Refs point of view re postponement

Referee Carl Boyeson has told the Sunday Mercury that Birmingham City’s Championship clash with Barnsley at Oakwell yesterday ‘didn’t have a chance’ of going ahead, once he had assessed the condition of the pitch.

The Hull based official also quashed rumours that Barnsley’s undersoil heating system was not working correctly on the night before the game when temperatures fell to as much as minus 11 degrees celsius.

“I got a call at 10.45am from the Barnsley secretary saying that there was a problem,” Boyeson told the Mercury, “I was asked to get to the ground as quickly as I could. We went out about 12.15 and looked out at the two areas which were causing concern, one down the sideline and one at the end in front of the goal where shade was covering the grass.

“I walked the pitch with Colin Calderwood and David Flitcroft.

“When they asked me the answer I told them that it didn’t have a chance and both representatives were in agreement. The areas of concern were frozen solid.

“I believe that the temperature got down to as low as minus 11 in the area overnight. They have got undersoil heating but to what extent that protects the pitch, I’m not aware.

“Covers sometimes protect the pitch down to temperatures of about minus four, and undersoil heating takes it to less than that.

“But there obviously has to be a cut off point when it gets down to such low temperatures.”

Carl Boyeson stressed his sympathy with the travelling Blues fans, many of whom had already arrived in Barnsley before the pitch inspection took place.

“My sympathy goes out to fans from Birmingham City who have travelled to watch the game, but my concern is player safety.”

 

If the ref can publicly provide an answer/explanation, why can't the club?

That wasn't difficult was it? was it

 

Re: If the ref can publicly provide an answer/explanation, why can't the club?

The only thing that puzzles me is the timing,I appreciate that the club left it to the last possible moment to give it chance to thaw,but didn't these decisions used to be based on the latest time that away fans would be setting off for the match irrespective of whether conditions improved later?

 

10-45 the call was made, wasn`t that a little late in the day????

 

The bad weather was forecast. We all knew it was coming, we all knew the predicted weather was below -6. The club say that they knew the under soil heating only works down to -6. With that in mind why did they not inform the referee the day before the game that they wanted him to do a pitch inspection the next day? Why was it left until 10:45 to even contact the guy and ask him to then set off on a presumably 90 minute journey with no notice at all?

Why didn't they call him up on friday and say "look ref we're anticipating a problem tomorrow as the forecast is for temperature much lower than our under soil heating can handle. Can you get down early tomorrow to have a look?" Why wait until 10:45 before even admitting to the ref that there was a problem? Amateurish