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

[rigger]

The club are not offering a refund to anyone who cannot make the midweek rearranged fixture. I thought I saw on this site, a post that showed EFL rules stating that a full refund should be given to people who cannot make the new fixture.

[MarkBRFC]

6 minutes ago, rigger said:

The club are not offering a refund to anyone who cannot make the midweek rearranged fixture. I thought I saw on this site, a post that showed EFL rules stating that a full refund should be given to people who cannot make the new fixture.

I might be wrong, but I think that is for postponed games rather than abandoned games.

[rigger]

2 minutes ago, MarkBRFC said:

I might be wrong, but I think that is for postponed games rather than abandoned games.

In the article that was posted on here it definitely said it was for abandoned games.

[wilsdenrover]

21 minutes ago, rigger said:

The club are not offering a refund to anyone who cannot make the midweek rearranged fixture. I thought I saw on this site, a post that showed EFL rules stating that a full refund should be given to people who cannot make the new fixture.

I posted that but upon double checking I was wrong to do so (sorry!).

Here’s the (definitely correct) clause from the ticketing terms and conditions:

 

 

[MarkBRFC]

1 hour ago, rigger said:

In the article that was posted on here it definitely said it was for abandoned games.

Full refund for abandoned games before kick off.

Anything after kick off is half price admission.

[...]

2 hours ago, JHRover said:

So as predicted the rearranged fixture will be taking place midweek on 2nd December 2025. Why on earth a game cancelled in September needs to wait the best part of 3 months to be replayed I am not so sure but hey, a few weeks before Xmas, dismal weather, should ensure a low turnout. Could have been played in October.

Rovers also saying that ticket holders will pay 'half price' for the rearranged fixture which I find odd. In most previous examples surely it would be free entry to those who bought for the first game? Can't imagine the Ipswich lot will be too happy about paying twice but welcome to Venky Rovers. Maybe they'll bring their usual 1000 rather than the tourists who turned up for the cancelled game. 

 

Also at a time when It quite possibly 'pissing it down'

[M_B]

5 hours ago, JHRover said:

So as predicted the rearranged fixture will be taking place midweek on 2nd December 2025. Why on earth a game cancelled in September needs to wait the best part of 3 months to be replayed I am not so sure but hey, a few weeks before Xmas, dismal weather, should ensure a low turnout. Could have been played in October.

Rovers also saying that ticket holders will pay 'half price' for the rearranged fixture which I find odd. In most previous examples surely it would be free entry to those who bought for the first game? Can't imagine the Ipswich lot will be too happy about paying twice but welcome to Venky Rovers. Maybe they'll bring their usual 1000 rather than the tourists who turned up for the cancelled game. 

 

The half price ticket was agreed between the two clubs, let Ipswich worry about their own end . 

[simongarnerisgod]

6 hours ago, Hasta said:

December. That's usually pretty rainy.

also very cold sometimes,hope ipswich travel up then it gets called off because of a frozen pitch🤣,not  sure our undersoil heating works anymore,if it does then it must be years old

[Tomphil2]

Why not just make it ten quid a ticket and quid a kid for every non ST holder and try and get a few more in at the toughest time of the year financially.

This will be a dismal crowd when a siege mentality is needed.

[ElTwis]

I've emailed the club knowing full well it will do no good. They haven't agreed anything with Ipswich, they've done the absolute bare minimum they have to do with ticket prices in line with the EFL guidelines. I never expected anything else from the hollowed out shell that is Blackburn Rovers but I have asked if they intend on keeping the children's tickets money given this is now mid week on a schoolnight

[M_B]

50 minutes ago, ElTwis said:

I've emailed the club knowing full well it will do no good. They haven't agreed anything with Ipswich, they've done the absolute bare minimum they have to do with ticket prices in line with the EFL guidelines. I never expected anything else from the hollowed out shell that is Blackburn Rovers but I have asked if they intend on keeping the children's tickets money given this is now mid week on a schoolnight

They've agreed with Ipswich to make it half price for those who bought match tickets , according to the Telegraph 

[ElTwis]

As detailed earlier in the thread though, half price is the EFL regulations so they are literally charging as much as they can.

[rigger]

17 hours ago, ElTwis said:

As detailed earlier in the thread though, half price is the EFL regulations so they are literally charging as much as they can.

The E-mail that I received explaining the situation, had the cheek to be signed-off, "Thanks for your continued support". They have lost that.

[roversfan99]

Theyve put up a video of the groundsman defending the club on the official youtube now.

Mentioned the old pitch, all the other stuff is immaterial. Thats the issue, the owners wouldnt go through with the promised full pitch revamp a few years ago. 

[Tugayisgod]

https://www.facebook.com/share/17UpE273ax/

[Herbie6590]

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/25539231.blackburn-rovers-address-ipswich-abandonment-ewood-park-concerns/?ref=rss&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=bluesky

[StHelensRover]

The LT article clears it up for me nicely, the facts are there for all to see. However, I can't reach the same conclusion as the club. It's not to do with the amount of rain we got because Chorley, B***ley and others in the local area all played at the same time, both less than 10 miles in either direction. 

It seems to be to that small matter of having a pitch that's nearly 4 decades old. I wonder whether that makes it the oldest or certainly one of the oldest pitches in the division, that wouldn't surprise me. Sounds like an expensive job, but not for billionaire owners who love the club like their baby.

[chaddyrovers]

He did that old pitch isn't to blame for the Ipswich game being called off but the pitch couldn't deal with the amount of rain we got..

The river level wasn't a factor and he was loud in saying. Also said we cant touch or changing in regard to the river. Its not something Rovers can do anything about

[roversfan99]

It is. He even acknowledged the age of the pitch on the video and the drainage underneath. The owners refused to do the full pitch overhaul needed the other year.

Only the gullible and naive would think it was totally out of the clubs control.

[JCRovers]

I call BS on the club's latest statement regarding the cancellation; a lot of excuses but no solutions. Same thing will happen again in the following season(s) if no investment is made.

1. River was a problem in the match vs Portsmouth last year - then why don't they contact city council and express that it's an issue that needs resolving a.s.a.p.? What have the club done/ invested into in the meantime to mitigate the risk themselves regarding an overflowing river?

2. The pitch is 36 years old ad so the drainage system couldn't manage to handle the heavy rainfall (75 ml) against Ipswich - tell the owners to put money in to upgrade it then? I'm no expert on this but were pitch covers used at halftime for example to stop some of it and to lessen the pressure on the drainage? Again, no other club in the area had their game called off on that day (Bolton, B*rnley, Man Utd etc.). B*rnley supposedly handled 55 ml with a new pitch/drainage system but we can't handle 75 ml? Is it really that much of a difference? Are we really that far behind in terms of 'drainage system technologies' as ridiculous as it sounds? New instalment takes anywhere between 6-8 weeks according to web sources and are preferably being done during off season/ summer when conditions are usually dry, so the time aspect shouldn't be a factor here.

3. The groundsman happily shows off his latest 40K equipment as if that shows intent and willingness from the owners when we've had games cancelled due to waterlogged pitch for the past 4-5 seasons and we nearly had to call off the game vs Stoke as well. But I guess he'll work for another few years without any complaints until his retirement while traveling supporters are getting robbed from seeing their beloved team.

[chaddyrovers]

14 minutes ago, JCRovers said:

River was a problem in the match vs Portsmouth last year - then why don't they contact city council and express that it's an issue that needs resolving a.s.a.p.? What have the club done/ invested into in the meantime to mitigate the risk themselves regarding an overflowing river?

As someone said previously it would Environment agency problem and its would take years to find a solution and money to pay for it

[K-Hod]

2 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

As someone said previously it would Environment agency problem and its would take years to find a solution and money to pay for it

Why was this never a problem pre-2011 then?

[roversfan99]

The thing is, that £40k investment will appease some, similar to when we failed to do a total overhaul of the pitch but they came out and bigged up that they had stitched the goal areas and again people defended the owners.

But the owners were supposed to and eventually blocked the aforementioned overhaul which was needed after 30+ plus years, a few years ago. It would have cost I think £2m and included the pipes underneath.

And yet some with the inability to realise that its just a PR attempted spin piece will watch and read similar rubbish to today and swallow it. Its not the clubs fault!

[chaddyrovers]

1 minute ago, K-Hod said:

Why was this never a problem pre-2011 then?

It wasnt problem until the last 12 months was it? 

 

[Cherry Blue]

2 hours ago, StHelensRover said:

The LT article clears it up for me nicely, the facts are there for all to see. However, I can't reach the same conclusion as the club. It's not to do with the amount of rain we got because Chorley, B***ley and others in the local area all played at the same time, both less than 10 miles in either direction. 

It seems to be to that small matter of having a pitch that's nearly 4 decades old. I wonder whether that makes it the oldest or certainly one of the oldest pitches in the division, that wouldn't surprise me. Sounds like an expensive job, but not for billionaire owners who love the club like their baby.

Not defending the owners as they should have invested in the pitch but refused, as @roverfan99 states. But the weather yellow flag warnings specifically mentioned "Ewood" & "Waterfall" areas in Blackburn would get heavy rain at 4pm. No such mention in Burnley for "Turf Moor" or in Chorley for "Victory Park".

Unanswered for me is why did Ipswich subs warm up during HT not only in the wrong half but very strangely in the exact same area that the ref used the demonstrate the ball would not roll? Our groundsman saw it ans was clearly annoyed they were using the wrong area. I've mentioned this before but had no reply.