Parsonblue

She was on the radio last week saying that it was unlikely that a vaccine would be found until well into next year at the earliest.

I'm opposed to resources being wasted on football rather than where they are needed. I appreciate that you have been opposed to the lockdown from day one but I look at the growing number of deaths and really don't regard football as all that important in the greater scheme things. Behind closed doors football is going to be the norm for the foreseeable future. Our way of life before the virus hit is not going to return until there is a vaccine and that may be a year or two away, if indeed one is created at all. Social distancing is here to stay with all the ramifications it will bring. Football, like the rest of society, is going to have to adapt to the new reality and, sadly, many clubs are going to find that impossible.

Sky/BT will keep the Premier League games - or the majority of them and certainly the key games. SKY/BT, as you say, are not going to give up the exclusivity to the major games. BBC may get the Premier League games that have no importance in terms of European qualification or relegation and very little audience pulling power. ifollow will end up with Championship games with one or two maybe making it to Quest. I think the interesting question is what happens next season. With the Oxford group now admitting that it is unlikely that a vaccine is going to be ready until some time next year - at the earliest and maybe not even at all - it's likely that the whole of next season will be played behind closed doors. With the costs of testing etc. I'm not sure how clubs in Leagues One and Two could possibly contemplate that and I suspect several Championship clubs will find it a stretch too far. The Premier League will be able to fund it from TV money - both from here and abroad - but I suspect the rest of football is going to really struggle. In twelve months time I will be amazed if we still have 92 full time clubs at senior level unless the government are going to prop clubs up with financial support.

I must admit Tyrone that I'm not expecting to be back in a football ground until the start of the 21-22 season - and even then I suspect it will probably need a vaccine before the government allow it or, indeed, many older folk would be happy to go back. I noticed in the government guidelines for sport they had mooted the prospect of 'behind closed doors' sport until a vaccine or successful drug treatment had been found.

I think you'll find care workers can't which is why the government said - only last week - that they planned to have all care workers in care homes tested by the END of June. The point you seem to miss is that if there are private tests available why aren't they being made available to the people on the front line who need them. A care worker in a care home is surely far more important, in terms of needing regular testing, than a footballer.

It doesn't make it right chaddy just because clubs have the funds to bypass the system and pay for private tests. In the meantime care workers in nursing homes can't get the tests and won't all get them until the end of June - if they're lucky - according to the government. Finishing the football season really isn't a priority when the death count mounts on a daily basis.

The papers this morning suggesting a number of players are refusing to sign it. Don't blame them. Sounds like the PL trying to cover their backs if players or their families succumb to the virus.

As most of next season will be played behind closed doors it really doesn't matter if it's longer or shorter. Next season will not be a proper season anyway.

Money rather than health and well being is what is driving the agenda for football in this country. Personally, I've been totally disillusioned and disgusted by the actions of our footballing authorities over this. There is no reason why this season can't be finished behind closed doors in September and October when the demand for PPE equipment and tests may not be as great. It's not like there will be any great urgency to start next season when it's likely to be played behind closed doors anyway.

Sensible decision under the circumstances.

It seems clear that next season will be behind closed doors - if it takes place. But ultimately, social distancing means that football cannot take place without putting the health of players at risk and, quite rightly, players are now objecting. The Government has today given plans for people in their workplace in the coming months and social distancing is a key part of that. Would you really expect football not to follow the health advice? As for PPE equipment - there is a worldwide shortage so how do you justify it being used by football clubs? Tests need to go where they are needed not to football clubs even if the PL want to pay for them. Why would any player put themselves on a long haul flight to Australia in the present situation - particularly as the government is advising against such travel. It may well be that some clubs go under during the next eighteen months - there are any number of businesses that will struggle to survive so football is not alone. Health is far more important than football chaddy. This virus has put the importance of football into perspective - compared to the lives of loved ones it's not important at all.

Nobody is going to be buying season tickets this summer for a season that is likely to be played behind closed doors. I really don't see how any government can agree to crowds gathering in football stadiums or any other sporting stadium until there is a vaccine or medication to treat the virus - and both seem a long way off. Personally, I wouldn't step foot in a football stadium until one or the other is operating. There is no way you can do social distancing in any ground - just passing someone to get to your seat puts paid to that. Social distancing is going to be with us well into next year so quite how footballers play a game whilst staying one or two metres apart is beyond me whether games are behind closed doors or not. I fully understand why players are reluctant to put their own and the health of their loved ones on the line. There is no way that the authorities should be asking them to do that - particularly if money for clubs is the driving force. At the end of the day the health of players and everyone else involved in putting on games is far more important than finishing this season or starting the next one. When frontline workers can't get PPE equipment and testing is still very hit and miss it would be criminal to put those resources into football. Ultimately, lives are far more important than football.

Sorry to see Rhyl go. Enjoyed a couple of pre-season Reserve friendlies there in recent years. Really friendly club and their officials were so welcoming - treating visiting fans as valued customers rather than a nuisance - Non-League clubs always seem to act that way. I think it was at Rhyl that I had one of my first sightings of the mighty Myles Anderson - but Big Sam decided not to sign him for some reason - can't think why.

I noticed that the Dutch League is unlikely to start again and an increasing number of League Two and One clubs are less than keen to finish the season due to the financial pressures of behind closed doors games. I believe Rick Parry had commented that supporters are not likely to be allowed in grounds until some time in 2021. With behind closed doors games to finish off this season - if they happen which has to be doubtful - and no new season ticket sales in the summer, I suspect football is going to undergo a major restructuring for those clubs that survive. The days of big money transfers and wages - certainly for clubs outside the top six - are likely to be a thing of the past - and not before time.

Couldn't agree more. I was reading this week that Germany are not likely to allow supporters into stadiums until some time in 2021. It seems likely that the start of the 2021-22 season would be a possible start date if a vaccine has been developed. Personally, I really don't see how or when the 2020-21 season will be allowed to start with spectators and I'm not convinced Sky will pay for a full season of behind closed doors football.

Agree with all of the above. Personally, I don't think football with fans will happen again until next year but if this virus is still around - which is almost certain - then I too would be very reluctant to venture into a football ground. It's at times like this that football and its importance is put into perspective.

I must admit that I really enjoyed that game on a bitterly cold night. I felt the game should have been won by half-time with the possession and chances we created - plus we should have had a penalty with the holding at corners. Second half started slowly but Mowbray's subs made a difference with both Brereton and Samuel showing up well. Armstrong's goal was outstanding and he looked very good playing in the Dack role just behind the striker. Once again Downing looked a class above anything on the pitch and I thought Johnson improved as the second half went on. Hull looked poor but at the end of the day you can only beat what's in front of you and we did that comfortably in the end. I thought all the officials were poor tonight. The fourth official seemed to give one decision rather than the ref. Quite how he missed the penalty when Brereton was brought down I don't know.

I really don't see him as a liability, particularly when he plays in a wide midfield role.

Totally agree with Mowbray that Bennett always gives you 100 percent even when he's not playing well. This season he has played with injury and in any position required to aid the team. Other players in the squad respect and speak highly of him - which I suppose is why he is the ideal club captain. Personally, I would like to see him here next season because his versatility is ideal for a club that has limited resources. JRC is similar in his ability to play in several positions and there are one or two others in the Under-23's who are adaptable to different roles.

I don't believe Mowbray said he had given up on aiming for the play-offs this season. Despite the injury list, he stated quite clearly that it was still the goal that the players and staff were working towards. He was merely pointing out that the summer is likely to see the emphasis on the foreign market and that plans - a full-time head of European scouting and others sifting through European matches at the moment, in the same way that most clubs seem to do these days - were in place to aid this. Whoever was manager would have to work within the same boundaries that Mowbray is working with in terms of staying with the FFP regulations and maintaining a wage cap which is clearly well below other Championship clubs. Those two factors aren't going to change which I think is fair enough. Personally, I took away from the meeting that the owners are still fully behind Mowbray and I suspect he will be given next season to see the plans he has put in place being implemented. Again, I think that's not an unreasonable position to adopt. If these plans don't produce a side that can challenge for promotion then I would expect his position to alter.

I think there have been times in a number of games this season where one can see the progression that Mowbray is trying to make in terms of the style of football. Bristol City and Sheffield Wednesday away were two games when it clicked for the majority of the game. In other games there have been spells when we've played well but lacked the finishing touch in the six yard box. I think the football has been better this season than last despite the loss of Dack, who to be fair had been very in and out prior to his injury. I didn't have a problem today when we started to go long in the final stages of the match. It seemed to be the tactic that unsettled Fulham the most - although I thought Michael Hector was outstanding for them at the heart of their defence. For me, we are still very much a work in progress in terms of transitioning from a long-ball, direct style, to a more possession based style. It's clear the players are very much with Mowbray and what he is attempting to do. Ultimately, he will need the new emphasis on European scouting to come up with the goods in the summer to improve the team. It was clear from the meeting on Thursday that the domestic market isn't going to work given the club's welcome, if belated, decision to impose a sensible wage structure.

I think the one thing I took from the meeting is that Mowbray will definitely be here next season. I don't believe the owners are likely to get rid of him before his contract is up. If we haven't made a serious promotion push by that point then that is the time I would expect a change. As you say, the season ending injuries to three players is something you can't really plan for when working with a limited budget. I believe our owners have taken to Mowbray and probably find his honesty a real positive for them and fits with their own beliefs and values. I think that will give him more time than most but ultimately, he will need to have us challenging before his contract is up.

I thought it was a very tight game with one goal always likely to settle it. Personally, I thought we didn't do too badly with the number of injuries to our creative players. Fulham were better in possession but didn't create that many clear cut chances. Travis was excellent and I thought Lenihan and Nyambe had decent games. JRC didn't do too badly in a different role for him. As Mowbray said in his interview, he's not a Dack or Holtby but has other attributes that he brings to the game and that it's a case of adopting a different style for the team whilst we are without the injured players - which seems fair comment. A disappointing result but I thought it wasn't all doom and gloom. There were positives, particularly the performance of our younger players, and on the whole I didn't think we did too badly against a side that could well be destined for automatic promotion.

I totally agree with much of what @Miller11 wrote about last night's meeting. Both Mowbray and Waggott come across exceptionally well and clearly have the club at heart. For the first time since the owners took over there is a positive vibe about the place. I think both were very upfront about the situation and they seem to be putting the foundations in place to take the club in the right direction. I think from last night it's clear that the owners are here for the long term and that Mowbray and Waggott have their confidence and are likely to be here for some time to come. Personally, I'm quite happy about that, as I think both Mowbray and Waggott are doing a decent job, whilst I accept that some aren't.

That's happened at Ewood before now when we loaned a club our away kit for a League game after the ref ruled against the away kit they had brought with them. It would appear that it was Mowbray who wanted the third kit because they found the away kit was not always suitable for some colour clashes. Once again, I thought both Mowbray and Waggott came over very well and clearly have the best interests of the club at heart. I thought Mowbray's comments on transfer policy were detailed and open and clearly he has a large say in that area of the club so it was quite right for him to cover that part of the agenda. The meetings illustrate that the different groups in attendance have different views on certain things so it's not easy for those in charge to find compromises. Some supporters fully agreed with Mowbray with regard to putting the away fans as far away from the pitch as possible whilst others felt atmosphere was more important and wanted them in the lower tier. I suspect, and would hope, that Mowbray's view would be the one we follow. At many away grounds you are either in a corner or upstairs - out of the way - so the noise impact from away fans is reduced.