[Official Site] STOKE CITY CLASH POSTPONED

Yes but some did make an absolute song and dance about Forest mentioning 'injuries' as a reason for postponing (as well as covid). Maybe we are just paying tit-for-tat.

 

It was mentioned Forest used 34 players this season, so perhaps they were seen as making bigger the situation than it was, still 5/6 days after they have a fully fit squad for the Arsenal game. I don’t believe for a second we are playing ‘tit for tat’ it doesn’t make sense

 

At the time people were quite vocal about the fact they found it hard to believe Forest couldn't get 14 players together for the game. I would say across the first team, under 23s and under 18s that the same applies to us. We are in danger of looking like hypocrites.

 

No we aren't it was a couple of fans saying it.

 

Rubbish,

 

Read the first two pages of the thread '[Official Site] FOREST CLASH POSTPONED' and you may change your mind.

 

See above. Interestingly, a point was made that 'Forest played three days ago.' Well, we played two days ago.. Couldn't make this up.

 

I would imagine the Club will be quite keen for Saturday’s game to be called off. They will probably think things will calm down with the Supporters. I suspect they may be wrong.

 

As stated on numerous occasions, the rules for the FA Cup and the EFL competitions differ. Hence, we were able to find 18 players on Saturday, as per their rules, without complaint. You may have noticed, Barrow named 20.

For the Championship, you must be able to name at least 14 registered players. You cannot use players who haven't previously made an appearance in an EFL competition. Therefore, with the injuries and covid cases in camp right now, we don't have enough players to fulfil the EFL fixture based on their rules.

There's no hypocrisy anywhere. Perhaps you've seen personal opinions shared by such as myself, who stated something like 'clubs have 23s and 18s teams, so should be made to cobble a squad together'. A comment I stand by. Which we were allowed to do on Saturday, but aren't allowed to do in the league games.

The Forest issue relates to them having used nearly 40 players this season, but being unable to play. They clearly had an horrific covid outbreak, and terribly bad luck with injuries. Which cleared up in time for yesterday.

The Stoke game on Boxing Day was a Sky game so we've lost a six figure sum there. Absolute no benefit to postponements.

 

Am I missing something here? EFL rules forbid debuts?

 

It wasn't specifically what you alone said, but your comments that stand out to me are as follows:

'either clubs should be made to play using U23s or U18s if necessary, or all three points go to the opposition. I'm pretty sure both Stoke and Forest would have played if that was the case. In essence, clubs like us (who aren't asking for games to be cancelled, despite positive cases) are being punished'

'On Forest, 27 players have played minutes this season, with another eight unused, but therefore registered. I'm going to assume they're not missing 21 of them through COVID or injury. Maybe every 'keeper is unavailable? Only they and the EFL will know.

I don't think there's a conspiracy against BFC. But I do believe that clubs have enough players to select 18'

'It's not just COVID cases though, they're claiming injuries, which adds to the number unavailable. Since when did having injured players see games being cancelled?'

'Forest played on Thursday, three days ago. Of a squad of 35, they've somehow lost 21 players in that time?'

On that last point, we have a squad of 29 (according to the website) and played two days ago. You say we have 12 players to choose from, so by the same logic we have lost 17 players in that time? I appreciate not all 29 have been used this season, but 29 are presumably registered, and you allude to this total in your calculation of Forest's squad, with 'eight unused but therefore registered' and you use that as an argument for saying presumably they've lost '21 players.'

Crucially, your point on 'they're claiming injuries... since when did having injured players see games cancelled?' Isn't that exactly what we're doing now?

I'm not saying as a club we want to cancel, I'm saying that our reaction to the Forest cancellation now seems a bit rich and in my view, over the top.

 

It’s the rules they’ve drawn up regards cancellations during this covid nonsense. If you’ve less than 14 registered players, who’ve already played in the competition, you can’t fulfil the fixture. I don’t understand why that’s an issue in the league but not a problem in the cup. But I’m old fashioned. I’ve still not got my head around the fact that in the FA Cup, Barrow are knocked out because there was no VAR. Yet if they’d have played at a Prem stadium, they’d have been awarded a 90th minute pen.

How can you have a legitimate competition if the rules change dependent on venue?

 

More info from Whitey there than official channels ... Is this part of the campaign for new chief exec

 

Are you sure that you can't fulfill a fixture or that you can apply to claim you can't fullfil one? Are you saying we weren't allowed to play even if we wanted? That's a very different scenario to us making the claim that we can't fulfill the fixture and them agreeing and allowing us to call it off. I find it very hard to believe that we aren't allowed to fulfill the fixture rather than its us asking for its postponement as we could have signed 10 new players from Austria this weekend but according to you we wouldn't be allowed to play with our new players.

Agree totally about different rules for different teams. It's completely wrong

 

Your inability to use the quote function has made this very messy to read.

Let’s first off start with your final statement. You refer to ‘our reaction’. Who is the ‘our’ you refer to? Because you’ve only quoted me. And so if you only mean me, then it’s merely my reaction you think was over the top, or a bit rich.

Whatever the case, I still disagree. It’s not rich of me or over the top to form, hold and retain a personal opinion. It’s my opinion that all games should be played regardless of who is eligible, much like the FA Cup games. If you can’t play, then three points to the opponent. Now BFC have finally fallen foul, I assume you and others may think I’ve been caught out. I haven’t. I hold the exact opinion. The difference being, we don’t have 37 players in our squad. But my opinion remains. Just play the matches because otherwise, it isn’t fair.

But as I’ve referred to in my reply to Supertyke above, I’m not sure there’s much fairness left in the game.

I’ll reply separately to your other question because this is a mess of a post.

 

There are meetings with all clubs and medical information provided and thus it’s decided whether the fixture can be fulfilled. As the statement says, “we did everything we can to fulfil the fixture.”

It’s a joint agreement rather than a claim etc. I think people have seen the odd media story about some clubs (Liverpool maybe?) trying to get games called off, after the agreement was to play after judging all evidence. But then again, that’s the Prem and again, another authority altogether.

 

Thanks, I did pull from several posts though and I don't know how to use the quote function to do that

I only quote you because you responded to me, it's not personal. If you took it that way, then you've taken it wrongly. Several posters responded on that thread, and I feel like there was a bit of a collective 'poor us' about it. I don't think our situation is dissimilar to Forest, several posters were annoyed when that game got cancelled including yourself, we have now cancelled for the same reason. We have also specifically cited 'injuries' as well as covid, and that sticks out when you called Forest out for doing that. Not trying to 'catch you out' at all, I'm a grown man and I respect you.

I agree on your point, just play the matches.

 

There are 24 players on our website. Of those, Helik, Halme, Sibbick, Benson, Gomes, Oduor, Leya Iseka, Oularé and Woodrow were unavailable be it through injury or otherwise, on Saturday. But it was the FA Cup. And their rules allow you to select any player on pro terms. So we were able to put 18 out on Saturday.

As for your reference to registration of players, I posted a handy list in that thread of our registered squad and who counts towards what etc. Without going over old ground, I’ll just remind you that to count towards the covid rules, a player must have previously featured on an EFL matchday 18 this season. Which would rule out a few of the lads involved on the bench at the weekend for example. Confusing isn’t it?

So rewinding here - no, we haven’t lost 17 players since Saturday. It’s the same number who missed that match, plus further injuries or otherwise since then. Reducing us below 14 available players based on EFL rules.

 

I didn’t call Forest out. That’s the point. I’m calling out the rules. I have covid myself, I was unable then to attend Forest so it’s good for me that I can get to the rearranged match.

I just don’t agree with the rules.

Just as I don’t agree with VAR in the FA Cup because it’s not used in every fixture.

EDIT - I did call Forest out. I did find it a little shady. But knowing people who work there, I’m assured it was legit. So I was probably being a mard ****

 

Thank you for the responses. The rules are very confusing i agree, and the VAR rule for Prem grounds and non-VAR for non-Prem for the same competition (FA Cup) is crazy.

That was what I was getting at really, calling them out and then we do the same, but we all get a bit mardy sometimes But you've explained it very well, and it's appreciated.