It was always inevitable that some players would test positive. Already a game called off in Bundesliga 2 and surely some serious jeapordy as to whether the leagues can restart.

With a new season you have essentially a blank canvas and a level playing field. Aswell as this there is also the potential for consistency in terms of not just completing certain leagues, and of course in terms of advantages regarding fixtures etc, they havent even been drawn yet. The main driving force behind what course of action is best to take in terms of the 19/20 season will not be player welfare, health and safety or even the fairest way, it will be the way that benefits each individual club in terms of their current position. If a team is 24th, they would want to null and void the season. Take Liverpool, Leeds or West Brom, they would surely want to finish the season or even award it on PPG or similar. The team third in League 1 would certainly be happy with the proposal to only finish the Premiership and Championship, whereas 4th, 5th and 6th would be dead against it. There is also the additional issue of time in terms of trying to complete the 19/20 season quickly considering we would have had our last game at Luton last Sunday. And obviously the fact that next season can allow a couple of months to constantly monitor the situation without the same time pressure. It may well be that the whole of next season has to be behind closed doors to maintain integrity, but surely there would also be more scope for an agreement in terms of a willingness to open the doors to stadiums as soon as is possible in terms of health and safety PRIOR to fixtures being arranged. There are also various other issues that may cause further unfairness and lack of integrity that have been suggested or may be compromised, potential for VAR to be impossible, potential need for extra subs etc.

Another issue of potentially losing fairness and sporting integrity is a potential lack of VAR. If a decision goes against someone that would have been amended and corrected by VAR it is not fair. You cant have it for part but not all of a season.

Again potential legal issues are not the primary concern but the teams that go down or that dont get promoted will im sure suggest that it wasnt fair and that the integrity wasnt maintained playing behind closed doors at neutral stadiums and likewise the teams in 4th 5th and 6th in League 1 who are not promoted even though they occupied play off places and were in just as good as position as 3rd will I am sure issue legal proceedings. To think that finishing the season (well just the 2 top leagues) will remove any legal implications is naive and foolish. Playing behind closed doors especially if any players are unable to play due to having the virus or are unwilling to play will cause problems. NEITHER DECISION WILL BE TOTALLY FAIR! Another potential legal issue. You get more than the usual 3 subs. What happens if a 4th sub comes on and scores a winner? Is that fair? In your head, if the men in suits decide that the football will go ahead then it is all good to go no questions asked. With the potential for players to test positive and be unavailable or simply refuse to play that isnt the case. You keep using the words systems and procedures as if that is all that is needed, and as if they will 100% eliminate the risk within a contact sport and also ensure that everyone will be willing to play. This line about boosting the nations morale is a load of bollocks too. Footballers are not robots exempt from the virus or able to be wheeled out at the governments request to risk themselves and their families without having their own say.

My stance is very much that health should come before legal issues. But you dont seem to be able to grasp that there will be legal consequences NO MATTER HOW THE SEASON IS FINISHED/NOT FINISHED. Brighton are a good example, say they finish the season behind closed doors, and Brighton go down, they have more "home" games left and have publically stated that they feel that "sporting integrity" will have been compromised. Both finishing the season and not finishing the season will bring with it teams that feel cheated, legal proceedings and sporting integrity compromised, so such matters shouldnt be considered. Is it necessarily fair to put teams in Europe based on last season? No. But it is it fair to have teams promoted based on their season so far, which is not completed from League 1? Again, no. BOTH null and voiding AND finishing the season has a series of negative consequences, potential legal issues and neither maintain sporting integrity. To use that as a reason either way is not a credible reason. Your last paragraph makes little sense. Surely if it goes well in Germany, it can work in Italy? Even though 3 players in the same team have the virus! I personally believe that your understandable desperation to watch some football is making you only see issues in the prospect of nulling and voiding the season, even when there are very similar issues that are thrown up if you do complete the season behind closed doors. And you are under-appreciating the issue of player safety and of player willingness and co-operation by prioritising your one sided points regarding legal and financial issues above them.

I dont understand this focus on potential legal cases. If the season is finished behind closed doors, there will be legal cases. If the season is declared null and void, there will be legal cases. Whoever misses out will enforce legal proceedings. It shouldnt be an issue anyway, the legalities are not a reason to base a decision on in such a situation. You cannot maintain any sort of integrity by finishing the top league or top 2 leagues, but having a situation where some teams are relegated having played a full season and replaced by teams who havent been able to get promoted justifiably. Absolutely farcical. If its null and voided across the board then at least theres consistency. Essentially the 2019/2020 season is wiped from the record books, there is no need to rush teams to finish half arsed seasons, with potentially reluctant or unwilling players risking their health imminently, the season re starts after all clubs have had discussions over the summer regarding mutually agreed terms in regards to a potentially partially behind closed doors season. The leagues in which teams are in and continental qualification just is based on last season. Not ideal, but no way is ideal. Also, with games behind closed doors assuming the season is to be finished, income is massively restricted. The primary expense to a football club is player wages, which at the moment are reduced. Surely they would revert back to 100% if they were playing games again? I see that Fiorentina has had 6 new cases including 3 players and Torino also have a new one. This sort of thing will surely not be a one off.

My point is that I don't believe that any sort of plan or structure can prevent the high risk of the virus being spread playing a contact sport. I also believe that a predictable and understandable less than 100% willingness on the players behalf will further jeopardise the integrity and potentially stop any plans coming to fruition.

The clubs cant make players play against their will, its easy for some blokes in suits whether at the FA or in government to discuss it and allow it when its not them playing. If a decent enough amount of players dont want to, and if its true that players from 9 of 20 teams have shown reservations, then quite simply how can it go on?

You can never escape the fact that they will be playing a contact sport and are at risk of contracting the virus, regardless of precautions, safeguards and discussions theres only so much you can do. If players are unwilling which I can totally understand then it shouldnt and wont go ahead.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/11566057/project-restart-nine-clubs-players-opt-out-coronavirus/amp/?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_campaign=sunsporttwitter&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter&__twitter_impression=true Surely it cant go ahead.

Bringing in minor measures seem fairly pointless when you consider that they are playing a contact sport.

But even if the German government has given their approval, there are so many questions to be answered as Blue blood mentions here, and things that could crop up (quite likely) such as players contracting the virus before the first game, what rules are in place ie does one player testing positive cause a cancellation, or do a certain number have to get it, its just a minefield. Players from the position of a very limited training period after a break, playing in masks in an empty stadium, lets say one of the players in the league as a minimum contracts the virus too between now and the season, I dont see how both the competitve edge and as Blue blood mentions the sporting integrity can be maintained, players knowing they are at risk of catching the virus and taking it home putting their family in danger. Another thing that I am not sure that has been considered is the opinions of the players. In England quite rightly a lot of media focus has turned to the welfare of the players with silly ideas like moving to Australia to play, shortening halves etc, there is no way that I can accept that every single player either here or in Germany is 100% happy and content to return to playing so soon. You mention the Championship chaddy, youve still the same problem regarding relegation to and promotion from League 1, makes no sense. I miss being able to watch and play football and would love to see it as soon as possible but I just cannot fathom how considering its nature and the nature of the virus, how its return can be considered enough of a priority to overcome the risks and the issues that it brings up.

I remain unconvinced that the German league will go ahead as planned, would a player testing positive cause that fixture or indeed the whole league to be called off? Are the players 100% willing to co-operate and play, presuming that many are fearful for their health? I appreciate that Germany is a totally different country that seems to have controlled things better than here for example but I am dubious at the moment. And if it does go ahead, in front of empty stadiums presumably with masks on and with an element of fear, surely the competitive edge will be somewhat lost. We will see.

Ultimately this question should be well down the list of priorities but its a fair one. If the season is null and void it essentially doesnt exist, no promotions, no relegations, start next season with the same teams in the same divisions. Its unfortunate, but its the only way, in terms of health, safety and even logistically. Going to Australia for example, you have the feelings of the players as you are banking on 100% co-operation, you are assuming that there is 0% risk in Australia, and even if that got finished there, you wouldnt be able to do the Championship too so it wouldnt resolve promotion/relegation. The last day of our season would have been yesterday, to put into context of the logistical nightmare that would ensue even if it was safe now. Legal reasons are NOT a reason to make a certain decision, as not only are they certainly down the list in terms of importance, but they are unavoidable however the season is ended/not ended. An equal amount of teams will feel hard done by no matter what. The FA should show some leadership and null and void the season now. You have teams coming in doing half arsed training sessions knowing full well that the date of the supposed restart is not feasible, but potentially increasing the risk. I think Mowbray said as much yesterday. That way, they can still stay somewhat in shape individually from home without increasing any risk, and there is a good couple of months whereby no further decision has to be rushed, and without the desperation to finish the 19/20 season hanging over like a cloud. The prize money can be agreed, ideally in a way whereby the Premier League money can trickle down effectively to keep lower clubs afloat, and distributed as soon as possible, another thing which will be delayed by trying to finish the season. The issue obviously wont go away before the start of next season, but we dont know the exact date when fans can attend games, even assuming that it will be safe before the end of next season. There is obviously plenty of time hopefully for clubs to come to an agreement whereby before the fixtures are arranged, games will be played behind closed doors until (and if) its safe to allow fans in. It is not essential but that would hopefully remove any legal ramifications from teams feeling they are disadvantaged, whilst not increasing the amount of time that supporters can not attend, and of course the financial issues that would be caused. I do appreciate and empathise with your desperation to get the football back but it just doesnt seem possible any time soon, and some clarity and a firm and immediate decision to null and void the season would be a big step in the right direction.

There will be legal ramifications no matter which route they go down. There is also the logistical issues of trying to squeeze in the rest of the season in that I think would already be over now before starting and preparing for the next season. There has to be an element of joined up thinking too, it makes little sense for the Premier League to finish abroad, but even if that is possible, which for many reasons seems difficult, the EFL is very unlikely to finish. So what happens with relegation? Opening an unnecessary can of worms. Divisions with varying numbers of teams are a crazy idea, and if there can be no relegation then there is little point in finishing it anyway. The clubs whose financial sustainability may be in doubt are obviously those further down the pyramid than the Premier League. Even if the Premier League can be finished in god knows which area of the world, if that can be done safely, which seems impossible to me, all 3 EFL Leagues surely cant, so the point about various incomes eg ifollow is moot. Plus would people pay for ifollow subscriptions for a few games that potentially they had already paid for with a season ticket, and would the income for them be anything but minimal? I doubt it. I personally think that the current season should be immediately declared null and void across the English Leagues, prize money etc can then be distributed. The focus can then be on next season, so theres an element of downtime now, and of course plenty of time before we need to decide what will become of next season. I think it would be a financially driven selfish lust for entertainment to start squeezing in games like people are trying to propose, totally against the safety of all involved, and Every reason that supports trying to finish the season has a stronger counterargument. The fanciful idea that it will bring the country together and boost morale is naive, indeed it would just cause an increased risk of unnecessary gatherings, either with people not within their households or even at stadiums. Maybe putting it on free to air TV would reduce that risk, but that would mean the TV Companies will still kick up a fuss. Any suggestion that legal reasons should push the idea to finish the season are equally flimsy because regardless of what is decided, there will be legal ramifications either way and these simply cannot be avoided, nor can they be prioritised anyway over public safety. I see no reason to finish the leagues. Its unfortunate but its an unprecedented situation. Would the players be willing to uproot for a couple of months to do this radical idea, has that been considered? I suspect the novelty of having football to watch at all, which we are all eager to watch, would wane somewhat considering that no matter what happens during the season, no one will be able to go and see it.

There will be legal issues regardless of how it is settled. If its null and void, those at the top of, in the promotion places or outside the relegation places in their relevant league will probably create legal cases. If it is done on sporting merit that would be a legal minefield. Conversely if the season is finished behind closed doors, teams will argue about advantages and disadvantages, for example Brighton have said that they dont think its fair because they lose home advantage from their surplus of remaining home games. There is no perfect solution nor any way of avoiding potential legal cases due to the current situation. It certainly isnt black and white to potentially put people at risk (footballers, other parties involved and their respective families) and also use up previous, finite resources. Unless I am missing something I dont see how playing football behind closed doors would prevent clubs from financial ruin. Agreeing this as soon as possible would allow an agreement to be put in place regarding distribution of prize money, solidarity payments etc. Also, if they play games again surely full wages will need to be paid? The morale argument is fairly flimsy too. Many people wont be affected because they have no interest in football so this idealistic scenario in which the nation is glued to TVs is unrealistic. Theres also the timebomb of fans congregating, especially outside stadiums which will happen. Will Liverpool fans all peacefully watch from home or will the minority of idiots be desperate to party at the stadium following finally winning a League title? There is also the issue of player welfare. What if players refuse to risk their own health and that of their families for the sake of playing arbitary games in front of no one? Do you think you will be glued to matches on TV in front of no fans or do you think you would lose interest and place less importance to those games?

I think everything especially in the Football League points to finishing the season being unrealistic and I think that would be the correct decision. The amount of tests and other resources needed, the risk of supporters congregating etc make it far too big of a risk. I also think the Premier League should follow the same protocol rather than pie in the sky ideas such as finishing the season off in a different continent. And no bollocks about having extra teams in leagues next season or awarding things on "sporting merit" just call it null and void now distribute the prize money etc and then theres a bit of clarity. I think it is difficult to announce anything at the moment because the situation is so fluid and we dont have any real idea when it could be safe and realistic especially to allow fans back in again. I have written off fans being able to attend games until at least 2021 but even then something I hadnt factored in was the potential legal and logistical nightmare of opening the doors half way through and teams feeling disadvantaged by that. That would be dissapointing because this season I can understand but the fixtures for next season havent even been drawn yet and you wouldnt want football to be unavailable to fans once the announcement has been made that it is safe for fans to attend again. But it looks like we wont be attending games until August 2021. Initially the prospect of any football even behind closed doors was an exciting prospect because its better than nothing but I think i am now of a mindset where I am unsure if I would be particularly interested in football behind closed doors, perhaps partly due to a realisaton of its importance or lack of in the grand scheme of things at the moment.

No matter how the game changes, nothing will ever change the fact that goalscoring is the number one priority of a striker though. I dont think its realistic to expect Championship to be good at everything. Ultimately I also felt that people overstated other areas of his game, but the proof was in the pudding in terms of the limits that put on his ability to score goals, ie very little. For example, Armstrong is lightning quick, but Rhodes was at least as effective in behind because the timing of his runs was far, far better, Armstrong often caught offside, and once he got in behind, he was clinical whereas Armstrong probably misses more than he scores and is more of a scorer of great goals rather than a great goalscorer. He was also of no use if we went direct but he wasnt useless with his head, he did score quite a few headers when he again used his intelligence to get a yard. I dont think theres been a better consistent Championship striker in the last decade than Rhodes as he was here, barring obvious exceptions like Mitrovic of players who maybe spent a year here post relegation. I also feel that he can be considered underrated just because his unrelenting goal record over 3 and a half season was remarkable and made him the best striker around at this level at that time.

One controversial shout for a player who was always popular but both at the time and after his departure slightly underappreciated has to be Jordan Rhodes. There was always an undercurrent of people trying to find holes in what he couldnt do and a blatant under-appreciation of quite how ridiculous his goal record was. 3 full seasons in teams that ranged from shambolic in the first year to more stable in the second and third (with obvious major flaws still existing) he got 27, 25 and 21 goals. Then a further 10 in a half season prior to his departure. It takes incredible anticipation, composure and intelligence to be so consistently prolific. We have been lucky to have since had Graham and Dack but even in League 1 neither could smash the 20 goal barrier Rhodes did every full season he was here. Goals always will be priority 1 from a striker, he was an absolute guarantee. His post Rovers career is pretty irrelevant to how good he was here, played a key role in Boro's promotion but went to 2 clubs who clearly had bought him without necessarily the managers final say and I think hes suffered a crisis of confidence but it doesnt take away his extraordinary consistency here.

Dack is nowhere near being fit, almost certainly hasnt cut months off such a serious injury. Even said in the LT recently that he wont be back until late in the year. Holtby planned on being back for any potential play offs but is in Germany so would need to self isolate for 2 weeks first. That being said, we might not have any football before late in the year anyway if common sense is used.

I think the more time goes on, the possibility of finishing the season becomes more and more unlikely, even behind closed doors, in terms of guaranteeing player safety and using up resources that could be better used elsewhere. I also accept that as much as I am desperate to watch any football, the notion of having anything like a similar interest and passion in behind closed doors results and matches is probably unlikely. If Rovers somehow got into the top 6 for example, I suspect I would resent the fact that I couldnt go and see the games. Next season should be the priority and salvaging as much it it as is reasonably possible. Any talk of a conspiracy towards making a decision in any way focused on getting Liverpool the title is absurd though. As much as I dont want them to lift the Premier League.

I think theres some good shouts here but also some questionable ones. The centre backs are 2 good shouts, and David Thompson was a cracking little player. I think its hard to pick out a keeper to be fair, never thought Bunn was much cop. On the flip side, I dont think that what happens post Rovers should have a bearing, otherwise Rhodes would be overrated, even though he constantly scored goal after goal. Kalinic was someone I was desperate to do well and could see flashes but ultimately he was given quite a few chances and he never convinced at all. He has played for some big clubs since without really excelling at any of them. Rochina and to a lesser extent Formica I think grabbed peoples attention, one was a Barcelona graduate and the other a highly rated Argentinian at a time when we had a fairly ageing and stagnant side but both flattered to deceive more often than not. I dont think either could be considered underrated, indeed I would probably say that Rochina is overrated. Conway it is easy to forget how effective he was for his first few years, maybe staying on too long tarnished his memory somewhat, and I think Nyambe has always been a fans favourite even when his performances were unconvincing. I think a couple of other shouts would be Garry Flitcroft for sure and also Grant Hanley and maybe Ben Marshall and Michael Gray? Underrated is such a difficult definition really, I do wonder even if the likes of Andy Cole, Robbie Savage and Benni McCarthy are somewhat underrated, even with their high profiles. And it might go under the radar quite how good David Bentley was.

I think the interview isnt even directly with the club, more lifted from a podcast he did with a friend.

I think theres an element of rewriting history in terms of King. At that time, there was no way that we can justify dropping one of the front 2 who at that time were scoring 20+ goals a season each. He often underwhelmed when he did play and that Stoke hat trick was very much an exception. I also certainly dont think Rochina could be described as magnificent here!