On Tuesday Football Federation Australia (FFA), the Chinese Football Association (CFA) and the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) will sit down in Kuala Lumpur and decide what to do about the coronavirus.
Shanghai SIPG and Shanghai Shenhua were due to travel to Australia next week to take on Sydney FC and Perth Glory but with the virus spreading and Canberra announcing a ban on arrivals from mainland China, these games can't take place in either country anytime soon. There is obviously some working out to be done.
Chinese teams playing the first three games of the group away from home is no longer a possibility, at least for Australia. The situation is growing increasingly serious.
There are a number of options for the AFC, including:
1. Postpone the China-Australia meetings.
Three of the six group games take place in in the first three weeks but then there is a gap of over a month before the second half gets underway. The AFC could postpone the Chinese-Australian games until later.
Pros: Gives time for the situation to, hopefully, calm down. The competition is starting relatively early so alternative dates should be available. Would keep the integrity of the competition alive and Australian teams would probably have finished their domestic season by the time the games are played.
Cons: Would be tight. The schedule is carefully worked out and there is always plenty going on. Chinese league is already postponed and clubs are going to be extremely busy when football does eventually start. There is also the possibility that governments in Japan and South Korea also start to impose stricter bans and then the problem becomes bigger,.
2. Play both games in a neutral venue
The AFC could change the schedule so Australian and Chinese teams meet in the back to back games on matchdays three and four. Both of these meetings could take place in a third country over three or four days.
Pros: Chinese teams, such as Shanghai SIPG who are now in Dubai, could spend time in overseas training camps, long enough to show they are clear of the virus and then meet Australian opposition in Southeast Asia. Playing twice in the space of a few days would make things easier for the players.
Cons: Hard work for the Chinese players. Would take plenty of organising.
3. Expel Chinese teams
At the moment with the focus on China, not having Chinese teams at all would, initially at least, make the situation clearer. This is, however, the nuclear option.
Pros: While harsh, it could solve the problem quickly and mean teams can focus on the games they do have, ending the uncertainty.
Cons: China is the AFC’s biggest Champions League market. It would be a huge setback for the tournament.
4. Go straight to the knockout stage
A novel option would see the group stage cancelled with all 32 teams going straight to the knockout phase. The initial two legs could take place on the last two matchdays of the group stage and then the tournament would follow the original knockout schedule.
Pros: Would keep all teams involved, give plenty of time for the virus situation to calm down. Could be sold as something original and make every game an exciting occasion. It may be a big deal but for one year, it could work.
Cons: Would have to be the case for the western half of the tournament too even though all 16 teams there currently ready to start the group stage. Dumping the whole group stage would not appeal.
5. Play the whole group stage elsewhere
The Asian Club Championship, the predecessor to the Champions League, would often feature whole groups played in a single city over the space of a few days.
Pros: In a neutral venue, teams can play each other once if needed and it can be done and dusted within a week. Could take place in April or May.
Cons: Would be hard to organise.
