During one famous scene in 1980s BBC sitcom Yes Minister, two civil servants – Sir Richard Wharton and Sir Humphrey Appleby – discuss how to advise a Prime Minister during a crisis.
“In stage one, we say nothing is going to happen,” Wharton begins. “Stage two, we say something may be about to happen, but we should do nothing about it,” Appleby explains. “In stage three, we say that maybe we should do something about it, but there’s nothing we can do,” Wharton continues, and so to Appleby’s punchline: “Stage four, we say maybe there was something we could have done, but it’s too late now.”
On Wednesday, with Tottenham’s home game against Fulham the second match in as many days postponed due to a Covid-19 outbreak, the Premier League issued a statement: “The Premier League has not discussed pausing the season and has no plans to do so,” was its beginning and its thrust. Business as usual during the most unusual season. Make your own mind up whether this is stage one or two of the civil servant crisis guide.
Football – including the Premier League – was postponed in March because the country entered a national lockdown. Eighty per cent of the country will begin the new year in Tier 4, which is effectively a social lockdown. Schools, universities and places of worship remain open (in contrast with the spring), but senior schools will delay opening for all students and primaries will do the same in the South East. Make no mistake: football is taking a risk by carrying on.
The notion of a “circuit break” fortnight has been widely mooted, but would probably do little to help. Players would have to train during the second week and so may only get five days off. The reaction from managers is laced with self-interest. Sam Allardyce, who would favour having two weeks on the training ground with his new squad, is for the idea. Ole Gunnar Solskjaer, whose Manchester United team have rediscovered their form, is against it.
But the discussion is moot – we can’t fit in a break anyway. The Premier League is facing a scheduling nightmare without even the briefest hiatus.
Let’s assume that Manchester City reach the EFL Cup and FA Cup final and the Champions League semi-finals, hardly an unrealistic proposition. With the domestic season needing to end on 23 May to allow the European Championship to start on 11 June and a 12-day international break in March, City will have to play a game every 3.4 days simply to fit in their scheduled matches.
Manchester United are the same. The added round in the Europa League dictates that Solskajer’s team could play 40 more matches between now and the Europa League final in Gdansk on 26 May. Again, that’s a game every 3.4 days. And that’s assuming that there are no more postponements as cases rise across the country. Perhaps we’re actually at stage three of the sitcom joke.
Any virologist worth their salt predicted a significant rise in cases during the winter months when the workload on footballers typically reaches its peak. This spike and subsequent enforcement of lockdown procedures did not rush in from left field and should not have caught anyone off guard. In fact, the Premier League is fortunate that winter weather has not yet caused any postponements. That may come in January and February.
At what point is player welfare considered here, or do we just continue to treat footballers as performing circus animals with a patriotic duty to entertain those cooped up at home? Sunderland manager Lee Johnson briefly discussed his concerns about the long-term lung capacities of players who contract Covid-19. Even those who don’t contract the virus will be asked to deal with an increased workload and pressure at a time of great national worry. Those who participate in the European Championship, Copa America or Gold Cup this summer face a relentless schedule over a 21-month period ending in May 2022.
This is a mess that could have been avoided. This season always promised unique, uncontrollable challenges that may arrive with little notice and cause lasting headaches. We could have scrapped one or both of the domestic cup competitions for a single season, sharing the usual revenue between League One, League Two and National League clubs. There could have been a disaster plan in place in case the season needed to be curtailed.
Instead, very few ceded any ground at all. The only significant change to a busy calendar was to start the season a month later and so make the window to complete the fixtures a month shorter.
That was either an act of foolhardiness, wilful ignorance or misplaced complacency; you’ve read this far so feel free to make your own choice. The Premier League’s “The show must go on” mantra was well-intentioned – goodness knows we all need some escapism – but escapism is a privilege not an indisputable truth. We are sleepwalking into a fixture calamity that may yet threaten the end of this season more gravely than it threatened 2019-20.
Anyone claiming to be shocked wasn’t taking it seriously enough in the first place.
Daniel Storey’s i football column is published in print and online on Friday mornings. You can follow him on Twitter @danielstorey85
More from Daniel Storey
- The Premier League diluted its anti-racism message at the worst possible time
- Lampard is indeed treated differently as a manager – but not for the reason he thinks
- Project ‘Bigger’ Picture: An alternative vision for the future of English football
- Liverpool have become complacent and Klopp has to find the root cause
- Fulham are making the same mistakes all over again
from Football – inews.co.uk https://ift.tt/3n4TK8K
Post a Comment