• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Wycombe v Oxford kick off 1930 Sky sports football.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Father Jack Hackett said:
Bodes well for us as has been proven. Anyone who can kick a ball straight in the academy has been hawked around and sold to the first bidder (so much so we couldnt even put u18 and u23 sides out). He's ruined any chance of us having a bright medium-term future so your Chairman was entirely right.
Click to expand...
Totally agree. It's so demoralising as a fan he's selling the last kind of jewels you have. Personally can't believe what SD has done. It's fuckind disgraceful marra
 
Father Jack Hackett said:
Their Chairmam didnt have to come out straight away with his cock and bull story, putting pressure on the EFL and other clubs mind but you are correct, it was the EFL which is of no surprise.
Click to expand...
I agree, a vote from the clubs was a poor way to go about it as you could predict the way almost every club would vote before it happened.
 
0321safc said:
We finished 7th. Points on the board > games in hand. That’s the way football has always been. The core fundamental tenet of the game.
Click to expand...

No, we didn’t - we finished 8th.

But even if we did finish 7th... That’s still not good enough to care about who was promoted as we weren’t in the running.
 
South Banker Wolf said:
Totally agree. It's so demoralising as a fan he's selling the last kind of jewels you have. Personally can't believe what SD has done. It's fuckind disgraceful marra
Click to expand...
I honestly think the plan is to sell the land the AOL sits on. No other rational explanation for it. Things are ugly now, if he can’t sell he will run the club to the ground and get as much money out of it as he can. Even with this proposed salary cap and subsequent percentage of players needing to be homegrown on the horizon, he’s still palming off all our young players.
Alisander thunders said:
No, we didn’t - we finished 8th.

But even if we did finish 7th... That’s still not good enough to care about who was promoted as we weren’t in the running.
Click to expand...
Weren’t in the running. We were in touch with 2nd place with them still to play.
 
SAFC 83 said:
I agree, a vote from the clubs was a poor way to go about it as you could predict the way almost every club would vote before it happened.
Click to expand...

They’re the rules though - shall we just ignore the rules and do it a different way? Isn’t that less fair, ignoring the rules?

Teams will vote in their favour, of course they will - but teams earned the right to do that based on their performances over 36 games.

It’s weird how only 4 underperforming teams were unhappy...
0321safc said:
I honestly think the plan is to sell the land the AOL sits on. No other rational explanation for it. Things are ugly now, if he can’t sell he will run the club to the ground and get as much money out of it as he can. Even with this proposed salary cap and subsequent percentage of players needing to be homegrown on the horizon, he’s still palming off all our young players.

Weren’t in the running. We were in touch with 2nd place with them still to play.
Click to expand...

Our form and performances suggested the only ‘running’ we’d have is further down the table. So no, we weren’t in the running.
Father Jack Hackett said:
Read my post slowly and take heed of the words in it; I never once suggested we deserved to be promoted
Click to expand...

Then why get upset about who was promoted? It had nothing to do with us. The 3 best teams over the average games were promoted, it actually worked out quite well.
 
Last edited:
Alisander thunders said:
They’re the rules though - shall we just ignore the rules and do it a different way? Isn’t that less fair, ignoring the rules?

Teams will vote in their favour, of course they will - but teams earned the right to do that based on their performances over 36 games.

It’s weird how only 4 underperforming teams were unhappy...


Our form and performances suggested the only ‘running’ we’d have is further down the table. So no, we weren’t in the running.


Then why get upset about who was promoted? It had nothing to do with us. The 3 best teams over the average games were promoted, it actually worked out quite well.
Click to expand...

Because I believe it was unjust. Peterborough deserved to be in the play-offs, were the team bang in-form and Tranmere were the form team at the foot of the table.
That is the reason.
 
Alisander thunders said:
They’re the rules though - shall we just ignore the rules and do it a different way? Isn’t that less fair, ignoring the rules?

Teams will vote in their favour, of course they will - but teams earned the right to do that based on their performances over 36 games.

It’s weird how only 4 underperforming teams were unhappy...


Our form and performances suggested the only ‘running’ we’d have is further down the table. So no, we weren’t in the running.


Then why get upset about who was promoted? It had nothing to do with us. The 3 best teams over the average games were promoted, it actually worked out quite well.
Click to expand...
Yes we were. We were 3 points off 2nd with 2nd still to play.
 
Father Jack Hackett said:
Because I believe it was unjust. Peterborough deserved to be in the play-offs, were the team bang in-form and Tranmere were the form team at the foot of the table.
That is the reason.
Click to expand...

Sadly Peterborough were too shit for the majority of the season, worse than Wycombe.

Maybe Tranmere would have survived, but maybe not.

But sadly, playing matches was not sustainable or safe - so maybe Peterborough and Tranmere should reflect on the 36 games that made them underperform.

It’s certainly not ‘unjust’, a season was played out to the letter of the rules in the most fair and proportionate way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top