Holybourne Identity wrote: ↑Wed Dec 13, 2023 11:13 am
It will be interesting to see what happens next time. During the same week there was a fatality at one of the NFL matches played in London and a similar, non-fatal incident at Sunderland.
For reasons of sporting integrity I don't believe Lincoln were obligated to accept the result as it stood. However, there is a lack of sporting integrity in the 84 minutes played being excised from history, and different players and management involved when the match was replayed. The La Liga example is a much fairer outcome to arise from a very sad situation.
The Laws of Football provide that a game consists of 2 halves of 45 minutes.
Under the Laws of the Game, the result of the abandoned game could not stand as there had not been a completed game
Sporting Integrity means complying with the laws of the game. The only thing guaranteed to undermine sporting integrity is to ignore the laws of the game, mid competition
All teams in the EFL know the laws of the game require 2 halves of 45 minutes to be played.
What is your definition of sporting integrity? Is it ignoring the rules all other teams play by? Is it manipulating an unfortunate event to suit your club ignoring every other team in the competition.
Perhaps you think, we should end every game after the 1st goal? Ignore the fact the laws require a game of 90 minutes?
Sporting Integrity requires compliance with the Laws of the Game - as applies to every team and not trying to manipulate them mid game to suit your team
When our match with Colchester was ‘abandoned’ due to a pitch invasion the stadium was cleared. The game then resumed and the full 90 minutes completed behind closed
doors.
This was I believe over an hour after the match was ‘abandoned’ . So was that sporting integrity or what? I fail to see the difference between the abandonment of that match and the one with Lincoln.
One was completed with the scores standing at time of abandonment and the match duly completed hours later with the same players and management. The result did not change. The other was scratched from the record books and played again weeks later, as we know, with different players , different manager and the result was reversed,
The interpretation of the ‘rules’ should be the same for both matches. As stated before the EFL is not fit for purpose.
My interpretation of the rules is based on same principles for both games
The Colchester game was 90 minutes played albeit with an hour break in 2nd half
The Lincoln game was 82 minutes played so therefore was not 90 minutes and cannot count.
Not sure why you seem unable to comprehend that 82 minutes is less than 90 minutes
You say sporting integrity demands ignoring rules that 90 minutes is needed for a game.
Sorry spen666 you are wrong. The Colchester match was’abandoned’BEFORE 90 minutes had been played. The remaining minutes were played sometime after the game had been ‘abandoned’.
This could have happened at the Lincoln match,either once the stadium had been evacuated, or the following morning, or at a mutually agreed time as happened in Spain. I never said anything about not completing the 90 minutes plus stoppage time.i suggest you read more carefully what I actually stated rather than what you think I stated.
Winchestorfan wrote: ↑Wed Dec 13, 2023 1:29 pm
Sorry spen666 you are wrong. The Colchester match was’abandoned’BEFORE 90 minutes had been played. The remaining minutes were played sometime after the game had been ‘abandoned’.
This could have happened at the Lincoln match,either once the stadium had been evacuated, or the following morning, or at a mutually agreed time as happened in Spain. I never said anything about not completing the 90 minutes plus stoppage time.i suggest you read more carefully what I actually stated rather than what you think I stated.
Colchester game lasted 90 minutes
Lincoln game did not
Whatever they could or could not have done. A game that is only 82 minutes does not count
Holybourne Identity wrote: ↑Wed Dec 13, 2023 11:13 am
It will be interesting to see what happens next time. During the same week there was a fatality at one of the NFL matches played in London and a similar, non-fatal incident at Sunderland.
For reasons of sporting integrity I don't believe Lincoln were obligated to accept the result as it stood. However, there is a lack of sporting integrity in the 84 minutes played being excised from history, and different players and management involved when the match was replayed. The La Liga example is a much fairer outcome to arise from a very sad situation.
The Laws of Football provide that a game consists of 2 halves of 45 minutes.
Under the Laws of the Game, the result of the abandoned game could not stand as there had not been a completed game
Sporting Integrity means complying with the laws of the game. The only thing guaranteed to undermine sporting integrity is to ignore the laws of the game, mid competition
All teams in the EFL know the laws of the game require 2 halves of 45 minutes to be played.
What is your definition of sporting integrity? Is it ignoring the rules all other teams play by? Is it manipulating an unfortunate event to suit your club ignoring every other team in the competition.
Perhaps you think, we should end every game after the 1st goal? Ignore the fact the laws require a game of 90 minutes?
Sporting Integrity requires compliance with the Laws of the Game - as applies to every team and not trying to manipulate them mid game to suit your team
I don't know why you're shouting, I'm agreeing with the concept that Lincoln did not have to accept the result of an abandoned/paused match.
The Laws of Football provide that a game consists of 2 halves of 45 minutes.
Under the Laws of the Game, the result of the abandoned game could not stand as there had not been a completed game
Sporting Integrity means complying with the laws of the game. The only thing guaranteed to undermine sporting integrity is to ignore the laws of the game, mid competition
All teams in the EFL know the laws of the game require 2 halves of 45 minutes to be played.
What is your definition of sporting integrity? Is it ignoring the rules all other teams play by? Is it manipulating an unfortunate event to suit your club ignoring every other team in the competition.
Perhaps you think, we should end every game after the 1st goal? Ignore the fact the laws require a game of 90 minutes?
Sporting Integrity requires compliance with the Laws of the Game - as applies to every team and not trying to manipulate them mid game to suit your team
Again we played 3 periods of footbal equating to 90 minutes, so rules can be re written ?
By your inaccurate logic, every game is hundreds of "halves". Every time the whistle blows ends a "half"
The game you refer to there were 2 halves. Albeit a 15 minute gap in 1st half.
In any event 90 minutes were played unlike the abandoned Lincoln one
It wasn't my inaccurate logic, It was the Referees.
I am merely pointing out that the rules you have shown
2 x 45 minute halves with 1 turnaround between them
Can sometimes be different due to error.
42 minutes play. break. 3 minutes play. turnaround 45 minutes played.
The 90 minute game is all that matters & so the 82 minute game could & should have
been resumed to Uphold the Integrity
of the 90 minute game.
Spen666 I don’t understand what you are trying to say. I agree matches are in two 45 minutes halves plus extra time plus interval
I agree the Colchester match was , eventually, the correct length.The Lincoln game require six more minutes plus stoppage time.
My point, old chap, is that in La Liga match which had to ‘abandoned’ under very similar tragic circumstances was completed ( not replayed) to everyone’s satisfaction.
Why did the EFL take two weeks to respond and when the game was replayed not only were the players and manager of Lincoln different but so was the result.
La Liga used common sense and ensured the match was completed. The EFL proved they couldn’t organise the proverbial in a brewery let alone administer the league.
What do you disagree with?
