April is going to be a monster month - 8 fixtures, two of which are local derbies (possibly 9 if we get to FA Cup Semis). Can't see us keep up the intensity of the last few matches. We are definitely going to need some luck on the injury front.

1 minute ago, wilsdenrover said:

18/19th March 

Our only hope is that it isn't on Sky - we are nearly always poor when we are on Sky 🙂

1 minute ago, Andy said:

It's winnable, for sure.

Not a glamour tie, but gives us more chance to reach a semi-final.

Must admit - better than City away. 

6 minutes ago, ben_the_beast said:

Basically we argued that the 23:00 deadline is a hard deadline and if a club asks for an extension then we have until 23:15. We argued that 23:15 is not a hard deadline and should have leniency. The reason we argued this is because the 23:15 deadline is only stated in the guidance section of the EFL rulebook and not in the regulations section. To add to this Silvester attended a meeting whereby this was explained prior.

We ended up submitting all relevant documents at 23:28 so 13 minutes past the extension. Any mention of relegation clauses were limited and seemingly hours before the deadline. 

We also argued we were disadvantaged because we had staff at the Birmingham game (Waggott), that we had less medical staff due to them being at the game (something which was in our control) and that the medical took place at the training ground whilst the club secretary was at the stadium (again within our control).

Overall there's no bloody wonder the appeal failed. It was based on naff all and certain staff members have shown their incompetence. 

Gotta say some of the comments in the document are damning - total lack of planning across the board. Big question - who is responsible - Waggott, Broughton, Club Secretary ? It could be seen as a series of unfortunate events - but to me it is a total lack of planning and leadership. Personally, IMO Waggott has to shoulder the ultimate responsibility - he is in overall control.

If Nixon is right - and the league questioned whether we would buy if relegated - the EFL really need to look at themselves. If that is true - they really haven't won as most fair minded people would say it was a ridiculous request.

9 minutes ago, BRFC4EVA said:

Heads must role. We need full disclosure of what took place, timeline, everything

I agree we need full disclosure - but heads rolling will depend on circumstances.

10 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

We’ve just peaked for the season 

It’s all downhill from here

☹️

Though a brilliant performance - I do think we need to keep in context. Beat Sheffield and then maybe we can dream. But I do fear recent exertions with a thread bare squad may be exposed against a physical team like them.

13 minutes ago, Mercer said:

To me, it's written in the stars.

Home draw against Burnley in the quarters.

And yes, we are going up through the play offs.

Something has changed over the last half dozen games or so..

Absolutely loved last night and it's years and years since I felt like this about Rovers.

I am hoping for Fleetwood in the next round 😉

3 hours ago, BRFC_Polky said:

Great, can’t wait to see the back of this debacle!

As we await the outcome - I must not be the only one thinking - these things rarely go in Rovers favour 😩

17 minutes ago, Exiled_Rover said:

I don't know anyone that sits near me in the Jack Walker that will accept absolute shit.

They will accept that Burnley have spent £40m+ in two transfer windows on promotion - you have to be realistic. 

Football really is the epitome of money talks.

All depends on who spending the money - we allowed Kean to waste our parachute payments.

2 hours ago, rigger said:

Lose on Tuesday and we are out of the cup. Lose on Saturday and we are still in the play-off race.

Pick up yet more injuries due the number of matches - and we could be out of the play off race. I think we have to trust JDT and the medical team.

28 minutes ago, superniko said:

Disregarding any actual use of our eyes

Wharton 1G and 1A in 498 minutes in the league (6 starts and 1 full match)

Morton 2A in 2209 minutes in the league (24 starts and 18 full matches)

Buckley 1A in 1227 minutes in the league (14 starts and 9 full matches)

This is just Chaddy being Chaddy.

Morton and Buckley have been absolutely horrendous all season, it's not even up for debate. 3 assists between the two of them and 0 goals across a combined 3,436 minutes (equivalent of 38 matches)

Adam Wharton should be the first centre midfielder on our team sheet when fit until performances state otherwise.

I always think of equal interest is play leading to an assist - i.e. indirect assist. e.g. the cross field ball from JRC to Thomas opened up the Blackpool defence - but the assist would go to Thomas. Both Buckley and Morton play the deep lying midfield player, whereas Wharton played further forward. In no way is it an opinion on any of the players - but stats only tell part of the story - e.g. on our expected goal ration we would be bottom of the table :-)

55 minutes ago, Ricky said:

See Forest have their own appeal lodged after they left Steve Cook out of their 25 man squad and then got injuries to centre half’s so asked the league to add him back in. 

Not sure it works like that tbf.

Would that be Premier League rather than EFL - be interesting to see what they do. I thought the only potential exception was goal keeper ?

9 hours ago, roverandout said:

But hopefully Wharton comes back. He has all the qualities that O'brien has

In the first team - Wharton had an unbelievable match against Blackpool followed by ok or even poor performances. O'Brien did it consistently for Huddersfield over a season. Not saying Wharton can't be that player - but IMO hasn't done it consistently yet.

1 hour ago, goozburger said:

I first heard "stakeholder" used in a non-financial context when I was assigned to work on a task within a project a few years ago. One of my colleagues was listed as the task "stakeholder". In this context, they were just creating the task as something that needed to be done. It's management jargon that makes people feel important so that the company "values" them without having to give them a pay rise.

I first heard it on Buffy the Vampire Slayer 🤣

11 minutes ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

You were too quick to write him off.

JDT repeatedly said it would take time for Dack to get back up to speed. That isn't going to happen in a month or two after a 2 year lay off with two career-threatening injuries. It's taken nearly  a year from starting training again to get to this point. 

He's probably a yard slower than before his injuries,  but fortunately he's a very talented player at this level who never relied on pace, and he's still the most natural goal scorer at the club. 

It is amazing how much slower he is than prior to his injury. Though we did see the same with Shearer - who was actually quite quick prior to his first ACL injury.

However it is good to see he hasn't lost his goal scoring ability. Hopefully his overall game will continue to improve as he continues to adapt his game.

4 hours ago, Upside Down said:

I have no sympathy for Rovers. They are a football club (supposedly) this is what they do.

It's just another basic task that this club can't get right.

As predicted they are now trying to shift the blame onto the EFL.

That all depends on whether the EFL rules are clear as to the requirements that we fell foul of, that delayed final submission. 

1 hour ago, AllRoverAsia said:

Let me repeat:

The EFL have not been dragging their feet, they made a decision very quickly and stuck with it. 

It is Rovers who instigated the appeals.

I think the point is that the appeals process needs streamlining. Let's not forget, as well as the club, there is a player left in limbo while this drags on.

What nobody seems to be picking up on - yet again we seem to have a news black out from the club itself. No apparent effort from the club to give the fans direct updates. I don't know, could be part of EFL rules - but surely they could confirm what state the appeal is at ? Rather than us having to rely on conflicting reports from various media outlets.

For those criticising the EFL, there is potentially millions at stake from promotion (we could debate all night whether O'Brien would make that much difference), with potential for them to be sued by other clubs. IF the rumours are true, and we only missed the deadline because of an additional clause that didn't need to be added - I would imagine it will become  potentially complex.

1 hour ago, AllRoverAsia said:

The EFL have not "took their time", they made a decision on or hours after DD.

Rovers instigated appeal and re appeal, I assume we asked for arbitration?

It would appear the EFL have not blinked as yet.

So has the appeal decision been made ? Latest from Telegraph would infer we are still waiting EFL decision.

48 minutes ago, Mellor Rover said:

Because for all intents and purposes, everything I've seen on the O'Brien case so far points me towards in a court (granted not where this is settled), the EFL's case simply wouldn't hold up.

They know this I feel, but don't want to set a precedent for having decisions overturned.

What would be very interesting - have they always insisted on this relegation clause in these alleged circumstances ? If not, I am not certain how they can reject the appeal. However, this is the EFL, who thought that Buckley deserved a red card for gently throwing a ball at a players head (in obvious jest rather than with malicious intent)

5 hours ago, R0verb0y said:

Insomnia, caused by another problem - not Rovers-related - has brought me to this thread.

Surely, while the first of those two points is valid, @RoverDom, I don't know where you're going with the second.

I've never been a qualified solicitor, but my "day job" used to be as a para-legal; and it's with that background that I ask, "How could the EFL 'cock up' a transfer?"

Isn't it the responsibility of the two clubs to ensure that the paperwork they submit to the regulatory authority - which is surely what the EFL is when it comes to transfers - is correctly completed? And as the keeper of those records, the role of the EFL is surely to do no more than verify that the paperwork is indeed correctly completed by the deadline it imposes on clubs for a transfer to be valid.

 

Is it not possible for the EFL to impose further checks that are outside the scope of what is reasonably required ? 

1 minute ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

That would be equally bizarre. The EFL would have to demand that Forest inserted the same clause for the 50 players they signed in the summer, or for any club that signs players in the summer after getting promoted to the Prem. 

I would agree - down to Rovers what contract we offer and any clauses in it

15 hours ago, WacoRover said:

Britain played in U21’s, I’d love to see him back. 
Pears, Hedges, Dack, & Thomas… other than that, it’s a crapshoot on the other 7.

COYB! 

JRC has been one of our better players recently

5 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

Why did he have no reason to doubt processes that have hardly led to a successful 10 years?

Ignoring everything else - when did we miss the transfer deadline previously?