Having stimulated a debate, through the publication of our proposals on the most equitable way to end the season, it is clear from the feedback that there is one important factor that many people have missed. This is perhaps understandable given that we gave (in the interests of transparency) a very long explanation. I think it is therefore important to clarify one issue.
The point that is commonly being missed is that our proposal would not require every division to adopt the margin for error adjustments to simple PPG, it just allows them the opportunity to vote to do so if they so wish.
As the financial dynamics of different divisions are so varied, I do not feel it is appropriate to mandate that every division has to use exactly the same method, as long as the framework for how the decisions are made is common across all of the divisions.
A good example of this is League Two, who had an earlier indicative vote to end the season immediately, with those ending in the play off places to play off, those currently in the automatic promotion places to be promoted, and Stevenage to be spared relegation. If League Two clubs vote for our proposal, along with a further proposal which has been put forward by another club (that there should be no relegation from League Two in the event that the National League does not hold a competition next year) then League Two can achieve what it wanted as per their indicative vote. The EFL proposal does not give League Two what it wants.
In the same way as I do not think it is right for League One clubs to vote for something to happen in League Two which is against the wishes of League Two, then I do not think it is right for League Two clubs to vote for something to happen in League One which does not impact them. League One is currently the division which is the most divided in terms of whether to play on or not. Our proposal gives each division a small degree of flexibility to make sure that the outcome is “fair” in its particular circumstances. It is not unusual for different divisions to vote for slightly different variants on regulations, as long as it does not impact the others.
This flexibility may be particularly important in the Championship, who currently wish to play on but may find that circumstances prevent this even if they do restart. The Tranmere proposal would allow the Championship to consider whether it would be appropriate to use raw PPG (which might of course deliver a different result if they are forced to stop again than it delivers now), or to apply the margin for error, without opening the door to the Premier League to argue that there should be no relegations from the Premier League.
The strength of what we have proposed is that every division is able to vote on what is fairest in their particular financial and competitive circumstances, but with a common principle over-arching the entire EFL.