All Activity

A hard and fast rule is way too inflexible and doesn't differentiate between situations where a team is one up or five up or allow for things like fault or conduct to be considered.

Said a few times in this very thread. Decision was made Saturday night IMO, and everything else is just going through the motions to look like they have taken everything into account.

The Supremes - Wait A Minute Before You Leave Me

Probably just waiting for their lawyer reports to see what Rovers could do if the game is ordered a full replay and what the other lot might do if the result is called. It'll all come down to covering themselves and opening the smallest worm can. There should be a hard and fast rule already in place for these situations.

When we visited CFS to record our latest podcast we negotiated a discount code for all BRFCS members and we are delighted to confirm that it’s now live & ready to use. Simply click our affiliate link HERE & use the discount code BRFCS10 at the checkout.

Yes. Either that or the Norwich rep wants to award the three points to Rovers and has challenged Risible Risdale to a game of rock, paper, scissors to decide things.

Selecter - Three Minute Hero

Who thinks the EFL made their decision in five minutes but are delaying releasing it to make it seem like they’ve been considering alternatives?

Fun Boy Three - The Lunatics Have Taken Over The Asylum

Interesting that he said in France they just play the remainder of the game asap. On the face of it that seems the fairest solution and we could do with a new type of precedent being set to start the ball rolling along those lines here.

The game should be replayed in full but every player should be blindfolded throughout so as to not prejudice the result.

McKenna obviously wanted what is best for Ipswich, ive no issues with that and we would want the same, equally Ismael will have wanted whats best for Rovers. The ref was impartial and made the correct call to stop a game on a pitch not fit to continue a football match on.

Yeah its just a tactic to presumably try and strengthen our case. But whether he or indeed McKenna agreed is irrelevant to whether it should have been called off, both parties are obviously going to want what is best for their team. But the pitch was clearly not fit to continue so the only decision was to abandon the game. Ismael hasnt said he thought otherwise, just that he didnt agree to it. Its now all about them both trying to get not what is fair, as no solution is totally fair. But what suits each individual party.

Yep Ismael clearly hasn’t said he disagrees with the decision to call it off just that he wasn’t part of that decision. Seems to me like we are bracing for bad news and getting the statement out ahead of it there

The pitch was unplayable though. It came late in the game but if the ball doesn't roll and it doesn't bounce---then its unplayable. Doesn't matter what the time was, ref had no choice. Ismael has his role to perform I suppose.

Tbf the pitch ain’t his problem. He just needs to make sure the players perform week in and week out and give us the results.

Having listened to Ismael's interview, he's being very cute with his words. Saying that he didn't explicitly agree to the abandonment because he wasn't asked, but not saying he disagreed with it either. His issue seemed to be more with the EFL statement than whether the pitch was unplayable or whether the match could continue.

Anything other than a full replay would be astonishingly radical and would set a new precedent. I can't see the football authorities being that brave. A good manager should be able to use this though. We should run out on Saturday with a sense of grievance and tear into the opposition!

If it is the case that Ismael did not agree to the match being abandoned, then I owe you an apology for my comments in that regard after the game. It'll be interesting to see if the EFL respond to that, because their statement was pretty clear in saying all parties agreed to the abandonment.

Yes M'lord.

And do something far more ridiculous and illogical than just finishing the game? I don't know why you're persisting with this one beyond sheer bloody mindedness or trolling. I don't wish to be rude but it has been thoroughly deconstructed as a very bad suggestion. I've no issue with you as a poster but hardly anything you've said on this matter makes sense.

Great to see Ismael coming out and saying that he never agreed with the referee decision and that point of his report is wrong. So why did the ref say he did? Why has lied in his report? It was all McKenna and Ipswich were wanting the game calling out for these reasons, they were losing, down to 10 men and Rovers were controlling that game. Nothing in his team favour.

Sometimes there is a need to be radical 🙂

Lol, "there is widespread support for the idea among club bosses, Sky Sports News has been told", yeah, no shit. It makes the competition a bit of a joke though. Last season the team in 8th finished 22 points behind the team in 3rd, and 17 points ahead of the team in 22nd. The idea that it will lead to less dead rubbers is somewhat flawed in that it gives teams who are clearly going to finish between 3rd and 8th less reason to field full strength squads at the end of the season, particularly if they have little chance of getting automatics.

51 pages and still no signings. What a joke..