All Activity

I was only treating it like you were someone attempting to make a coherent argument, which I assume most of us do when we post.

Most of the suggestions are hypothetical as is mine and the last bit is reality. Don't treat everything on here like we are in a court of law. Which by the way is probably how the EFL will treat it.... result or replay, there'll be two choices only.

If the panel decision comes within the regulations I wouldn’t think there were grounds for litigation. Taking part in the competition means clubs accept the rules

Would a rule that (unless both parties agree otherwise) "in the event of an abandonment the remaining part of the game shall be replayed under conditions as similar as possible to when the game was originally called off" work? Or would it raise more problems than it would solve?

What does what Ipswich want have to do with it? I'm talking about the fairest outcome, not what either side wants. Ipswich aren't morally entitled to some reversal of their failures simply because bad weather interrupted the match. How do you arrange it? The same way you arrange 90 minutes, except it's easier as they'll be back on the coach quicker. It's a complete non-point. They'd say they were being punished, well they aren't in any meaningful way, certainly far less than we would be if a full replay happened. Your last remarks here completely undermines your previous points about what Ipswich want. I'm certain they'd rather have a crack at getting a point back than be guaranteed nothing. If that's not the case they should just give up on their season right now.

The issue is that there is absolutely no precedent for it, and nothing that separates this game from others that have had full replays ordered.

My daughter went for the 17:04 from Bolton which was terminated there

It'll be a full replay, it's abundantly clear that the EFL will want to protect themselves from backlash and/or litigation and declaring the 80 mins played null is the best way to do that. I think playing the rest of the match is the most fair thing to do. I also think declaring a win for Rovers but awarding only one point is just laughable.

No - because currently the rule isn't that there should automatically be a full replay. Nor that a result should stand after x mins. As Ive already said several times in this thread I think its correct the EFL have absolute discretion and technically any solution is available. I dont think we or anyone else should be awarded the points in the circumstances that occurred on Saturday - it suits us now but I wouldn't like us to be on the wrong end of that in future. Obviously if we had been three up with a minute to go the situation would be entirely different which again is why absolute discretion is useful. On the other hand I dont favour a full replay - as Ive said several times the fairest solution would be a part replay 11 v 10 if only the EFL have the stones to depart from the norm. Where have I stated that none of it ever should be up for debate or that it should always be a full replay? That's basically the opposite of what I've been saying.

the flooding occured at 17.56... if we'd played there we could've finished the game 😉

This can could well be kicked down the road for months in the hope that by the last few weeks of the season neither club is involved in either the promotion or relegation stakes before they get off the fence to make a decision

You book a Waggott bus

The EFL.

I can find a small issue yes; picking new teams with them 1-0 down they’d just start all their attacking players; nothing to lose. You want it as close to original game as possible really. I genuinely can’t see past a full rematch given the nuances

But that in itself won't suit Ipswich either they'd not want that over a full replay. Coming 250 miles to play 10/15 mins how do you arrange that ? Sure it would be great for Rovers to trot out on the training ground or Ewood on a Tuesday afternoon but it isn't really desirable from their point of view is it. They'd say they were being punished because of a situation out of their control being dragged half way up the country for 15 mins with ten men. The ONLY credible outcome is result stands anything else is doing them a favour.

Finishing the match behind closed doors is the simple solution. Just play the final 15. No fans, but both teams can stream the game. Both teams can pick a brand new starting team, same players don’t need to be picked etc. Ofc Ipswich start with 10. Can anyone find the issue with that?

Yep, and If they really must, then in the interests of integrity, they could also order that at least X number of players on each side are the same players as those who were on the pitch when the game was abandoned, in the same way that they dictate how many players from the last league game must start low priority cup games

Agreed, but it probably remains so that if a game is 3-0 with 2 minutes of injury time left to play they can just call it. I suspect they'll only use it when it's beyond obvious what the outcome will be. The partial replay I doubt they'll ever use so it may as well go.

Wonderful wonderful man, a national treasure and respected by cricketers far and wide. Some wonderful stories about Dickie on the news today. RIP

The fairest middle ground has already been repeatedly suggested. Finish the match.

That's fair enough, I just don't understand how it's better for us than calling it a draw. Seems like it would make everyone as unhappy as possible. Can't imagine it will be anything other than a replay, but the objectively most fair thing to do is to play the last 10 mins plus stoppage time at 11v10. Still not as good for us as just finishing the game at the time, but no one could reasonably complain and it's exactly the same amount of effort as playing a full 90 except we lose out on gate receipts.

I can think of a few heads i'd like to ram up the drain hole.

A really disappointing performance in the second half today. Despite being in a strong position at 2-0 and then 3-1, the youngsters lost control and then failed to do the basics in terms of defending. Blackpool, who don't have an under-21 team, looked a pretty decent outfit. This was a steep learning curve for our youngsters but hopefully, one that will benefit them in the future. A Blackpool fan informed me that James Butterworth, who scored a couple for the visitors when he came on as a second-half sub, is the son of John Butterworth - a former youth and reserve player for us in the early 1990s who many will remember from when Jim Furnell was running the youth set up.

Its still a guessing game. Decision is taking more time than expected but surely the EFL know by now. Maybe they have put steelcityblue's option to Ipswich with a deadline date for getting back to get back.