permitting of course ). It could also be used to play one of the tin pot cup competitions.
We could try for 5 games!
Profile pic
Feethams the Panda. 28 Jan 2012.
Now extinct!
Feethams the Panda. 28 Jan 2012.
Now extinct!
-
- Posts: 6025
- Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 10:47 am
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: I've said it before . . .
I agree. I think it's daft this division starts mid-August and has to cram in all fixtures (including play-offs) before the end of April. An extra couple of weeks either way would alleviate a lot of pressure.theoriginalfatcat wrote:It is a good idea. I like it.dfc4me wrote:Try this for a radical idea.
Start a week earlier, finish 2 weeks later and leave January fixture free but allow any teams that have a fixture backlog due to catch up ( weather permitting of course ). It could also be used to play one of the tin pot cup competitions.
We could try for 5 games!
-
- Posts: 1604
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 8:41 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: I've said it before . . .
Thought we have had our home winter break
Re: I've said it before . . .
There's compelling evidence to show that England's players are massively fatigued when it comes to the end of the season. At the 2002 and 2010 World Cups, we didn't score a single goal in the second half of a match - suggesting players are tired. Indeed it's something Sven Goran Eriksson and Fabio Capello both cited as a reason for failures at major tournaments.
And Juergen Klopp too has recently said that English clubs should have a winter break.
And Juergen Klopp too has recently said that English clubs should have a winter break.
- DarloOnTheUp
- Posts: 6337
- Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 12:35 am
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: I've said it before . . .
It is raining more now because of the time of year it is. There is also more chance of frozen pitches and snow, so your argument is, to put it politely, a load of bollocks.BUSHEAD wrote:if people havent realised - it rains alot during the summer here as well.
if it aint broke, dont fix it.
And clearly it is broken: we're getting games called off left, right, and centre. I wouldn't call that "not broken".
The vast majority of football matches are called off during the winter period for a reason. Yes it still rains during summer but nowhere near as much as during the winter: it isn't even close, and that's before you throw in the freezing temperatures and snow. Plus as Gramps said. the warmer weather during summer also helps the pitches to dry quicker.
I reckon we should at least have a winter break: they do it in most other European countries and it makes perfect sense.
Re: I've said it before . . .
How long would be before there was a call for a mid season break in July because it was too hot and the pitches had the same consistency as the car park?.Just an observation.
Re: I've said it before . . .
The Saudi kingdom is an odious regime which murders it's own citizens routinely for any form of opposition whatsoever, including peaceful protest, and has been for years and years.BUSHEAD wrote:footballs been august to may for 130+ years .
No reason to change it whatsoever.
No reason to change it whatsoever, then!
Basically what I'm saying is that saying that there is "no reason to change something" when the reason is "well, it's always been like that" is bullshit.
Re: I've said it before . . .
Actually, no it doesn't.BUSHEAD wrote:if people havent realised - it rains alot during the summer here as well.
About 50-60mm a month on average - which drains away and evaporates in no time anyway, because a) it's obviously warmer, and b) the sun is much higher in the sky and the rays are much hotter.
In the winter, especially from November to January, nothing dries out properly, simply because there is fuck all solar heating, even with average rainfall..
When you get a deluge in December, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out that the water table will be high, and the ground boggy for ages.
In the summer, yes you can still get floods and boggy ground, but as soon as the sun is out for a few hours - problem solved.
That's the major difference.
Re: I've said it before . . .
Whilst we're talking about righting a wrong, all leagues should be reduced to 20 teams. All fixtures would easily fit in to the reduced 'summer' season length.
- Quaker0006
- Posts: 166
- Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:46 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: I've said it before . . .
We would then have to reduce the wage budget since we would lose out on 8 games income
Re: I've said it before . . .
The wage budget would obviously be reduced - the players wouldn't be working as much!Quaker0006 wrote:We would then have to reduce the wage budget since we would lose out on 8 games income
Re: I've said it before . . .
flap flap flap.
it pisses down all the time , is the entire league getting flooded out ? no it isnt . stop over reacting.
Footballs fine the way it is.
it pisses down all the time , is the entire league getting flooded out ? no it isnt . stop over reacting.
Footballs fine the way it is.
Think before posting
- DarloOnTheUp
- Posts: 6337
- Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 12:35 am
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: I've said it before . . .
"I DON'T LIKE CHANGE" - BUSHEAD.BUSHEAD wrote:flap flap flap.
it pisses down all the time , is the entire league getting flooded out ? no it isnt . stop over reacting.
Footballs fine the way it is.
- Quaker0006
- Posts: 166
- Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:46 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: I've said it before . . .
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't most of the players contracted? They don't receive money on a match basis, rather a steady weekly /monthly amount?Henley wrote:The wage budget would obviously be reduced - the players wouldn't be working as much!Quaker0006 wrote:We would then have to reduce the wage budget since we would lose out on 8 games income
Also from a selfish point of view it dilutes what is our greatest asset - our financial power to compete in each of the leagues so far due to our fan base.
- QuakerPete
- Posts: 1196
- Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:51 pm
- Team Supported: Darlington
Re: I've said it before . . .
A winter break for Premier teams is to "help" them and the national team to compete better in tournaments. A winter break at our level is to avoid weather postponements - good luck with that one