Sheffield U v Middlesbrough Postponed

[White Band 831]

Maybe it's all an elaborate ploy to take out our rivals - lull one of the play off contenders into thinking it will be an easy win for them, unleash a load of players with a point to prove who go on to have the game of their lives, leave a covid outbreak behind which takes out their next matches and leaves them with an impossible fixture pile up. 🤣

[Smogzilla 7,484]

Let's 'ave it.

[BoroJake 2,345]

Oops too late

[CanadianBoro 233]

3 minutes ago, Denzel Zanzibar said:

Well this is absolute bullshit from the EFL.

As someone has said, chances are a few of the players who WILL play tomorrow probably will have COVID (3 day incubation period, remember) and will be passing it onto Sheff Utd's squad.

What an absolute shitshow. Gibbo, get the lawsuit ready.

if I was boro id have rapid tests for the players before the game tomorrow. If those players test positive and that info was shared with our opponents and EFL they'd have to call it off right? Otherwise they would have a case for a lawsuit against The league.

[Brunners 7,982]

6 minutes ago, CanadianBoro said:

If any player is showing symptoms of any kind they wouldn't be allowed to play anyway right? It can take up to 5 days from infection to get a positive test. 

If anyone was sick you'd think they'd want them to stay way from the field, not forced into playing a game putting others at risk. 

So long as they test negative, symptomatic players can play.

[Changing Times 12,343]

1 minute ago, p_mards said:

It's a completely different scenario to Blackpool as their problems were predominantly injuries, with just a few Covid cases that were contained, whereas ours has wiped out the majority of the team and backroom team.

It's not different at all, and therein lies the problem with the whining going on.  Illness is illness, you get outbreaks at clubs, and games don't get cancelled because of it.  It's simply about players being missing for whatever reason.  If it was a flu outbreak at the club it wouldn't be getting cancelled, likewise if a stomach bug was going through the club.  If we had 9 players out injured we wouldn't be cancelling it either.  You choose from the squad you have available and you pick your best team from that, whether players are injured, suspended, or ill. 

Just because a player has yet to play a first team game doesn't mean they are incapable of it.  Every player has yet to play a first team game until they've actually been selected for one even the best players in the world.  Coburn last season came off the bench at the end of the Rotherham game, came on in the next game against Sheff Wed and scored.  Jones had a handful of games last season for Queen of the South and is now viewed as one of our most important players.  Terrible Spence only got into our side because of players being missing, and did pretty well, even though he has since became the worst player in football.  According to the good people of Transfermarkt, we apparently have a first team squad of 27 players, which doesn't include Wing and Spence, and an under 23 squad of 24 players, none of whom are under 18.  We have more than enough players to play this game, so we should get on with it, as should everyone else.  Players are missing all of the time, it's part of football, it's been part of football since it began, you just get on with it and do your best.

[Denzel Zanzibar 6,972]

1 minute ago, Brunners said:

So long as they test negative, symptomatic players can play.

Crazy. Absolutely crazy.

[Downsouth 6,326]

10 minutes ago, JonnyMFC said:

Balls to the EFL, lets go out there tomorrow and prove to the rest of the teams that are cancelling left right and centre that you can field a team if needed........we need to set a precedent and put a markler down for the rest to follow.

Are we sending out Megan or her Dad😃

[Denzel Zanzibar 6,972]

7 minutes ago, Changing Times said:

It's not different at all, and therein lies the problem with the whining going on.  Illness is illness, you get outbreaks at clubs, and games don't get cancelled because of it.  It's simply about players being missing for whatever reason.  If it was a flu outbreak at the club it wouldn't be getting cancelled, likewise if a stomach bug was going through the club.  If we had 9 players out injured we wouldn't be cancelling it either.  You choose from the squad you have available and you pick your best team from that, whether players are injured, suspended, or ill. 

Just because a player has yet to play a first team game doesn't mean they are incapable of it.  Every player has yet to play a first team game until they've actually been selected for one even the best players in the world.  Coburn last season came off the bench at the end of the Rotherham game, came on in the next game against Sheff Wed and scored.  Jones had a handful of games last season for Queen of the South and is now viewed as one of our most important players.  Terrible Spence only got into our side because of players being missing, and did pretty well, even though he has since became the worst player in football.  According to the good people of Transfermarkt, we apparently have a first team squad of 27 players, which doesn't include Wing and Spence, and an under 23 squad of 24 players, none of whom are under 18.  We have more than enough players to play this game, so we should get on with it, as should everyone else.  Players are missing all of the time, it's part of football, it's been part of football since it began, you just get on with it and do your best.

But why should WE have to field a weakened team when literally EVERY OTHER FOOTBALL CLUB has been allowed to postpone?

[Downsouth 6,326]

@Blanco

Tell you what Joe this thread is most certainly going to up the averages post count wise.

Hardly anyone at this stage can answer SmogDanes original questions, none of us have a clue who WILL be available this is going to be a mammoth thread and probably achieving the highest post count if the game does go ahead.

 

[Will 2,958]

10 minutes ago, Changing Times said:

It's not different at all, and therein lies the problem with the whining going on.  Illness is illness, you get outbreaks at clubs, and games don't get cancelled because of it.  It's simply about players being missing for whatever reason.  If it was a flu outbreak at the club it wouldn't be getting cancelled, likewise if a stomach bug was going through the club.  If we had 9 players out injured we wouldn't be cancelling it either.  You choose from the squad you have available and you pick your best team from that, whether players are injured, suspended, or ill. 

Just because a player has yet to play a first team game doesn't mean they are incapable of it.  Every player has yet to play a first team game until they've actually been selected for one even the best players in the world.  Coburn last season came off the bench at the end of the Rotherham game, came on in the next game against Sheff Wed and scored.  Jones had a handful of games last season for Queen of the South and is now viewed as one of our most important players.  Terrible Spence only got into our side because of players being missing, and did pretty well, even though he has since became the worst player in football.  According to the good people of Transfermarkt, we apparently have a first team squad of 27 players, which doesn't include Wing and Spence, and an under 23 squad of 24 players, none of whom are under 18.  We have more than enough players to play this game, so we should get on with it, as should everyone else.  Players are missing all of the time, it's part of football, it's been part of football since it began, you just get on with it and do your best.

This logic would work if we were the first team asking for a game to be postponed to avoid having a significant competitive disadvantage, but we're not. Teams in this league have had games postponed to avoid this for far smaller outbreaks than we are currently experiencing.

[BillyWoofs_shinpad 1,884]

7 minutes ago, Denzel Zanzibar said:

But why should WE have to field a weakened team when literally EVERY OTHER FOOTBALL CLUB has been allowed to postpone?

Probably because we’ve got a decent sized squad I guess. I really don’t think there is a massive conspiracy against the club. 
 

I’d like to see the game go ahead, it’s a chance for a few fringe players…warm them up for the Mansfield game. 

[Changing Times 12,343]

6 minutes ago, Denzel Zanzibar said:

But why should WE have to field a weakened team when literally EVERY OTHER FOOTBALL CLUB has been allowed to postpone?

Have they all been allowed to?  Blackpool tried and couldn't.  I assume they aren't the only ones who have tried and failed to get games off cos they have players missing.  I agree the EFL have screwed it right up but to me it's a simple thing that everyone should be playing or you pause the whole season.  I think just get on with it though.

[Changing Times 12,343]

2 minutes ago, Will said:

This logic would work if we were the first team asking for a game to be postponed to avoid having a significant competitive disadvantage, but we're not. Teams in this league have had games postponed to avoid this for far smaller outbreaks than we are currently experiencing.

True but I dare say we have a bigger squad than some, which I assume plays some sort of role in the decision?  If we have 9 players missing cos of Covid then we have enough to field a team as far as I can see?  Like I said, it should have been play or forfeit from the beginning.  I think it would be surprising how easily clubs would find it to field a team in those circumstances.

[SouthernSmoggie 4,242]

As is so often the case in football... It's the inconsistentcy. I wouldn't give a crap if everyone was the same, but other clubs have called off games for way less. Imagine United being told to recall loan players and start U18s? As if. 

If we are the first in a future one-size-fits-all hard stance... then so be it. But I somehow doubt it.