| EFL statement here on 17:35 - Sep 25 with 271 views | EastTownBlue |
| EFL statement here on 17:27 - Sep 25 by SuffolkPunchFC |
Other than some fans' unreasonable impatience, what does it really matter that it took a few days for an announcement? |
Yes, there is clearly a process to be followed which included the clubs having to make their representations by yesterday. |  | |  |
| EFL statement here on 17:44 - Sep 25 with 236 views | Everydayblue |
Do we reinstate "inflatables day" for the re-match? | | | |
| EFL statement here on 17:48 - Sep 25 with 220 views | SitfcB |
| EFL statement here on 17:44 - Sep 25 by Everydayblue |
Do we reinstate "inflatables day" for the re-match? |
Absolutely. |  |
| |
| EFL statement here on 19:13 - Sep 25 with 153 views | cressi |
| EFL statement here on 15:20 - Sep 25 by davblue |
I get they were winning but what else was the alternative? The game hadn’t finished. If they had played the final 10 mins then it’s not a true representation of the game state, tiredness etc.
It was the only option and I would say the same thing if we were winning. |
But there was not really eleven minutes left with add ons probably 20. Plus it should have probably been stopped 15 minutes previously
Plus would Furlong made that tackle if he wasn't playing on a lake. | | | |
| EFL statement here on 19:15 - Sep 25 with 145 views | PhilTWTD |
| EFL statement here on 17:48 - Sep 25 by SitfcB |
Absolutely. |
Have we ever had wetsuit day? Is diving equipment banned from grounds? |  | | |
| EFL statement here on 19:32 - Sep 25 with 107 views | bluelagos |
| EFL statement here on 19:15 - Sep 25 by PhilTWTD |
Have we ever had wetsuit day? Is diving equipment banned from grounds? |
Dont encourage 'em ffs! |  |
| |
| EFL statement here on 20:12 - Sep 25 with 51 views | Cafe_Newman |
| EFL statement here on 15:13 - Sep 25 by tommcd |
"It was ultimately decided by a majority..."
"...the three Championship Directors abstained..."
Obviously we'll never know what spin the three that abstained tried (or did not try) to inject into the discussions, but them not voting seems a pragmatic way of dealing with the conflict of interest.
From a panel of 8, with three abstentions, if I'm thinking through it right, a 'majority' is equivalent to a unanimous decision amongst those that voted. |
"a 'majority' is equivalent to a unanimous decision amongst those that voted."
It could have been 3 votes to 2, right? |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
