v Ipswich Town (h) - 20/9/25

[NeilInBristol]

5 hours ago, KentExile said:

Might be sooner when it turns out Rovers neglected to press send, and as a result, Ipswich's suggestion passes unchallenged 😉 

🤣🤣🤣

Top post!!

[Elrovers]

39 minutes ago, NeilInBristol said:

Yep!! It’s a joke

the whole thing is a shambles

Why does it take so long if the ref has the ability to call off a match then they must have some rules about what they do next

ridiculous 

English football mate. What the fuck do you expect from them. Pillocks the lot of them.

Edited 3 hours ago by Elrovers

[NeilInBristol]

31 minutes ago, Elrovers said:

English football mate. What the fuck do you expect from them. Pillocks the lot of them.

Remove the power from the ref to cancel the game

Let the players decide amongst themselves 

if Ipswich players walk off they concede the game

if rovers players walk off (why would they) they concede the game

simple

 

 

[OldEwoodBlue]

12 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Would'nt be at all surprised if that's the case but piss poor if it is. As Wilesden said the other day, what's the point in allowing yourself complete discretion within the regulations if you're just going to make the same decision (i.e. a full replay) every time without taking into account the individual circumstances of every case?

Its for the exceptional case.

This isn't it.

1-0 with at least 16 mins to play.

A full replay is the only right and fair outcome. We all know it.

The drainage problem is well known, fixable if the owners sign a cheque, thus our (clubs) own fault.

Venkys can fuck off every fucking day until they do actually fuck off.

[Tomphil2]

Saving pounds comes before gathering points in Suhail land.

[Tugayisgod]

24 minutes ago, OldEwoodBlue said:

Its for the exceptional case.

This isn't it.

1-0 with at least 16 mins to play.

A full replay is the only right and fair outcome. We all know it.

The drainage problem is well known, fixable if the owners sign a cheque, thus our (clubs) own fault.

Venkys can fuck off every fucking day until they do actually fuck off.

It is an exceptional case due to the fact it was 11 v 10 for the majority of the ,2nd half. That makes it unprecedented and no doubt the main issue for the EFL to consider.

I for one DON'T believe a full replay is the only fair outcome, I think it's totally unfair to be honest.

 

[roversfan99]

I would love them to give us the 3 points but theres no way that you can do that in terms of fairness.

The most obvious compromise of playing the remainder of the game also has all sorts of issues. Obviously, to get them up to play 11 minutes plus injury time is very unlikely. But also, the fixture loses integrity because it obviously splits into 2. You are then left with a second mini game weeks/months after the first 80 minutes, with different players, in different conditions, with both sides able to approach such a small period as if its a new game, basing tactics on trying to defend or peg back a lead.

Therefore, I can only see in line with precedent that they replay the full game. Its really shit and its hard luck but its very difficult to go ahead with any other option. If it does happen, its not some hatred of us from the EFL, its just sadly following precedent and its the only real option which maintains any real integrity and normality in the fixture.

[Andy]

8 hours ago, Eddie said:

Now, if the club had any sense, this is a chance to turn a potential replay into a positive. 

Just have it be free tickets for everyone. Try to get as many in as possible. See it as a bonus fixture that can create new supporters and generate revenue from concessions. 

They won't do this, but it would be a silver lining if the full replay is required. 

This was my thinking, too - albeit more from a 'right, if we have to play from scratch, let fuck 'em up'.

Get a full house, drown the farmers out and back the team to a 4-0 win.

And then I woke up.

[USABlue]

Has to be a full match replay no?  I don't know of any other outcome for an abandoned match due to weather 

[Tricky]

Replay the game with Rovers winning 1-0

[steelcityblue]

50 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

I would love them to give us the 3 points but theres no way that you can do that in terms of fairness.

The most obvious compromise of playing the remainder of the game also has all sorts of issues. Obviously, to get them up to play 11 minutes plus injury time is very unlikely. But also, the fixture loses integrity because it obviously splits into 2. You are then left with a second mini game weeks/months after the first 80 minutes, with different players, in different conditions, with both sides able to approach such a small period as if its a new game, basing tactics on trying to defend or peg back a lead.

Therefore, I can only see in line with precedent that they replay the full game. Its really shit and its hard luck but its very difficult to go ahead with any other option. If it does happen, its not some hatred of us from the EFL, its just sadly following precedent and its the only real option which maintains any real integrity and normality in the fixture.

I don’t see this argument at all. Why ignore what you call ‘the most obvious compromise’. I’d call it the fairest thing to do. Of course it won’t be the same in terms of players and tactics but neither would a full replay. Why is it unreasonable to expect Ipswich to play out the remainder of the game even if inconvenient for them when that is the solution with obvious natural justice? Going forward it is a simple fair policy the EFL could adopt (as other countries already do). Replay the remaining time.End of. 

[RevidgeBlue]

1 hour ago, OldEwoodBlue said:

Its for the exceptional case.

This isn't it.

1-0 with at least 16 mins to play.

A full replay is the only right and fair outcome. We all know it.

The drainage problem is well known, fixable if the owners sign a cheque, thus our (clubs) own fault.

Venkys can fuck off every fucking day until they do actually fuck off.

It's not 1-0 with 16 mins to go though.

It's 1-0 11 v 10 with 16 mins to go.

The EFL SHOULD utilise the absolute discretion at their disposal and order the remainder of the game to be played under those conditions. It's not absolutely perfect but it's the fairest possible solution.

They probably won't though. I expect they'll completely bottle it, mumble something about "precedent" and order a full replay 11 v 11.

 

[GHD]

9 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

It's not 1-0 with 16 mins to go though.

It's 1-0 11 v 10 with 16 mins to go.

The EFL SHOULD utilise the absolute discretion at their disposal and order the remainder of the game to be played under those conditions. It's not absolutely perfect but it's the fairest possible solution.

They probably won't though. I expect they'll completely bottle it, mumble something about "precedent" and order a full replay 11 v 11.

 

I believe if they weren’t prepared to set a precedent and listen to submissions, they would have made the decision by now. 

[NeilInBristol]

24 minutes ago, Tricky said:

Replay the game with Rovers winning 1-0

That isn’t a bad suggestion- perhaps from the time we actually scored though (which could mean it’s actually another score at that point)

[Eddie]

6 hours ago, Tomphil2 said:

They will at the very least be ordered to cover costs and try and make a few extra pennies so there'll be some sort of charge.

Meanwhile Ipswich will probably subsidise those who want to travel again.

Ordered? By our owners? 

[USABlue]

37 minutes ago, Tricky said:

Replay the game with Rovers winning 1-0

You know better, that is not the way we do things, we are nailed on to lose the game and possibly have one of our own sent off 

[USABlue]

15 minutes ago, GHD said:

I believe if they weren’t prepared to set a precedent and listen to submissions, they would have made the decision by now. 

I agree with some others, the decision is made this shenanigans is to give the impression they are listening to the combatants points.  Probably don't even read them. How sweet are the FA on Ipswich cos we know how it might be if it was one of the media darlings.

[roversfan99]

42 minutes ago, steelcityblue said:

I don’t see this argument at all. Why ignore what you call ‘the most obvious compromise’. I’d call it the fairest thing to do. Of course it won’t be the same in terms of players and tactics but neither would a full replay. Why is it unreasonable to expect Ipswich to play out the remainder of the game even if inconvenient for them when that is the solution with obvious natural justice? Going forward it is a simple fair policy the EFL could adopt (as other countries already do). Replay the remaining time.End of. 

Ultimately, the main reason leading to a replay is precedent.

Its not the logistics that are a big factor though. The options are either to have a result based on 80 minutes, a game based on 2 seperate part matches in totally different circumstances, or just to replay the game in full.

I would love to be wrong but I cant see anything but a full replay and if that is the case I will be annoyed but I wont see it as a miscarriage of justice or an agenda against us.