All Activity

Not one of his comments referred to his team being awful for almost the entire game or his tactics consisting of using the wet conditions to try and maim their opponents. He did mention that the second half was pretty much unplayable from the off - ignoring the fact it only affected one team negatively, turning them into cheating shithouses collecting 4 yellows and a red.

I believe one of the things the club will be bringing up is that McKenna has spoken out in the press as they aren't supposed to following an abandonment

Give it time…

Really surprised how little media attention this is getting...

All good, clean fun though wilsdenrover 😂

It’s amazing the rabbit holes we manage to send ourselves down on here. 😁😁

We have no legal obligation to any other club re our drainage facilities so it certainly wouldn’t (or shouldn’t) be us.

This will really kick off at the end of the season if Ipswich win the replay and deny another Club promotion by less than three points. Who then do the aggrieved Club sue? The EFL for not having rules that are clear enough or us for having dodgy drainage facilities we've known about for ages and which have caused games to be called off in the past?

I agree (maybe keep the Norwich one…) but I bet that would get the lawyers interested. The regulation says the Board decides and the Board has an exact definition set out for it.

The representatives from Preston, Middlesbrough and Norwich should be excluded as a potential conflict of interest with them being Championship rivals.

Re the bit I’ve emboldened - I’d look at the balance of probabilities. I have no issue with the absolute discretion of the regulation as it is written. My issue is with the EFLs apparent reluctance to ever use this discretion. Which is pretty much what you’ve just said 😁

I think the rules as currently drafted with absolute discretion are the best way to go. Who's to say whether a team could or couldnt retrieve a two goal deficit with ten mins to go or a three goal deficit with twenty etc. What's required is a good old helping of common sense and the courage to set an initial precedent which uses that discretion fully. In this case replay the final 10 mins plus ET 11 v 10 with as many of the same players as are available and minus the guy who was sent off.

When I see some of the names on the EFL board I have no faith in them either: https://www.efl.com/about-the-efl/efl-board/

Yea it’s £100 per person travel for maximum 24 people. There’s then the same amount (and person limit) for hotels. The hotel one has conditions to do with travel time linked to it but I’m pretty certain Ipswich could claim this one too.

That is my expectation too.

Just to be clear I made that up 😁 I was just trying to show how easy it would be to get around the concern you raised. All you need is an Authority who wants its rules to be fit for purpose…

Which are that Ipswich can claim a maximum of about £4.8k did you say?

I fully expect the match to be replayed in full. I’d be very interested in a lawyer’s argument (and I’m sure they’d find one for the appropriate hourly fee…) as to how continuing from where the match was stopped would be unfair.

Ah - cheers!

One thing the EFL most definitely will want to avoid is lawyers becoming involved and their ruling (whatever it is) being challenged in some kind of court. Both clubs will present their case but this has the potential to run and run it the need arises given how open ended their regulations seem to be. I said in Saturday I have no faith in any current Rovers staff to present our case in a fit and proper manner.

If I was a Rovers I’d direct Ipswich to the EFL regulations re expenses.

‘Where the abandonment is caused by the behaviour of fans the Board will convene to determine whether the match will be deemed to be complete or is to be replayed in part or full…’

If I was Ipswich I'd be demanding we covered all expenses for them and their fans for the replay.

The regulation actually allows them to pretty one choose any conditions they wish. Full replay/part replay 11 vs 10/part replay 11 vs 11/result stands and so on and so on. As you say, if they aren’t going to make use of this, why not just have options based purely on absolute fact (minutes gone as you suggested, or combination of minutes gone and extent of any lead either team has established).

Someone quoted the customer charter earlier in the thread - half price i think was the stipulated condition if a game was abandoned (not postponed)