All Activity

Don’t know why Ipswich couldn’t have stayed an extra night and get the final 10 played this morning /afternoon. That to me would be the fairest thing so you get as near to the same conditions as possible. As it is I think we all know it’s going to be a full 90 mins replay and it’s a completely different game

I think its a water level thing though as the outlet is below the water level when heavy down pour occurs the outlet becomes submerged rendering it useless. Another option would be to run pumps prior to the games and throughout or begin them during a heavy down pour game and have the water dumped out further down Alum house brook. The Ewood park outlet is closed to avoid back up. Simple but costly

no one is bitter and twisted again @roversfan99. I and others just disagree with the decision. Also people are unhappy with McKenna's reactions, his post match comments and the way him and his players celebrated after the game was called, you might not seen a problem or any issue with his actions but plenty do.

If I had travelled around 250 miles to watch my team, I would expect them to show some appreciation for that

That's Leonard who went Peterborough, that'll be why you thought that.

Well no, I have just not become so bitter and twisted over an admittedly frustrating situation to the point where my posts (and dishing out of thumbs down emojis) come across as petulant, bitter and twisted beyond sensible reasoning.

McKenna got what he wanted, his posted match interview, patting the ref on his back. Their celebrations at calling the game off were embarrassing yet you are so quick to defend them every time.

The frustrating part is with how the club is ran there are potentially simple solutions to this that have NOT been explored. Would that surprise anyone? The consensus will have been..... "how often does it stop a game going ahead? No." That's the level of excellence now riddled inside Ewood. No pride or passion for the club to be the best it can be. Who would even have the authority to make a call on a ground improvement like that. The imaginary CEO or the intern one? These kind of fixes are significant but not an issue for our owners if they were present.

If Ismael did agree with that decision then I disagree with him

Yes, I am sure that he is laughing his head off that his masterplan of causing the pitch to be totally unplayable due to a waterlogged pitch came to fruition. They came out at the end to clap their fans who had travelled a long way. The pitch was unplayable. End of story.

I didn't think you would. Alebiosu slid into a challenge and couldn't stop and Miller did likewise and in my view should have been cautioned. I'm not saying they were deliberate but more because of the surface. Whether you agree or not it's a fact that the pitch had become dangerous which, according to reports (I personally haven't read them) Ismael accepted on those grounds. The pitch was fine at kick off. The persistent rain and nowhere for it to go caused the problem.

So by the same token Im guessing by extension you now can't stand Ismael any more either as he was in agreement with calling the game off?

I said that you not caring about player welfare was one of two possibilities. The other is that you believe you know better than three professionals, which is questionable and in my personal view ridiculous, but seems to be the view you hold, so okay. You're free to believe that. Don't exclude Ismael from your rant. He agreed to calling the game off as well.

I'm not having the player safety angle - Hirst tried to break Ribeiro's legs in the first half and there was only one team throwing themselves into sliding tackles and it wasn't the Rovers. I'm fine with the game being stopped because of the standing surface water - which again begs the question, why was the game started in the first place?

suggestion I don't care about player welfare which is untrue but you played 80 mins, just finish the game instead of stopping and given McKenna what he wanted. yes I believe the game should have carry on and all it has done is proved that managers like McKenna can keep complaining and get their way. It was totally disgrace the way McKenna and his players celebrated with their fans getting what he wanted post game. I bet McKenna is laughing his head off now how he get that game stopped. Can't stand the guy anymore.

In what way is it a dig? It's just a statement of fact. If you believe the game should have gone on you disagree with the referee and both managers. Ergo you believe you know better than them about whether the players were at risk or not. If you don't disagree with them but still think the game should have continued then you don't care about the player's safety, only about the match result. It's the only conclusion that can be made on the opinion you say you stand by.

Like I said, I stand by my original opinion on whether the game should have carry on and I do Plenty of digs there from yourself unusual

Unlikely, but if not then it means he either believes he knows better than both managers and the referee, or just does not care about player welfare at all. Neither is a good look but one is obviously more deplorable than the other.

I seem to recall reading that in addition to your solution, extending the outfall to further downstream could be undertaken, without Environment Agency involvement, but obviously at a cost to the club

This is totally irrelevant in deciding whether the pitch was fit enough to continue the game.

back in 2021 when Rovers pitch was stitched. As Garner, you would the Environmental Agency to do building work and improve the drainage system in the River Darwen and also factoring in the number of new houses being building in the local area all using that River Darwen. Could Rovers build a storage tank facility on site to store more water and slowing disposal it into the River? I'm not an expert in this field btw My answer to your question was very clear and very direct that I stand my opinion . I gave you the answer which was what happens if we lose 1 or 2 key players between yesterday and the replay game stand by my original opinion

If the drain outlet was angled downstream, rather than at 90 degrees to the river, and a non return valve fitted, the river flow itself would draw out the ground water (venturi effect ).

That might help Chaddy change his mind

I daren't! Sorry dont agree on your other points either. We're far from the only ones to have owners who subsequently turned out to be disastrous initially approved and if we send in transfer registrations late or with clerical errors that's our fault. ( I suspect the latter were deliberate anyway)

It's the footballing authorities in general, there was no challenge to the Venky's ownership and agents and rogue managers etc despite loads of evidence they were up to no good. Admittedly this was the PL in the first instance but the EFL have done diddly squat since so that makes them culpable in my eyes. They specifically rejected our appeals on some technicality concerning player signings. They will reject this appeal I have no doubt though it hasn't happened yet. If any of these things were under discussion with or had happened to a Man U, a City, an Arsenal in the PL or say a WBA or Leeds in the EFL would outcomes be different? Course they would. Ever since we 'bought' the title the collective 'they' in authority haven't been our friends. Besides which my wife says they hate us and she's never wrong she tells me so take it up with her.