davieG Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 Considering the Clive Clarke situation, the trouble and potential trouble, the fact that they were winning should we just make a magnanimous gesture on behalf of Clive Clarke, The Club and the Fans and concede the game. Some have suggested playing the second half, I just don't see that as practical solution and giving them a 1-0 contrived goal start strikes me as ludicrous. We either play the game as originally intended or give it up - what's the view.
Manwell Pablo Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 Considering the Clive Clarke situation, the trouble and potential trouble, the fact that they were winning should we just make a magnanimous gesture on behalf of Clive Clarke, The Club and the Fans and concede the game.Some have suggested playing the second half, I just don't see that as practical solution and giving them a 1-0 contrived goal start strikes me as ludicrous. We either play the game as originally intended or give it up - what's the view. Can we wait for the draw first?
The People's Hero Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 We offered them the game as I understand it. I believe we should give them a one-nil head start and play the ninety minutes.
The Don Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 I'm more than happy to give this game up. We were losing, and look at the team we put out. I would rather us obtain a playoff place. Keep all our players fit for the championship.
Leicester Lass Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 I don't think we should concede the game - I believe Tim Davies offered Forest the game last night anyway and they were more than happy to have it abandoned. As I see it we should start a fresh, we were only one nil down and coming back into the game towards the end of the first half so who's to say the result wouldn't have reversed in the second half? Yes, if the shoe were on the other foot I'd be annoyed at starting 0-0 but there's no way the rearranged game will just be 45 minutes and started at 1-0 to Forest.
Mort Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 I'd say either ceed the game* to Forrest or replay it, the idea of playing only the second half or granting Forrest 1-0 lead from the start of 90mins is just daft IMHO. *But if we do abandon the game i think the club should look at clearing space to allow the 5,000+ of were there to get free entry to the next league home game - wouldnt be hard to sort out and just base it on display of the Forrest ticket stub.
THEBIGJOHNSTEADER; Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 I'm more than happy to give this game up.We were losing, and look at the team we put out. I would rather us obtain a playoff place. Keep all our players fit for the championship. Yes by one goal only with 45 minutes still to play. I don't care about the cup at all but I don't think the game should be conceded, nor should the decision be based upon a minority of chav wankers turning up looking for trouble, most of them are about 14 and can easily be punched and kicked to the floor and then stamped several times with ease
Dr The Singh Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 Concede the game, no matter what the result is of the replay, it will always have a bad taste to it!!!
Lord Nibblington Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 I'm not really fussed if we concede the game, start with a 1-0 defecit, give them a 1-0 defecit or playing from 0-0 as if nothing has happened. Winning a Carling Cup game is not really that high on the season's priority list, so it doesn't really matter. I just hope we do something along the right lines, whatever they are, in view of what Forest as a club did last night.
samlcfc1 Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 We could gave gone out in the second half and pasted them 5-1 (not likely, but possible) so its fair that we should just start the game again and hopefully put a better team out. We cant concede the game, i dont think Clive would want that either, its not our fault he collapsed.
Wils Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 We offered them the game as I understand it.I believe we should give them a one-nil head start and play the ninety minutes. Exactly what i think should happen. I really dont think we should concede the game.
Smudge Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 Considering the Clive Clarke situation, the trouble and potential trouble, the fact that they were winning should we just make a magnanimous gesture on behalf of Clive Clarke, The Club and the Fans and concede the game.Some have suggested playing the second half, I just don't see that as practical solution and giving them a 1-0 contrived goal start strikes me as ludicrous. We either play the game as originally intended or give it up - what's the view. Ludicrous....why? I know we can't contrive a standard for this situation but if this was a game of two legs, Forest would be ahead by one goal. How can you take away a goal that was hard won? I think that they were gracious in abandoning the game, I assume at our request and we owe them. Taking advantage of the situation isn't in my game book and I hope isn't in Martin Allen's. I think we should concede an own goal right after kick off, that action alone would send a huge message to the football world about who we are and what we stand for.
Thracian Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 Concede the game. Send Forest best wishes for their continued progress. Had it been a boxing match the bout would have been stopped after half an hour anyway.
Monk Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 Its is a very difficult call to make. On one hand we dont want to gift a result to our biggest rivals. I dont think we should conceed, purely because we havent made a fault as such. If for example one of our fans walked on the pitch and injured a forest player, then I could understand it. but the fact that the events of last night were no fault of either club, I think that we should not conceed. That said, a replay will have a strange air to it given the circumstances. Plus the fact that crowd trouble is extremely likely. I think the match should be replayed in its entirety, from 0-0 behind closed doors. In my eyes thats the only fair way to do it.
Lord Nibblington Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 Concede the game. Send Forest best wishes for their continued progress. Had it been a boxing match the bout would have been stopped after half an hour anyway. But they weren't boxing. And simply because they were rubbish in the first half does not mean the same would have been true of the second. We were crap first half against Palace. Much, much better in the second half. It's impossible to say what would have happened had Clarke not fallen ill.
Ric Flair Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 Not sure what the best course of action is, there isn't any clear cut ruling here. If it's replayed and we beat Forest.......... oh dear.
Leicester Lass Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 Not sure what the best course of action is, there isn't any clear cut ruling here. If it's replayed and we beat Forest.......... oh dear. But if it's replayed, we give them a 1-0 lead and then win everything is gravy, right?
The People's Hero Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 Concede the game. Send Forest best wishes for their continued progress. Had it been a boxing match the bout would have been stopped after half an hour anyway. Next time I see a boxing match involving 22 players, one of whom almost dies twice, I might be inclined to agree with you.
Monk Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 But if it's replayed, we give them a 1-0 lead and then win everything is gravy, right? Are there any examples of this happening elsewhere? When matches have been called off due to bad weather the teams re start at 0-0. Why should this be any different?
Smudge Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 Concede the game. Send Forest best wishes for their continued progress. Had it been a boxing match the bout would have been stopped after half an hour anyway. In fairness to Leicester they are also entitled to at least 45 minutes to redeem themselves, denying them the opportunity doesn't seem right either.
Ric Flair Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 But if it's replayed, we give them a 1-0 lead and then win everything is gravy, right? Are we allowed to do that though? Not sure how it goes down letting teams score straight from the kick off or even starting an abandoned game with one team having an advantage. Had we played 77 or more minutes then it's a different story.
Lord Nibblington Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 Are there any examples of this happening elsewhere?When matches have been called off due to bad weather the teams re start at 0-0. Why should this be any different? There have been quite a few examples of teams letting other sides without challenge for a number of different reasons.
Smudge Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 Are there any examples of this happening elsewhere?When matches have been called off due to bad weather the teams re start at 0-0. Why should this be any different? Bad weather is the Ref's decision, in this case, our team couldn't continue.
Lillehamring Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 i don't think you can 'give' someone a 1-0 lead, it'd have to be a case of kicking off and letting them score unopposed from the kickoff... personally, i think we should give them the result for these reasons: 1. if we replay and lose, we'll look really crap. 2. it's an effort and fixture we can do without 3. forest won't get the satisfaction of actually beating us 4. it will make them feel even more guilty for calling us cheats realistically, i'm sure if forest can re-charge for tickets, there's no way they'll accept a forfeit at the expense of a lucrative rematch, win or lose.
Lord Nibblington Posted 29 August 2007 Posted 29 August 2007 realistically, i'm sure if forest can re-charge for tickets, there's no way they'll accept a forfeit at the expense of a lucrative rematch, win or lose. If it's true that we already offered to conceed the game, I suspect that might be part of the reasoning as to why they said no.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.