Seriously, 12 pages of conspiracy theory over a called of fixture when others were also called off today? This site is getting more and more paranoid by the minute.
Orient's, Southend's, and Crawley's games were called off. The pattern there? Lower league games in the south east of England.
Palace game went ahead but they are in the Premier League and are therefore required, and can afford, to have under soil heating.
News flash... we are a lower league team based in the south east of England, just like Orient, Southend, and Crawley.
Our game being called off must be part of some ingenious conspiracy by the Belgian super villain currently plotting our demise though.
So can we because Daisy said that we had no money worries..!!
To install the boiler when the pitch was being laid would have cost approx. £90k. Now how much would the club have lost yesterday?
They don't even need to install the boiler, AFAIK. They can presumably hire one.
In the interests of balance and fairness I should mention that both Dagenham and Redbridge and East Thurrock's matches were eventually postponed too although they were still officially on when I posted to that effect on here.
Blackheath RFC successfully (in terms of result too) fulfilled their fixture at Kidbrooke Lane Eltham Well Hall.
Are people being serious when they try and compare another ground to the valley saying it was playable why wasn't ours?
I am just trying to understand how our pitch was so frozen that it was unplayable and the game was cancelled. Yet other grounds not that far away were perfectly playable. Now factors like amount of access to direct sunlight may have been a factor, maybe other clubs did things Charlton did not do. I don't know so I am asking. The weather would seem fairly predictable at the moment, so personally I am just wondering how this situation arose, and why it was not able to be resolved, when other clubs relatively close by managed to get their pitch playable. It's a genuine question.
Are people being serious when they try and compare another ground to the valley saying it was playable why wasn't ours?
I am just trying to understand how our pitch was so frozen that it was unplayable and the game was cancelled. Yet other grounds not that far away were perfectly playable. Now factors like amount of access to direct sunlight may have been a factor, maybe other clubs did things Charlton did not do. I don't know so I am asking. The weather would seem fairly predictable at the moment, so personally I am just wondering how this situation arose, and why it was not able to be resolved, when other clubs relatively close by managed to get their pitch playable. It's a genuine question.
Have you ever walked down a street and seen frozen patches in one part and completely clear in another? I don't pretend I know the micro climate around the ground but I'd imagine being in a valley and having big stands mean that the temperatures get very low and that sunlight will not always get through to the pitch. You can't just ask why grounds in different parts are ok and ours wasn't as you aren't comparing the same thing.
Seriously, 12 pages of conspiracy theory over a called of fixture when others were also called off today? This site is getting more and more paranoid by the minute.
Orient's, Southend's, and Crawley's games were called off. The pattern there? Lower league games in the south east of England.
Palace game went ahead but they are in the Premier League and are therefore required, and can afford, to have under soil heating.
News flash... we are a lower league team based in the south east of England, just like Orient, Southend, and Crawley.
Our game being called off must be part of some ingenious conspiracy by the Belgian super villain currently plotting our demise though.
While I agree with you regarding the conspiracy theories the big difference between Charlton and orient, Southend and Crawley is that we have the underground heating in place and i doubt very much that they do. All we had to do was hire a boiler for a few days. It's not like he can't afford it
Are people being serious when they try and compare another ground to the valley saying it was playable why wasn't ours?
I think they are.
I agree that whether Ebbsfleet or wherever was playable or not is irrelevant as different locations, different stands, different shadow and slightly different weather, winds, temperature.
An independent ref inspected the pitch and deemed it not fit to host a game. That is a fact. The ref hasn't been bribed or conned.
The question is could Charlton have done more than they did?
Would more covers have helped?
Would have running hot water through the pipes under the pitch on Thursday and Friday have defrosted the pitch?
Would it have been possible to link up a temporarily hired boiler to the pipes so as to pump hot water under the pitch?
Andy Curtis, the stadium manager at the time the pitch was laid and the piping installed said yesterday on twitter that it was.
Charlton are not obliged to use the undersoil system they have as we are in league one. They can choose to or not to turn on the system and some Charlton fans and the Scunthorpe chairman believe they chose not to.
Some think this is a good thing and clever by the club as we have a lot of injuries but may not have them when the game is re-arranged but those taking this stance clearly think the club manipulated the situation to their advantage.
Others believe that Charlton did all they reasonably could and the bad weather beat them as it did as other league one grounds and they is no blame and no manipulation.
Myself, I think the ground staff did all they were allowed to do. The option of hiring a heater costing approximately £5k was rejected as too expensive, outside the existing budget and as not necessary as a postponement was unlikely and if one did occur it might help the team in any case.
Can I prove that? No, my educated guess based on how this regime lies, mis-manages, thinks short term and penny pinches
Seriously, 12 pages of conspiracy theory over a called of fixture when others were also called off today? This site is getting more and more paranoid by the minute.
Orient's, Southend's, and Crawley's games were called off. The pattern there? Lower league games in the south east of England.
Palace game went ahead but they are in the Premier League and are therefore required, and can afford, to have under soil heating.
News flash... we are a lower league team based in the south east of England, just like Orient, Southend, and Crawley.
Our game being called off must be part of some ingenious conspiracy by the Belgian super villain currently plotting our demise though.
While I agree with you regarding the conspiracy theories the big difference between Charlton and orient, Southend and Crawley is that we have the underground heating in place and i doubt very much that they do. All we had to do was hire a boiler for a few days. It's not like he can't afford it
The big issue is whether hiring a boiler for a few days would have been a feasible option, and if so why we didn't do it...
Henners, completely agree it's right to question whether more could and should have been done but anyone questioning whether the pitch was actually playable are quite possibly in the wrong.
The reason why the Ebbsfleet game went ahead is because is just along the road from Gravesend. Everyone knows that Gravesend is the hottest place in the country.
Are people being serious when they try and compare another ground to the valley saying it was playable why wasn't ours?
I think they are.
I agree that whether Ebbsfleet or wherever was playable or not is irrelevant as different locations, different stands, different shadow and slightly different weather, winds, temperature.
An independent ref inspected the pitch and deemed it not fit to host a game. That is a fact. The ref hasn't been bribed or conned.
The question is could Charlton have done more than they did?
Would more covers have helped?
Would have running hot water through the pipes under the pitch on Thursday and Friday have defrosted the pitch?
Would it have been possible to link up a temporarily hired boiler to the pipes so as to pump hot water under the pitch?
Andy Curtis, the stadium manager at the time the pitch was laid and the piping installed said yesterday on twitter that it was.
Charlton are not obliged to use the undersoil system they have as we are in league one. They can choose to or not to turn on the system and some Charlton fans and the Scunthorpe chairman believe they chose not to.
Some think this is a good thing and clever by the club as we have a lot of injuries but may not have them when the game is re-arranged but those taking this stance clearly think the club manipulated the situation to their advantage.
Others believe that Charlton did all they reasonably could and the bad weather beat them as it did as other league one grounds and they is no blame and no manipulation.
Myself, I think the ground staff did all they were allowed to do. The option of hiring a heater costing approximately £5k was rejected as too expensive, outside the existing budget and as not necessary as a postponement was unlikely and if one did occur it might help the team in any case.
Can I prove that? No, my educated guess based on how this regime lies, mis-manages, thinks short term and penny pinches
Thanks HI you put my question much better than me. Clearly as Colt points out different areas are affected differently in cold weather, but knowing/understanding/ maintaining the conditions of an area upon you conduct your business is a pretty major consideration and preparation for difficulties that the weather may present must be a key part of your plan to stage a football match. I suspect the reasons the game did not go ahead can be located in HI's answer above. Which is pretty depressing, all in all.
Henners, completely agree it's right to question whether more could and should have been done but anyone questioning whether the pitch was actually playable are quite possibly in the wrong.
I did not mean to question as to whether the pitch was playable, only WHY it was not in a condition to be playable, in terms of preparation for the game.The call made by the ref was surely the right one. Maybe I did not make that clear enough.
A decent operations manager would have looked at the forecast and spoken to his staff at the start of the week.
A decent operations manager would have taken steps to ensure that the pitch was covered and used all facilities open to him to get the game on, blowers, covers etc.
That happened at Ebbsfleet.
The person in charge at Charlton failed to take these steps, despite having all the pipe work in place as was so heralded 3 years ago; he had the option of hiring a boiler for about £1500 per day, say total cost of £10k to run. I'm sure @Airman Brown could work out the figures better than me but a small investment to get the game on would be less than money lost in rescheduling for a midweek game with a lower attendance.
This is all down to penny pinching. Well done Tony, you've cost your boss more money. You know how much Roland likes to take and not give. A stitch in time and all that?
News flash... we are a lower league team based in the south east of England, just like Orient, Southend, and Crawley. Yes thanks for that Roland , and all within 3 years ! Where will we be in another 3 years ?
A decent operations manager would have looked at the forecast and spoken to his staff at the start of the week.
A decent operations manager would have taken steps to ensure that the pitch was covered and used all facilities open to him to get the game on, blowers, covers etc.
That happened at Ebbsfleet.
The person in charge at Charlton failed to take these steps, despite having all the pipe work in place as was so heralded 3 years ago; he had the option of hiring a boiler for about £1500 per day, say total cost of £10k to run. I'm sure @Airman Brown could work out the figures better than me but a small investment to get the game on would be less than money lost in rescheduling for a midweek game with a lower attendance.
This is all down to penny pinching. Well done Tony, you've cost your boss more money. You know how much Roland likes to take and not give. A stitch in time and all that?
Now that is fairer criticism, and pointing a finger in the right direction in terms of who to ask questions of.
TK may well could and should have done something more about it for the reasons you state.
Doesn't mean Roland told him not to hire one, and if your costs for boiler hire are correct it could have been done within the clubs ecisting budget without the need for Roland to dip into his own pockets again.
A decent operations manager would have looked at the forecast and spoken to his staff at the start of the week.
A decent operations manager would have taken steps to ensure that the pitch was covered and used all facilities open to him to get the game on, blowers, covers etc.
That happened at Ebbsfleet.
The person in charge at Charlton failed to take these steps, despite having all the pipe work in place as was so heralded 3 years ago; he had the option of hiring a boiler for about £1500 per day, say total cost of £10k to run. I'm sure @Airman Brown could work out the figures better than me but a small investment to get the game on would be less than money lost in rescheduling for a midweek game with a lower attendance.
This is all down to penny pinching. Well done Tony, you've cost your boss more money. You know how much Roland likes to take and not give. A stitch in time and all that?
Now that is fairer criticism, and pointing a finger in the right direction in terms of who to ask questions of.
TK may well could and should have done something more about it for the reasons you state.
Doesn't mean Roland told him not to hire one, and if your costs for boiler hire are correct it could have been done within the clubs ecisting budget without the need for Roland to dip into his own pockets again.
Either way another f*** up by the club.
They did not even advertise there was to be a pitch inspection, this surely would have helped fans plan their day.
A decent operations manager would have looked at the forecast and spoken to his staff at the start of the week.
A decent operations manager would have taken steps to ensure that the pitch was covered and used all facilities open to him to get the game on, blowers, covers etc.
That happened at Ebbsfleet.
The person in charge at Charlton failed to take these steps, despite having all the pipe work in place as was so heralded 3 years ago; he had the option of hiring a boiler for about £1500 per day, say total cost of £10k to run. I'm sure @Airman Brown could work out the figures better than me but a small investment to get the game on would be less than money lost in rescheduling for a midweek game with a lower attendance.
This is all down to penny pinching. Well done Tony, you've cost your boss more money. You know how much Roland likes to take and not give. A stitch in time and all that?
Now that is fairer criticism, and pointing a finger in the right direction in terms of who to ask questions of.
TK may well could and should have done something more about it for the reasons you state.
Doesn't mean Roland told him not to hire one, and if your costs for boiler hire are correct it could have been done within the clubs ecisting budget without the need for Roland to dip into his own pockets again.
Someone said to me that the club had all that time when we were in the Premier League to install undersoil heating etc, to be fair they could have but we did have the dome which was highly effective and cheaper, I think.
The thing is that from the Chief Executive down they used to be involved, checking and making sure that the game could go on. As I said in my earlier post, Proper football people who know how to run a football club.
Am I right in saying the football league don't enforce any penalties on whether or not a match goes ahead? I seem to recall that during the 2013/14 season and our pitch was unplayable for quite a few weeks (when Roland bought us), and there was the potential for the League to enforce a punishment if the situation wasn't improved.
So as far as Charlton are concerned, the only negative to the situation is the decrease in sales associated with a rescheduled (most likely mid-week evening.) fixture? (I know in reality that Feb is quite a congested month for fixtures, and a rescheduled fixture is not needed at all - with our luck the fatigue is going to exasperate our injury woes as it is.)
I'm not saying that this was an intentional and/or malicious plan, but it doesn't seem to be a huge disincentive for a team who the play-offs aren't entirely out of reach, and currently find themselves weak yet could find themselves significantly stronger in a few weeks time..?
What happens to suspensions too? I understand Teixeira was unavailable for this match, due to his post-match red card vs Millwall. Is he unavailable for the next scheduled match specifically, or the next played match?
What happens to suspensions too? I understand Teixeira was unavailable for this match, due to his post-match red card vs Millwall. Is he unavailable for the next scheduled match specifically, or the next played match?
Tex still needs to serve his ban, so will missed the next game we play.
Am I right in saying the football league don't enforce any penalties on whether or not a match goes ahead? I seem to recall that during the 2013/14 season and our pitch was unplayable for quite a few weeks (when Roland bought us), and there was the potential for the League to enforce a punishment if the situation wasn't improved.
So as far as Charlton are concerned, the only negative to the situation is the decrease in sales associated with a rescheduled (most likely mid-week evening.) fixture? (I know in reality that Feb is quite a congested month for fixtures, and a rescheduled fixture is not needed at all - with our luck the fatigue is going to exasperate our injury woes as it is.)
I'm not saying that this was an intentional and/or malicious plan, but it doesn't seem to be a huge disincentive for a team who the play-offs aren't entirely out of reach, and currently find themselves weak yet could find themselves significantly stronger in a few weeks time..?
What happens to suspensions too? I understand Teixeira was unavailable for this match, due to his post-match red card vs Millwall. Is he unavailable for the next scheduled match specifically, or the next played match?
There will be some costs yesterday that the club has to forfeit - possibly including any police bill, although I'm not sure about that. Some Valley Express coaches will have been on the road, some agency and other employment costs, programmes if reprinted for the new date. Possibly street cleaning costs. Not sure about perishable food and drink given catering is outsourced. I'd have said £20k in round numbers.
Ticket sales and other matchday revenue are likely to be lower for a midweek rearrangement, especially away supporters, but also home sales. If the season is effectively over when we eventually play Scunthorpe the loss would be exacerbated. I would estimate say another £20-£30k for that all things being equal.
Realistically fans will have lost at least as much again as the club, e.g. even £20 average x 2,000 aborted journeys is £40k. I think the failure to communicate there was an inspection planned so people could look out for it is a key issue in that respect.
I'm sure the club could have negotiated a discount price with Andrews I'm exchange for some extra free advertising...
We could have put an article on the OS thanking Andrews for supplying a temporary boiler to ensure we got the game on. Tweets along the same lines, a big screen display and an announcement over the tannoy etc.
I'm sure it wouldn't have been too difficult to negotiate!
I'm sure the club could have negotiated a discount price with Andrews I'm exchange for some extra free advertising...
We could have put an article on the OS thanking Andrews for supplying a temporary boiler to ensure we got the game on. Tweets along the same lines, a big screen display and an announcement over the tannoy etc.
I'm sure it wouldn't have been too difficult to negotiate!
You assume that there is goodwill with Andrews to do such deals.
It would have been there is the past but as we've seen with Axis and Data Techniques many sponsors are no longer willing to "help the club out" anymore when their support and assistance isn't valued and many of the people they worked with have left.
As with fans, if you piss people off they aren't as cooperative as before.
Can't say if that is the case with Andrew Sykes or not
A decent operations manager would have looked at the forecast and spoken to his staff at the start of the week.
A decent operations manager would have taken steps to ensure that the pitch was covered and used all facilities open to him to get the game on, blowers, covers etc.
That happened at Ebbsfleet.
The person in charge at Charlton failed to take these steps, despite having all the pipe work in place as was so heralded 3 years ago; he had the option of hiring a boiler for about £1500 per day, say total cost of £10k to run. I'm sure @Airman Brown could work out the figures better than me but a small investment to get the game on would be less than money lost in rescheduling for a midweek game with a lower attendance.
This is all down to penny pinching. Well done Tony, you've cost your boss more money. You know how much Roland likes to take and not give. A stitch in time and all that?
Now that is fairer criticism, and pointing a finger in the right direction in terms of who to ask questions of.
TK may well could and should have done something more about it for the reasons you state.
Doesn't mean Roland told him not to hire one, and if your costs for boiler hire are correct it could have been done within the clubs ecisting budget without the need for Roland to dip into his own pockets again.
Someone said to me that the club had all that time when we were in the Premier League to install undersoil heating etc, to be fair they could have but we did have the dome which was highly effective and cheaper, I think.
The thing is that from the Chief Executive down they used to be involved, checking and making sure that the game could go on. As I said in my earlier post, Proper football people who know how to run a football club.
So that might suggest the ground staff as presumably proper football people, don't know what they are doing? I'm sure I've read comments on here that the management team delegate and don't involve themselves in details they dont want to. We can't reasonanly argue that absolutely everything negative is a result of the inexperience of the ownership.
I find it difficult to believe the ground staff knew the game was touch and go unless a temporary heat source was used and were unable to persuade their management the cost was worthwhile. It's a simple risk based analysis to show a small cost to potentially offset a potentially bigger loss. But if we are that short of cash then perhaps you are right but that is at odds with other areas of spend we see which could be curtailed e.g. The tunnel revamp, changes at the training ground, additional cost of changing the coaching staff etc.
If we are determined that there must be an underlying issue here beyond simply being victim to the weather then I'd find it more creditable to believe that perhaps Robinson suggested he wouldn't be unhappy if it were postponed. I doubt that too.
Just one of those things more likely which isn't great but potentially could have been communicated in advance as being 'at risk'.
Might be interesting to know if Scunthorpe spoke to the club before Friday and were warned at all but what's done is done.
I went to Ebbsfleet yesterday. On checking their website at 2.00pm, as well as confirming the match was on, they made a point of saying "if your match is off then come along to Stonebridge Road" It must have had some effect, as 1,400 was well above their normal gate. Not a great lot of skill on show, but pleasing to see my old childhood team, Chelmsford. Chris Dixon had a poor game and their supporters showed their pleasure when he was subbed.
A decent operations manager would have looked at the forecast and spoken to his staff at the start of the week.
A decent operations manager would have taken steps to ensure that the pitch was covered and used all facilities open to him to get the game on, blowers, covers etc.
That happened at Ebbsfleet.
The person in charge at Charlton failed to take these steps, despite having all the pipe work in place as was so heralded 3 years ago; he had the option of hiring a boiler for about £1500 per day, say total cost of £10k to run. I'm sure @Airman Brown could work out the figures better than me but a small investment to get the game on would be less than money lost in rescheduling for a midweek game with a lower attendance.
This is all down to penny pinching. Well done Tony, you've cost your boss more money. You know how much Roland likes to take and not give. A stitch in time and all that?
Now that is fairer criticism, and pointing a finger in the right direction in terms of who to ask questions of.
TK may well could and should have done something more about it for the reasons you state.
Doesn't mean Roland told him not to hire one, and if your costs for boiler hire are correct it could have been done within the clubs ecisting budget without the need for Roland to dip into his own pockets again.
Someone said to me that the club had all that time when we were in the Premier League to install undersoil heating etc, to be fair they could have but we did have the dome which was highly effective and cheaper, I think.
The thing is that from the Chief Executive down they used to be involved, checking and making sure that the game could go on. As I said in my earlier post, Proper football people who know how to run a football club.
I find it difficult to believe the ground staff knew the game was touch and go unless a temporary heat source was used and were unable to persuade their management the cost was worthwhile.
I don't, not at all.
And not because of any failing on the part of the ground staff.
The ground staff would have known the game was in doubt, as there was an inspection on Friday (including the Scunthorpe management) and then one scheduled for 10am
If I read it correctly elsewhere, there wasn't even a Saturday morning inspection at Ebsfleet
The ground staff would have known the game was in doubt, as there was an inspection on Friday (including the Scunthorpe management) and then one scheduled for 10am
If I read it correctly elsewhere, there wasn't even a Saturday morning inspection at Ebsfleet
Interesting. That suggests Scunthorpe didn't chose to tell their fans either during Fruday there was a doubt and an inspection planned?
Comments
Blackheath RFC successfully (in terms of result too) fulfilled their fixture at Kidbrooke Lane Eltham Well Hall.
Now factors like amount of access to direct sunlight may have been a factor, maybe other clubs did things Charlton did not do. I don't know so I am asking. The weather would seem fairly predictable at the moment, so personally I am just wondering how this situation arose, and why it was not able to be resolved, when other clubs relatively close by managed to get their pitch playable.
It's a genuine question.
All we had to do was hire a boiler for a few days. It's not like he can't afford it
I agree that whether Ebbsfleet or wherever was playable or not is irrelevant as different locations, different stands, different shadow and slightly different weather, winds, temperature.
An independent ref inspected the pitch and deemed it not fit to host a game. That is a fact. The ref hasn't been bribed or conned.
The question is could Charlton have done more than they did?
Would more covers have helped?
Would have running hot water through the pipes under the pitch on Thursday and Friday have defrosted the pitch?
Would it have been possible to link up a temporarily hired boiler to the pipes so as to pump hot water under the pitch?
Andy Curtis, the stadium manager at the time the pitch was laid and the piping installed said yesterday on twitter that it was.
Charlton are not obliged to use the undersoil system they have as we are in league one. They can choose to or not to turn on the system and some Charlton fans and the Scunthorpe chairman believe they chose not to.
Some think this is a good thing and clever by the club as we have a lot of injuries but may not have them when the game is re-arranged but those taking this stance clearly think the club manipulated the situation to their advantage.
Others believe that Charlton did all they reasonably could and the bad weather beat them as it did as other league one grounds and they is no blame and no manipulation.
Myself, I think the ground staff did all they were allowed to do. The option of hiring a heater costing approximately £5k was rejected as too expensive, outside the existing budget and as not necessary as a postponement was unlikely and if one did occur it might help the team in any case.
Can I prove that? No, my educated guess based on how this regime lies, mis-manages, thinks short term and penny pinches
Clearly as Colt points out different areas are affected differently in cold weather, but knowing/understanding/ maintaining the conditions of an area upon you conduct your business is a pretty major consideration and preparation for difficulties that the weather may present must be a key part of your plan to stage a football match.
I suspect the reasons the game did not go ahead can be located in HI's answer above.
Which is pretty depressing, all in all.
Maybe I did not make that clear enough.
A decent operations manager would have taken steps to ensure that the pitch was covered and used all facilities open to him to get the game on, blowers, covers etc.
That happened at Ebbsfleet.
The person in charge at Charlton failed to take these steps, despite having all the pipe work in place as was so heralded 3 years ago; he had the option of hiring a boiler for about £1500 per day, say total cost of £10k to run. I'm sure @Airman Brown could work out the figures better than me but a small investment to get the game on would be less than money lost in rescheduling for a midweek game with a lower attendance.
This is all down to penny pinching. Well done Tony, you've cost your boss more money. You know how much Roland likes to take and not give. A stitch in time and all that?
TK may well could and should have done something more about it for the reasons you state.
Doesn't mean Roland told him not to hire one, and if your costs for boiler hire are correct it could have been done within the clubs ecisting budget without the need for Roland to dip into his own pockets again.
They did not even advertise there was to be a pitch inspection, this surely would have helped fans plan their day.
The thing is that from the Chief Executive down they used to be involved, checking and making sure that the game could go on. As I said in my earlier post, Proper football people who know how to run a football club.
So as far as Charlton are concerned, the only negative to the situation is the decrease in sales associated with a rescheduled (most likely mid-week evening.) fixture? (I know in reality that Feb is quite a congested month for fixtures, and a rescheduled fixture is not needed at all - with our luck the fatigue is going to exasperate our injury woes as it is.)
I'm not saying that this was an intentional and/or malicious plan, but it doesn't seem to be a huge disincentive for a team who the play-offs aren't entirely out of reach, and currently find themselves weak yet could find themselves significantly stronger in a few weeks time..?
What happens to suspensions too? I understand Teixeira was unavailable for this match, due to his post-match red card vs Millwall. Is he unavailable for the next scheduled match specifically, or the next played match?
Ticket sales and other matchday revenue are likely to be lower for a midweek rearrangement, especially away supporters, but also home sales. If the season is effectively over when we eventually play Scunthorpe the loss would be exacerbated. I would estimate say another £20-£30k for that all things being equal.
Realistically fans will have lost at least as much again as the club, e.g. even £20 average x 2,000 aborted journeys is £40k. I think the failure to communicate there was an inspection planned so people could look out for it is a key issue in that respect.
We could have put an article on the OS thanking Andrews for supplying a temporary boiler to ensure we got the game on. Tweets along the same lines, a big screen display and an announcement over the tannoy etc.
I'm sure it wouldn't have been too difficult to negotiate!
It would have been there is the past but as we've seen with Axis and Data Techniques many sponsors are no longer willing to "help the club out" anymore when their support and assistance isn't valued and many of the people they worked with have left.
As with fans, if you piss people off they aren't as cooperative as before.
Can't say if that is the case with Andrew Sykes or not
So that might suggest the ground staff as presumably proper football people, don't know what they are doing? I'm sure I've read comments on here that the management team delegate and don't involve themselves in details they dont want to. We can't reasonanly argue that absolutely everything negative is a result of the inexperience of the ownership.
I find it difficult to believe the ground staff knew the game was touch and go unless a temporary heat source was used and were unable to persuade their management the cost was worthwhile. It's a simple risk based analysis to show a small cost to potentially offset a potentially bigger loss. But if we are that short of cash then perhaps you are right but that is at odds with other areas of spend we see which could be curtailed e.g. The tunnel revamp, changes at the training ground, additional cost of changing the coaching staff etc.
If we are determined that there must be an underlying issue here beyond simply being victim to the weather then I'd find it more creditable to believe that perhaps Robinson suggested he wouldn't be unhappy if it were postponed. I doubt that too.
Just one of those things more likely which isn't great but potentially could have been communicated in advance as being 'at risk'.
Might be interesting to know if Scunthorpe spoke to the club before Friday and were warned at all but what's done is done.
And not because of any failing on the part of the ground staff.
If I read it correctly elsewhere, there wasn't even a Saturday morning inspection at Ebsfleet