Looking at the Newcastle squad, they seem to have 11 players out from 25. Only FOUR with Covid. Three of the 14 available are GKs, so they don't have 13 available outfield players. However, a quick look at their u23 squad reveal that at least 4 players have some sort of experience from senior football this season or last. They also have quite a few players, like Matty Longstaff out on loan.
You could say that it's not obvious that they're stretching the rules to get the games postponed, but then again it is certainly not obvious that they're not. (And thinking of Newcastles specific situation with the Saudis and the transfer window I know which option I'd personally bet on)
To me this shows one of the main problems with the whole situation; the lack of transparency and oversight. After all postponing one PL game directly affects 50-100.000 people (fans etc), the tv networks, sponsors, the competition etc... They all have the right to know. At the very least the PL, when publishing the decision to postpone should publish the clubs full senior and elegible U21/23 squad with a list of who's unavailable. Privacy laws might prohibit naming the reasons for the individual players absence, but they should at least publish the number of covid cases and also the number of vaccinated/unvaccinated amongst them. Since there might also be other considerations taken into the decision they should also explicitly publish these considerations for each individual postponement.
To not do this is not only disrespectful of the people affected by it, but also opens up for a lack of trust, opens up the possibility of corruption and may potentially harm the integrity of the competition. Even if it won't harm the integrity, the mere POSSIBILITY of that happening is very harmful and unacceptable. To use a term that the PL/FA like to throw around for fun; it brings the game into disrepute. Now... what should be the punishment for that?
