real Posted November 3, 2010 Share Posted November 3, 2010 Ok, I'm not a legal expert, but I would suggest that the referee's decision to start the game was negligent, in that he attempted to start a game which has no prospect of being completed, and was already unplayable in the opinion of both managers. In making this decision I wonder if he considered the potential impact on fans having to pay again/extra for a re-arranged game? If he did not, then he may have failed in his duty to make a decision using a professional level of care. So, anyone up for a case against the FL to sue for any extra costs? i know we don't yet know that there will be a charge, but I feel that putting the right sort of pressure in place may result in the problem being avoided. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted November 3, 2010 Share Posted November 3, 2010 (edited) Ok, I'm not a legal expert, but I would suggest that the referee's decision to start the game was negligent, in that he attempted to start a game which has no prospect of being completed, and was already unplayable in the opinion of both managers. In making this decision I wonder if he considered the potential impact on fans having to pay again/extra for a re-arranged game? If he did not, then he may have failed in his duty to make a decision using a professional level of care. So, anyone up for a case against the FL to sue for any extra costs? i know we don't yet know that there will be a charge, but I feel that putting the right sort of pressure in place may result in the problem being avoided. I think the only outcome can be free admission in exchange for ticket stubs, any other action could open a real can of worms with the Football League's jurisdiction challenged if it can be proved they are not operating a 'fair for all' policy in respect of abandoned matches. It cannot be 'fair for all' if every club in their association operates under different rules. Edited November 3, 2010 by BP1960 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobOAFC Posted November 3, 2010 Share Posted November 3, 2010 Ok, I'm not a legal expert, but I would suggest that the referee's decision to start the game was negligent, in that he attempted to start a game which has no prospect of being completed, and was already unplayable in the opinion of both managers. In making this decision I wonder if he considered the potential impact on fans having to pay again/extra for a re-arranged game? If he did not, then he may have failed in his duty to make a decision using a professional level of care. So, anyone up for a case against the FL to sue for any extra costs? i know we don't yet know that there will be a charge, but I feel that putting the right sort of pressure in place may result in the problem being avoided. Since they have no public policy about game abandonment (well i coulndnt find anything on their website - if someone has post a link please?), that opens up a door showing their not following football league rules and if they do charge Latics can simply bring that up.. which could lead to fines or point deductions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc-latics Posted November 3, 2010 Share Posted November 3, 2010 hopefully, we're reading too much into this. the right thing to do, and im sure it will happen, is to let us fans in for free, or to charge a minimal fee of a quid or two to get into the rearranged game. it would be show what sort of club they are if it is anything different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankly Mr Shankly Posted November 3, 2010 Share Posted November 3, 2010 Here's some previous actions to clubs affected by abandoned games. It seems seeing every case has a different outcome it's completely down to the clubs discretion. Dundee United charged fans 50% of the original ticket price after their game was abandoned at HT against Rangers last season. A certain Rangers supporters club were unhappy to say the least. Plymouth Argyle let all fans in for free who attended their abandoned (after 58 minutes) game against Barnsley last season. An Argyle spokesman said "Although we are under no obligation to admit supporters from the first game into the re-match for free, we feel this is the right course of action to take. "Supporters are the lifeblood of the game, and we think that their forbearance in the face of Saturday's extreme weather conditions deserves this consideration." Burnley sounded like they did the right thing to their abandoned (after 19 minutes) game with Leicester City in 2005. They charged £10 entry and also offered 50% refund to anyone who returned a ticket stub for the original game. Basically, anyone who attended the original tie don't lose out, and they also take a bit of extra cash by new folk going to the rearranged tie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldhamains Posted November 3, 2010 Share Posted November 3, 2010 If it did come to Legal Action you could use the fact that people have gone on the record and said the match could of been called off two hours before kick off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spadam Posted November 3, 2010 Share Posted November 3, 2010 I would be willing to pay say 50% of the ticket price had it been abandoned at half time or later but after 8 minutes. Everyone who bought a ticket should be let in for free. People seem to be forgetting that if they make us pay then rochdale fans will have to pay aswell. Only Rochdale season ticket holders will get in for free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancy lad Posted November 3, 2010 Share Posted November 3, 2010 Ok, I'm not a legal expert, but I would suggest that the referee's decision to start the game was negligent, in that he attempted to start a game which has no prospect of being completed, and was already unplayable in the opinion of both managers. In making this decision I wonder if he considered the potential impact on fans having to pay again/extra for a re-arranged game? If he did not, then he may have failed in his duty to make a decision using a professional level of care. So, anyone up for a case against the FL to sue for any extra costs? i know we don't yet know that there will be a charge, but I feel that putting the right sort of pressure in place may result in the problem being avoided. I'd be up for that! Aint paying a penny for 6 minutes of football! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobOAFC Posted November 3, 2010 Share Posted November 3, 2010 I would be willing to pay say 50% of the ticket price had it been abandoned at half time or later but after 8 minutes. Everyone who bought a ticket should be let in for free. People seem to be forgetting that if they make us pay then rochdale fans will have to pay aswell. Only Rochdale season ticket holders will get in for free. No, ST holders will have to pay aswell. They paid for that game so they used their ticket for that game, so they have to pay again, they cant say 'those who bought a ticket just for this game has to be x amount to regain entry, but ST holders can in for free' they used their ticket, so if we pay, they pay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Latics_Fanatic Posted November 3, 2010 Share Posted November 3, 2010 No, ST holders will have to pay aswell. They paid for that game so they used their ticket for that game, so they have to pay again, they cant say 'those who bought a ticket just for this game has to be x amount to regain entry, but ST holders can in for free' they used their ticket, so if we pay, they pay. To be fair, if it happened at Latics i reckon they would let ST Holders in with one of the vouchers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_bro Posted November 3, 2010 Share Posted November 3, 2010 hopefully, we're reading too much into this. the right thing to do, and im sure it will happen, is to let us fans in for free, or to charge a minimal fee of a quid or two to get into the rearranged game. it would be show what sort of club they are if it is anything different. Fortunately it was an all ticket game therefore everyone who went has a ticket stub to either exchange for a new ticket, or use as entry to the rearranged game. The only extra expense involved is the travelling to and from the ground. (good job it wasn't Plymouth). There would have been real problems had it not been all ticket. How could you prove you were at the game without being handed a voucher at the turnstile on the way out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stitch_KTF Posted November 4, 2010 Share Posted November 4, 2010 No, ST holders will have to pay aswell. They paid for that game so they used their ticket for that game, so they have to pay again, they cant say 'those who bought a ticket just for this game has to be x amount to regain entry, but ST holders can in for free' they used their ticket, so if we pay, they pay. A season-ticket grants admission to all league fixtures played at home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcgoo_84 Posted November 4, 2010 Share Posted November 4, 2010 Fortunately it was an all ticket game therefore everyone who went has a ticket stub to either exchange for a new ticket, or use as entry to the rearranged game. The only extra expense involved is the travelling to and from the ground. (good job it wasn't Plymouth). There would have been real problems had it not been all ticket. How could you prove you were at the game without being handed a voucher at the turnstile on the way out? Exactly. With our game being all ticket there was no need for anyone to do anything. Forward thinking Bury (apparently) handed out a voucher to everyone entering the ground on Tuesday just in case their game didn't finish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted November 4, 2010 Share Posted November 4, 2010 A season-ticket grants admission to all league fixtures played at home. A shocking concept! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
real Posted November 4, 2010 Author Share Posted November 4, 2010 Given your initial gambit, no. :grin: A bit late with that. The ship has sailed. Meanwhile, I'm happy with the outcome. It's turned out exactly as I wanted it to. Just a shame it took 48 hours for dale to actually say what they were always intending to do (ahem). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.