wilsdenrover

I guess the issue with having an arbitrary x minute = rule is it would increase the pressure on the referee. As the said minute approached the losing manager would be imploring the ref to call the match off whilst the winning one would be insisting it continued. Of course once that minute went by both managers would immediately pivot to the other opinion without a hint of irony… We could have saved all this bother by just sorting the bloody drainage out.

The EFLs interpretation of their rules to allow Guiu to be eligible for Chelsea in the Carabao cup shows they can be flexible when they want to be. I doubt there’s a chance we’re one of the clubs they’d want to favour though…

Yep, then just wait ‘til we lose said replay…

If they’re not willing to look at each case individually they should remove the flexibility to do so from the rules.

I think Ipswich will moan at anything other than a full replay. As I said earlier, I don’t think either side can be justifiably unhappy with carrying on from where the match was halted.

The only times I’ve seen these quoted is from an FA document which is aimed at lower level (ie amateur) football.

One thing I’ve learnt from this is how many different (and incorrect) interpretations of a regulation journalists and pundits can make. The number of them saying ‘the rules point towards…’ when they do anything but is quite frankly staggering.

Rovers getting a single point for a win doesn’t mean Ipswich wouldn’t have lost the chance to get 3 points from a partial/full replay.

Why the ‘have to’ when the league has endless other options available to them?

But only if she says you can.

I’d say they’d definitely lose… We’d have been declared the winner and therefore Ipswich would’ve been given a point for losing.

Looks like we might be aiming for ninth in the future… https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/13436643/efl-board-discussing-championship-play-offs-expansion-to-give-seventh-and-eighth-placed-finishers-chance-of-promotion

What would Ipswich have to be (genuinely) unhappy about a partial replay? They’ve already indicated a willingness to travel again so saying they can do that for 90 minutes but not 15 would seem just a tad disingenuous. Equally, I don’t see how we could argue playing out the remaining minutes wasn’t fair either.

In my opinion: The EFL should tell Ipswich and Rovers their decision (eg continuing from where the match was stopped). The EFL give the clubs the chance to agree on logistics (date, tickets etc etc) If the clubs cannot agree these things the EFL then decides for them.

Well made points but nothing that doesn’t seem insurmountable - just needs willing from all parties…

Surely there’s minimal difference (if any) between this and a full replay?

The EFL should take no account of clubs digging their heels in and should just make a decision. That being said, it’s almost certain Nicko is talking bollocks.

Is an appeal really going to be an option or is Nicko just after more clicks??

Once the decision has been made I bet Ipswich communicate it before Rovers do.

Travel time surely can’t be a consideration, the decision should be the same whether the away team has a 10 or 250 mile journey. Ipswich can always decide the chance to gain a point or 3 isn’t worth the bother…

But we were.

He’s pretty much tried to suggest events of the second half were due to conditions. A not very subtle attempt to push the full replay narrative?: https://www.eadt.co.uk/sport/25482903.ipswich-town-kieran-mckenna-abandoned-game-blackburn-rovers/

Everything can’t be the same so nothing should be doesn’t seem like the strongest argument to me.

Give it time…

It’s amazing the rabbit holes we manage to send ourselves down on here. 😁😁