Match Thread Exeter (A) Tue 16/11/2021 & Tue 30/11/2021 19:45

Depends how long ago you bought it.

 

Bitcoin September 2nd 2017 ETH 2019. But actually, with Ethereum, even buying this time last year would have been an acceptable entry point.

 

£65K I heard on the grapevine.

Could be absolute nonsense but in the same sense I can't see it being much into 6 figures.

 

Right on all points Rod. I think Jon has got a little confused about the "knowingly and wilfully cheated". There is plenty of evidence to show they knew, they even published the subs rules on their website / twitter page before the game. The second damming evidence is Matt Taylor's post match interview where he clearly says the subs made the difference. Of course they did, they scored all the goals. Whether it was cold blooded cheating is up to the FA to decide but did the actions gain an advantage?, most certainly as Taylor says himself.

 

Ah right I read it that we had triggered the investigation - now that I reread the statement that's interesting

Curious!

 

Hi all, Exeter fan in peace and bewildered by the entire situation. I have read through this entire thread and it's interesting the different takes from both sides. There's a couple of good posts on our forum which I don't think many of you have considered, though. Copied below:

"What really niggles me is that Bradford allegedly tried to make a 6th sub as well (clearly believing that was the rule) but were prevented from doing so. We don't know the reason for not allowing the extra sub, but the officials did step in to prevent them breaking the rules, yet allowed us to do so. There's no consistency at all."

In which a reply to that post was

"From what has been said, I think it's a reasonable guess that Bradford would also have been permitted to bring on a sixth substitute, were it not for the fact they'd already used up their four opportunities to interrupt play by bringing on a sub.

If that's the case then it could be argued that the rules were, essentially, the same for both sides, ie both teams would have been allowed to make six subs as long as they did so within the rule which says you can only interrupt a game four times to do so.

If Bradford got as far as filling in a card for their sixth substitute and handing it to the fourth official then I'd suggest both teams were playing to the same rules and it would be harsh to penalise one team and not the other. It's not our fault if the Bradford bench lost count of how many times they'd interrupted play to bring a substitute on."

(These are in reference to the Lavery situation)

Just wondered what your take on this is? Personally I can see it being replayed (god knows when) and the gate receipts we receive for the replay will cover your travel and accommodation. If the game is null and voided, then it means it never happened so I can't see it being moved back to your place or at a neutral ground. But who knows? The only precedent I can find is The Devon FA advising our Development Team last year that they were able to play a first team player before the match and then realising after the match that they couldn't. The advice came from the Devon FA, the **** up was by the Devon FA so they couldn't kick the girls out but made them replay the tie again. As we were told on numerous occasions by the match officials we could use a sixth sub, and they are FA representatives so it in theory did come from the FA.

 

Me too.

I get what @Bigrod and @wetherbywhaler mean, however, the fact is like I said elsewhere, we were once kicked out of the FA Cup once for making a mistake, the mistake was real, we did potentially gain an advantage by fielding an ineligible player, and we still were able to overturn the decision to kick us out the competition.

That tells me that genuine errors aren't punished as harshly as attempts to actually cheat.

 

Bradford had not used their 4 opportunities up. That just grasping at straws.

Bradford made a double sub on 64, They made a sub prior to full time on 90 min. So that is 3 subs in two opportunities.

The next sub they made was at full time before extra time which doesn't count towards the stoppage and the next sub was made at half time in extra time. Bradford still had 2 opportunities remaining as they gained an extra one for heading into extra time and having the one unused during the game, they just didn't have any subs left.

 

Expert summariser Andy K mentioned Lavery a couple of minutes before Exeter scored their 3rd goal. Why would Adams want to bring him on then knowing it's 5 substitutes in the FA Cup ,as confirmed by Taylor in his post match interview?
Having listened to the verbose double act commentating for Radio Leeds I am surprised that neither they nor their "assistant" could count. The "assistant" did advise AK and Oggie of Udders earlier that it was 5 subs in the Cup competition.
Perhaps if we had been following the match on live text someone might have been able to alert the media before the end of extra time?

 

Interesting. But you didn't make a double sub on 64. You made one, the ball went out about 20 seconds later and you made another one. Check your twitter feed, I even said to myself during the game, why didn't they bring them on at the same time? The point remains even if that was only 3 interruptions, why did the officials prevent you from bringing Lavery on but didn't prevent us from doing so?

 

Even if the 64 subs were two separate subs (I didn't attend the game as Exeter on a work day is a bit of a trek), Bradford did not use all their allocated sub opportunities because two of the subs were taken during breaks in the game where subs were allowed to be made without issue, ie the start of the next period of game.

Your social media was posting about 5 subs, your manager after the game was talking about 5 subs.

It is difficult to suggest the rules weren't know and that this extra sub did not have any impact on the game when the game was 0-0 when the 6th Sub was made.

I don't think the FA will throw their officials under the bus so unfortunately I don't think it will end well for Exeter.

 

Our chairman's reply is pretty brutal and to the point (if you can avoid the ridiculous pop-up adverts)
https://www.devonlive.com/sport/football/football-news/exeter-city-say-lack-clarity-6222372

Given that Bradford tried to make a sixth sub themselves and were prevented from doing so to me indicates that both teams managers were informed prior that six were allowed. Lavery had an extensive warm up, stripped to come on and went to the side of the pitch only to be told by the fourth official he couldn't come on. What's also worth noting is that the officials gave us more than 5 cards to hand in for substitutions which also backs up their claims that the officials on numerous occasions told us we could make 6 subs, not 5..

Unfortunately I can't take the social media team part of your argument seriously. It's a couple of young media qualified persons that run it, not senior management. And it could well be that the referee told us it's 5 substitutes and 1 in extra time (like last year), the post doesn't really contradict that.

 

If a ref doesn't send off a player after two yellows, the game doesn't get replayed. I expect nothing to happen but maybe Exeter to forgo some points. However then again what's to stop people doing this on purpose

I expect us to heavily utilise the loan market. Crankshaw money should be earmarked on a quality 6 month loan signing.

 

Not necessarily. Stockport signed one of Bolton's best players. As opposed to us not having any money it seems Stockport have a lot. He was sub for us remember

 

The same as there is a massive bearing on a game if a player is not sent off or the wrong player sent off. They don't replay those games. Mind you they are refs errors. Is this?

 

Out of every single game in this competition only Exeter have made 6 subs.

This is not on Bradford, we haven't put 6 subs out on the pitch. If we have been stopped doing so by the officials but Exeter were allowed then Bradford have been disadvantaged by the match officials and the game result should not stand.

Whichever way you look at it, Bradford have done nothing wrong and gained no advantage, yet have suffered by playing extra time in a game where the subs from Exeter made all the difference.

Whoever is at fault, Exeter or the FA, Bradford have been disadvantaged and there is no denying that.

 

I would have thought the 4th official would have responsibility for subs, I can't believe he wasn't making documentation of who had come off and who replaced the player coming off, how could he have not noticed Exeter wanted to introduce a 6th sub.

 

I think theres a bit of misin

i think theres a bit of misinformation about. Your own manager talks about 5 subs after the match and doesn’t mention 6.

most importantly it is not the responsibility of the officials to ensure teams follow the rules even if the officials contradict them. I wouldn’t expect a team to field 12 players if the ref said they could.

 

Its not up the officials. The responsibility lies with the team.