Match Thread Away vs Grimsby town - Tue 22 December 7pm kick off

I see Rugby Union have acted decisively. The actual impact on Sale of having to cede the game, is far greater. They could have won a place in the Finals.

“It means Worcester are awarded a 20-0 win and Sale miss out on the play-offs”. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/54373489

 

I believe that the EFL has very detailed protocols on how its clubs must operate during the pandemic; it was part of the conditions for the return of 'elite' sport.

However, as far as I'm aware, those protocols don't cover the specifics of matches being called off, as there are already regulations to cover such issues and the bottom line is that it is down to the EFL to postpone matches, not the clubs.

So, we are back to the two basic questions:

1. who called off the match? and
2. was the match called off due to any failures to follow the COVID-19 protocols?

If the answer to 1 is the EFL then that is fine; if it was Grimsby then precedent suggests the match would be automatically awarded to City.

If the answer to 2 is there were no failures then, again, that is fine. If there were failures to follow protocols by Grimsby, then a lot will depend on the nature and severity of those failures. In this case the punishment could range from a simple warning to awarding the match to City (although I think the latter would be unlikely - more likely to be a fine).

The answer to question 1 should be easy for the EFL to answer and, if the answer was Grimsby, I would have expected the EFL to have made that clear by now. But then, this is the EFL we are talking about and, in recent times, their record is not particularly impressive.

 

This article suggests that Grimsby called off the match against Cheltenham. The wording implies that the EFL were the ones who made the decision in respect of the City game and the Hull cup tie. https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/grimsby-town-update-efl-investigation-4572853

These two paragraphs suggest that something may not have been conducted as it should.......’
There has been confusion though as to why the Mariners postponed their games, while other clubs – such as Stevenage – were able to go ahead despite recording more positive tests.

In announcing the postponement of Town’s games, the EFL also revealed that an investigation would be taking place on the circumstances surrounding the decisions‘.

That article is now four days old and if it was released mid afternoon, would suggest that the decisions were made late morning, if not earlier.

 

Which league game acts as a precedent for a cancelled game to be awarded to the other team? I don't see it anywhere specifically in the EFL's regulations.

 

The EFL guidance notes are very specific. Clubs cannot cancel or postpone games of their own volition. If clubs believe they can't fulfil the fixture (the usual reason is for a medical issue affecting the majority of the squad) they have to advise the EFL and it's then a matter for the EFL to decide. This is from the EFL's own guidance notes which accompany the detailed Regulations ..

It is not permissible for a club to make a decision to postpone a match and in the first instance Clubs should contact the Football Services Department for advice.

If a club doesn't fulfil a fixture and the EFL hasn't postponed the game, it then beomes a disciplinary issue for the EFL to action. Simple.

 

Scunthorpe United v Exeter City. Admittedly it's a long time ago, but then such occurrences are rare.