Rearranged dates

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Champagneblade

Champagneblade

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2010
Messages
10,608
Reaction score
27,043
Looking at the fixture schedule these are the available dates in the near future:

4th/5th Jan - QPR, Hull, Boro

11th/12th Jan - QPR, Hull, Boro

18th/19th Jan - vs Preston

25th/26th Jan - Hull (Boro and QPR play)

1st/2nd Feb - QPR, Hull, Boro

If all three of these teams cannot make at least one of those dates the league should dock them 3 points and award a 3-0 forfeit.

It's very clear then that they have no intention of playing the game until a far more favorable time to suit them, the cause of this, and that is totally unacceptable.

For QPR if you have players going to ACN, then that's your fault. You knew these players were liable to be called up.

For Boro, if the 4th or 5th is too short logistically then it should be the 11th or 12th or clearly their intention is to be beyond the JTW having strengthened, had more time to work with their new manager or they don't wish to play another in form team when they might have been jaded.

For Hull. It makes sense for them to have their takeover completed and potential reinforcements.

I'd be saying to the league QPR 5th Jan, Boro 12th Jan, Hull 26th Jan. If absolutely unachievable then 1st week of Feb.

We have to be favoured in this. None of this has been down to us. We can't have dates pushed out to March because for one, covid postponements could continue and we'll need more free dates and not having used dates in Jan won't help unless someone has a spare Dolorean. Secondly the whole integrity concept. Neither is it integrity if you were meant to play a team in the first part of the season and you now have to play them in the second after they have strengthened in the JTW nor is it integrity to be backed up against the wall with an immovable end date and having to play 4 matches in 8 days.

The EFL have been poor with their flaky rules and their allowance of clubs to dictate - where's the list of all the covid impacted players for Boro, Hull, QPR? - did they really not all have 13 outfield players and a keeper (note 13 outfield players and a keeper, not your PREFERRED 13 outfield players and keeper. Sorry Chris, but I make 27 -10 to be 17 and last time I checked 17 was greater than 14!). However they can salvage some credibility by not allowing the culprits of the postponement to then make a farce of the reschedule. It should be at the earliest possible date and if that isn't feasible there has to be a damn good reason why.
 

It is quite obvious that clubs know that they can play the ‘Covid in the squad’ card with impunity in the certain knowledge that no governing body will risk inviting the potential negative publicity of ‘not taking Covid seriously’. As soon as there is even a suggestion of Covid, we know its a postponement. I knew it wasn’t going to be an early start today as soon as we heard Wilder the other night at Blackpool. It was a ridiculous charade to drag it out until 5pm yesterday.

We, as a club, do appear to have been less streetwise and/or too honest, in comparison to other clubs, when it comes to looking after our own interests in respect of covid postponement, though. This time last season, we played Burnley away in an absolutely critical fixture for our hopes of starting a revival. The squad was then hit with Covid - which was publicised - yet we just proceeded to turn up and play that crucial fixture with a patched-up team and a short-handed and incredibly weak bench.
 
People kicking off about teams cheating to postpone these matches but it's the arranging of the new dates that's the issue and where cheating is really coming in I reckon.

Why have we been able to re-arrange Preston match before the QPR match?
The QPR match was nearly 2 weeks prior?
This is the bit that's wrong.
Similarly with Hull now, we've had a few days. Now let's see how long with Boro. These matches need to be arranged swiftly. But equally we don't want to be playing twice a week for a while if we can help it as it could knacker our squad.

I wouldn't suggest the 11th or 12th of Jan due to its closeness to wolves and derby matches. Would be 3 games in 6 days.

We could do 25th or midweek around 1st of Feb.
We could even schedule around 10th of March for one too.

But they need sorting pronto and putting in the calendar. We should have priority on the dates too in my opinion.
 
Micky Narker said:
Clubs should be forced to use academy players to make sure games go ahead, im sure a team had a fifteen year old on the bench recently.
Click to expand...
Take Bolton the other year as case in point. Their academy players were getting tanked 6-0 every week until Bolton said it wasn't in their best interests to keep playing the youth team for fitness purposes amongst nowt else.

So why couldn't Middlesbrough field some youth players to fulfill the fixture?

Wilder is a bottle job. That's why.
 
Champagneblade said:
Looking at the fixture schedule these are the available dates in the near future:

4th/5th Jan - QPR, Hull, Boro

11th/12th Jan - QPR, Hull, Boro

18th/19th Jan - vs Preston

25th/26th Jan - Hull (Boro and QPR play)

1st/2nd Feb - QPR, Hull, Boro

If all three of these teams cannot make at least one of those dates the league should dock them 3 points and award a 3-0 forfeit.

It's very clear then that they have no intention of playing the game until a far more favorable time to suit them, the cause of this, and that is totally unacceptable.

For QPR if you have players going to ACN, then that's your fault. You knew these players were liable to be called up.

For Boro, if the 4th or 5th is too short logistically then it should be the 11th or 12th or clearly their intention is to be beyond the JTW having strengthened, had more time to work with their new manager or they don't wish to play another in form team when they might have been jaded.

For Hull. It makes sense for them to have their takeover completed and potential reinforcements.

I'd be saying to the league QPR 5th Jan, Boro 12th Jan, Hull 26th Jan. If absolutely unachievable then 1st week of Feb.

We have to be favoured in this. None of this has been down to us. We can't have dates pushed out to March because for one, covid postponements could continue and we'll need more free dates and not having used dates in Jan won't help unless someone has a spare Dolorean. Secondly the whole integrity concept. Neither is it integrity if you were meant to play a team in the first part of the season and you now have to play them in the second after they have strengthened in the JTW nor is it integrity to be backed up against the wall with an immovable end date and having to play 4 matches in 8 days.

The EFL have been poor with their flaky rules and their allowance of clubs to dictate - where's the list of all the covid impacted players for Boro, Hull, QPR? - did they really not all have 13 outfield players and a keeper (note 13 outfield players and a keeper, not your PREFERRED 13 outfield players and keeper. Sorry Chris, but I make 27 -10 to be 17 and last time I checked 17 was greater than 14!). However they can salvage some credibility by not allowing the culprits of the postponement to then make a farce of the reschedule. It should be at the earliest possible date and if that isn't feasible there has to be a damn good reason why.
Click to expand...
Good post, I see Borough are about to sign Aaron Conolly on loan, totally not right for him to play it's effectively changing the transfer window.
 
100% agree with the OP. If the dates are free and United want to play the fixture then the other club should not be able to object without good reason. ACON or players not been back from injury etc. should not be allowed to delay the rearrangement.. Chances are other games will get cancelled so the sooner the existing ones are got out of the way the better. The EFL need to step in and be firm on this although I am not holding my breath.
 
when these games are rearranged, fans will come 2nd again thats almost the worse part as well. because all but guaranteed they will more difficult Tues/Wed night for home & away games, less on a Saturday afternoon
 
It’s the strengthening in the transfer window that frustrates me, and the fact we are the losers here due to the sheer amount of games we have had delayed other teams obviously have a couple of fixtures to reply but to 4, without our own outbreak (if that happens) will derail our season. Proper double whammy of not being match fit, and then having to play to many games to quickly near the end of the season against sides that have strengthened. EFL need to step in and force these games through at the earliest possible date.

I can envisage a “ohh shit want have we done” situation in which the play off schedule is interrupted because the EFL have been kicking the can down the road and allowing teams to play silly buggers.
 

We all need to send emails to efl might not work
But it might calm us down
 
Ainsley Harriott said:
Take Bolton the other year as case in point. Their academy players were getting tanked 6-0 every week until Bolton said it wasn't in their best interests to keep playing the youth team for fitness purposes amongst nowt else.

So why couldn't Middlesbrough field some youth players to fulfill the fixture?

Wilder is a bottle job. That's why.
Click to expand...
Or would fully expect a tonking when he's trying to get Boro promoted.

Let's be fair if we had x amount out with positive tests we would probably want to postpone as well.
 
In Rugby Union not sure if the perfect solution but with Newcastle Falcons they were given the points of a win in this case 4 and the opposition the points of a draw with it going down as a 0-0 for points difference (goal difference) so in our cases we would have 3 points against QPR, Preston, Hull and Middlesbrough with them getting 1 point each. Seems fair in my book! https://www.newcastlefalcons.co.uk/news/story/falcons-get-four-points-from-cancelled-sale-game
 
Only players who were registered at the time of the postponement by the postponing team should be allowed to play in any rearranged fixture.

It should not be down to the postponing club to decide when they are available to play it should be at the convenience of the other team and forced by the EFL.

This would make the situation somewhat fairer and prevent teams like QPR absolutely taking the piss more than they already have
 
EFL really need to crack the whip on this, nothing to stop QPR rearranging the fixture when they know their main players are back from injury.
 
varkanoid said:
EFL really need to crack the whip on this, nothing to stop QPR rearranging the fixture when they know their main players are back from injury.
Click to expand...
To be honest I think they will all be wanting to rearrange the fixture to when we are at our most vulnerable. Such as third game in a week or 3 or 4 players on 9 yellow cards or if we pick up a couple of injuries. Going to be tough for the rest of the Season.
 
Mojo said:
Only players who were registered at the time of the postponement by the postponing team should be allowed to play in any rearranged fixture.
Click to expand...

I suppose another way to look at it would be to consider players going out too.

Let’s say we end up having to postpone our game at Derby. Then MGW is recalled by Wolves and we lose Berge, Ndiaye and Egan to predatory bids from Prem clubs the following week. Would we consider it “fair” if we weren’t allowed to play any of their replacements (I know, I know, but stay with me) in the rearranged fixture?

The whole situation is messy beyond belief, and the fact that postponed and rescheduled games coincide with a transfer window makes it even messier. Cheers Wilder EFL.

They’re going to have to be ingenious as hell in finding solutions that won’t materially impact the integrity of the competition, or at least appear to do so to subjective eyes with skin in the game. Someone, somewhere—probably more than a few—is going to feel aggrieved, and it’s difficult to see a solution that would avoid this.

Because of that—the EFL can‘t cope with simplicity, never mind complexity—a decent guess is that there will be no special conditions or regs for rescheduled games, and that, however it pans out, corporate sports lawyers up and down the land will be handing themselves even fatter bonuses next Christmas.

Twats.
 
varkanoid said:
EFL really need to crack the whip on this, nothing to stop QPR rearranging the fixture when they know their main players are back from injury.
Click to expand...
That’s what’s happening we won’t be playing QPR until Afcon is over.
 
I've probably been as annoyed as everyone else about the 'tactical postponements' and they're mainly because the rest of the division have now seen what we are capable of and the quality in our squad (didn't think I'd be saying that a few weeks ago)
After watching Heckys presser though and finding out that MGW, Ndiaye, Brewster and Davies are all still injured or unavailable, maybe it's a been a chance for us to get our best players back and firing as well.
We'll need to go on a decentish unbeaten run to get in the top six anyhow so having to play catch-up will be easier with the whole squad to rotate around.
 
Just playing devils advocate here……

But if we lost to Covid/injury Wes, Egan, Ndaiye, MGW, Sharp plus a couple of others, given the precedence of the other 91 clubs, would Hecky not try the same on? I expect/hope so.

Likewise we may bring a couple in during JTW, and the return from injury of the lads in the treatment room means we become stronger at the point of the rearrangement?

Personally I do think clubs are taking the piss tho

The FA should say a club requesting a postponement should produce via an independent lab a minimum of 10 positive cases from their 25 man squad

If you operate a small squad (Leeds) that’s your prerogative but 10 is still required

If you have over 10 from 25 then it’s probably right that a postponement takes place

However you can only field players who were available (inc injuries & JTW buys) on the day of the original fixture

Reckon that would see a reduction

As for AFCON, that’s your look out, you can’t buy a 4litre car then complain you can’t get to work as you can’t afford the fuel…..
 
Champagneblade said:
Looking at the fixture schedule these are the available dates in the near future:

4th/5th Jan - QPR, Hull, Boro

11th/12th Jan - QPR, Hull, Boro

18th/19th Jan - vs Preston

25th/26th Jan - Hull (Boro and QPR play)

1st/2nd Feb - QPR, Hull, Boro

If all three of these teams cannot make at least one of those dates the league should dock them 3 points and award a 3-0 forfeit.

It's very clear then that they have no intention of playing the game until a far more favorable time to suit them, the cause of this, and that is totally unacceptable.

For QPR if you have players going to ACN, then that's your fault. You knew these players were liable to be called up.

For Boro, if the 4th or 5th is too short logistically then it should be the 11th or 12th or clearly their intention is to be beyond the JTW having strengthened, had more time to work with their new manager or they don't wish to play another in form team when they might have been jaded.

For Hull. It makes sense for them to have their takeover completed and potential reinforcements.

I'd be saying to the league QPR 5th Jan, Boro 12th Jan, Hull 26th Jan. If absolutely unachievable then 1st week of Feb.

We have to be favoured in this. None of this has been down to us. We can't have dates pushed out to March because for one, covid postponements could continue and we'll need more free dates and not having used dates in Jan won't help unless someone has a spare Dolorean. Secondly the whole integrity concept. Neither is it integrity if you were meant to play a team in the first part of the season and you now have to play them in the second after they have strengthened in the JTW nor is it integrity to be backed up against the wall with an immovable end date and having to play 4 matches in 8 days.

The EFL have been poor with their flaky rules and their allowance of clubs to dictate - where's the list of all the covid impacted players for Boro, Hull, QPR? - did they really not all have 13 outfield players and a keeper (note 13 outfield players and a keeper, not your PREFERRED 13 outfield players and keeper. Sorry Chris, but I make 27 -10 to be 17 and last time I checked 17 was greater than 14!). However they can salvage some credibility by not allowing the culprits of the postponement to then make a farce of the reschedule. It should be at the earliest possible date and if that isn't feasible there has to be a damn good reason why.
Click to expand...
Hull played today...
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom