Rules are Rules

[ontheup]

Given comments from both chairman and manager about our pitch and "rules", the irony of the following statements from Steve Brown following Ebbsfleet's abandoment last night, is not lost on me:


He said: "At the very least, the FA have got to look at the rule. To come back here and start from scratch, zero minutes, the only thing that stands is the red card.

It’s a very antiquated rule and they obviously don’t have to put lads through 42 games a season and come to places like this and dig deep to win a football match, for that to happen and then come back again starting from zero minutes. It doesn’t make sense to me.

He said: "If Danny Cowley had anything about him, if they're mathematically outside the play-offs after playing on Friday and Monday or whenever their games are, he should really do the right thing and give us the game.

"It’s unfair. We seem to have lost everything and they seem to have gained everything. There are so many questions. This just shouldn’t happen in the modern day. I don’t care what level you’re at, this shouldn’t happen."

The result doesn’t stand and they can come back and have another go at us in a week’s time or whatever. It’s just a ridiculous law.


Whilst I agree with a lot of what he's said, the insinuation that Concord should do the right thing and give them the game, is in my opinion not the way to do business, they knew the rules and you can't go changing them mid season.

[russc]

Rules are rules, the Conference shouldn't be bullied, etc. Do I hear the sound of chickens coming home to roost?

[jt]

With the revenue a 3G pitch would bring in they could afford some better lights that won't go out

[tim]

Careful, did we not have a problem with our floodlights earlier this season?

[Deleted]

Depends who you ask

[tim]

Well there was very dimmed lighting in the bar, not enough current to cook a burger, and the threat of 'lights out'
You decide?

[jt]

Threat of lights of, threat

[ontheup]

Incidentally I have nothing against Ebbsfleet and I know a number of their fans can be seen at the GS, however for me this is the start of the consequences to clubs of voting against 3G.

Granted this abandonment isn't directly associated with the 3G vote but I assume it is a rearranged game due to a postponement earlier on the season.

But the overall point is, clubs applying an argument against 3G and then contradicting that argument when it suits them.

I've seen plenty of anti 3G clubs moaning about fixture pile ups, falling crowds, and the condition of pitches....and I'm pretty sure in the coming months you'll hear a number of chairmen mulling over their bleak end of year accounts and bemoaning the impact postponements have had on their clubs finances.

Ironically, Bognor fans can't wait to see their team on a surface more suited to their style of play and a few have blamed the condition of pitches for their recent form.

[ontheup]

This gets better:

Ebbsfleet have lodged an appeal to the FA against the decision of the Conference Board to order the match be replayed.

So, it's not the way to do business but you're happy to copy?.....you knew the rules....

[Deleted]

Bloody money bags bully boys

[ontheup]

The point for me is the way Ebbsfleet (Maidstone) have gone about the whole thing. Put it to the conference, fine. They lost. End of story. I am personally in favour of games not getting abandoned (3G) but I now hope they don't get their way as their bully boy attitude stinks. What other rules would they like changing? Perhaps they could have a 2 goal start every game? Lets put that to the vote and go to court if we lose.

[russc]

OK own up, who went on Kent Online as Tomcat (see comments @ www.kentonline.co.uk/gravesend/sport/fleet-lodge-fa-appeal-16044/)