MTFCMusings wrote:How can anyone feel for Stevenage? They won three games all season for crying out loud. If that doesn’t deserve relegation I don’t know what does.
But they did it within the regulations and paid all their staff on time.
MTFCMusings wrote:How can anyone feel for Stevenage? They won three games all season for crying out loud. If that doesn’t deserve relegation I don’t know what does.
eggy wrote:https://www.efl.com/siteassets/efl-documents/200619---efl-v-macclesfield-town---decision_redacted-final.pdf
The independent panel's full decision has released. They've admitted they didn't want to deduct enough points to relegate Macc.
Rob wrote:eggy wrote:https://www.efl.com/siteassets/efl-documents/200619---efl-v-macclesfield-town---decision_redacted-final.pdf
The independent panel's full decision has released. They've admitted they didn't want to deduct enough points to relegate Macc.
Good, the right decision, Stevenage absolutely deserved relegating. Only thing I would have done is relegate Macc too, but Stevenage absolutely had to go.
Rob wrote:eggy wrote:https://www.efl.com/siteassets/efl-documents/200619---efl-v-macclesfield-town---decision_redacted-final.pdf
The independent panel's full decision has released. They've admitted they didn't want to deduct enough points to relegate Macc.
Good, the right decision, Stevenage absolutely deserved relegating. Only thing I would have done is relegate Macc too, but Stevenage absolutely had to go.
eggy wrote:Rob wrote:eggy wrote:https://www.efl.com/siteassets/efl-documents/200619---efl-v-macclesfield-town---decision_redacted-final.pdf
The independent panel's full decision has released. They've admitted they didn't want to deduct enough points to relegate Macc.
Good, the right decision, Stevenage absolutely deserved relegating. Only thing I would have done is relegate Macc too, but Stevenage absolutely had to go.
Can't say I agree that it's the right decision. Their actions warranted a stronger punishment, that much is universally accepted. If a stronger punishment is the difference between staying up and going down, that's your own fault for breaking the rules.
Rob wrote:eggy wrote:Rob wrote:eggy wrote:https://www.efl.com/siteassets/efl-documents/200619---efl-v-macclesfield-town---decision_redacted-final.pdf
The independent panel's full decision has released. They've admitted they didn't want to deduct enough points to relegate Macc.
Good, the right decision, Stevenage absolutely deserved relegating. Only thing I would have done is relegate Macc too, but Stevenage absolutely had to go.
Can't say I agree that it's the right decision. Their actions warranted a stronger punishment, that much is universally accepted. If a stronger punishment is the difference between staying up and going down, that's your own fault for breaking the rules.
They had already been punished several times as per the rules set out at the start of the season. I don't disagree that Macc deserve to go down, but I dislike Stevenage based on living there for a while so want them to go down even more
eggy wrote:Rob wrote:eggy wrote:Rob wrote:eggy wrote:https://www.efl.com/siteassets/efl-documents/200619---efl-v-macclesfield-town---decision_redacted-final.pdf
The independent panel's full decision has released. They've admitted they didn't want to deduct enough points to relegate Macc.
Good, the right decision, Stevenage absolutely deserved relegating. Only thing I would have done is relegate Macc too, but Stevenage absolutely had to go.
Can't say I agree that it's the right decision. Their actions warranted a stronger punishment, that much is universally accepted. If a stronger punishment is the difference between staying up and going down, that's your own fault for breaking the rules.
They had already been punished several times as per the rules set out at the start of the season. I don't disagree that Macc deserve to go down, but I dislike Stevenage based on living there for a while so want them to go down even more
They were punished several times because they broke the rules several times. The latest punishment was less severe because the panel took into account factors which they shouldn't have done (in my humble opinion).
If you only win three games and stay up because someone has less points than you, that's luck. Undeserved? Yes, but a part of sport.
If you break the rules but don't get the proper punishment because someone wants to go easy on you, it makes a mockery of having a set of defined rules in the first place.
BH_Stag wrote:Wish they’d just crack on and make a decision. The season is over now and we still don’t know who is going down. Everything seems to be a long process when the EFL are involved.
Billy the fish wrote:BH_Stag wrote:Wish they’d just crack on and make a decision. The season is over now and we still don’t know who is going down. Everything seems to be a long process when the EFL are involved.
If the appeal is successful and Mac get a heavier points deduction this will run through the courts for a long time .. relegate them both
Sedgwick wrote:Cant we relegate both? how is promotion/relegation working this year regarding filling in for Bury?
adamstag wrote:It’ll be Stevenage that go down.
If the punishment for macc has been delivered and is fair then that should be enough.
Looks like another case of where the EFL are trying to fob another club off due to their own incompetence.
Maybe if the EFL’s “fit and proper test” worked the problems at bury and Bolton wouldn’t have happened in the first place (appreciate the macc owner will have been in place before their promotion to the EFL)
Return to Stagsnet Main Discussion Forum
Users browsing this forum: Dave Wayne, northern stag, Stoney and 252 guests