Matches Crewe

Is it just me or do things make even less sense after reading that?

Silence from Crewe is better than poorly written pieces like that.

What exactly Artell is calling 'unacceptable' from us is not clear? My guess would be KR suggesting that we should be given the three points, but he was clear that this would only be if Crewe had not followed protocol.

Analyzing that article further:

The Crewe manager says he is disappointed that the "integrity" of his club has been questioned after they were put in a position of having to inform the EFL they could not fulfil the fixture ... But Artell says he and his players were ready to play until the drama unfolded behind the scenes.

So they informed the EFL that they couldn't play but said they were ready to play? How does that work?

"[Artell] I don't know why the game was called off. We've not broken any rules with Public Health England and the EFL and it is only because Oxford were kicking up a stink ... There is a problem with testing and it leaves it open for people to manipulate the system. I take my hat off to Karl (Robinson) it was a clever thing to do."

Artell contradicts himself there. He doesn't know why the game has been called on yet in turn blames us for it. For what exactly? Has KR intentionally dobbed them into the EFL ahead of the game by spotting something Crewe haven't seen?

If ever there needed to be an explanation - if just to put the clubs and managers at ease - now is the time to do it. RadOx and the OM should be hounding the EFL for an answer here. It's so confusing who is blaming who now!
 
Silence from Crewe is better than poorly written pieces like that.

What exactly Artell is calling 'unacceptable' from us is not clear? My guess would be KR suggesting that we should be given the three points, but he was clear that this would only be if Crewe had not followed protocol.

Analyzing that article further:

The Crewe manager says he is disappointed that the "integrity" of his club has been questioned after they were put in a position of having to inform the EFL they could not fulfil the fixture ... But Artell says he and his players were ready to play until the drama unfolded behind the scenes.

So they informed the EFL that they couldn't play but said they were ready to play? How does that work?

"[Artell] I don't know why the game was called off. We've not broken any rules with Public Health England and the EFL and it is only because Oxford were kicking up a stink ... There is a problem with testing and it leaves it open for people to manipulate the system. I take my hat off to Karl (Robinson) it was a clever thing to do."

Artell contradicts himself there. He doesn't know why the game has been called on yet in turn blames us for it. For what exactly? Has KR intentionally dobbed them into the EFL ahead of the game by spotting something Crewe haven't seen?

If ever there needed to be an explanation - if just to put the clubs and managers at ease - now is the time to do it. RadOx and the OM should be hounding the EFL for an answer here. It's so confusing who is blaming who now!

Well Crewe have called off both games so they are to blame, assuming there is any going around. But considering the timing, the more this strikes me that they are trying to muddy the waters as they are worried about losing points.
 
Wouldn’t it be nice if the Oxford mail instead of flicking through various Facebook pages did some actual journalism here and at least attempt to get answers from the EFL and the like..

Oh and Bazzer, deep breathes now !
 
TBF this is the man who thought it OK to not test the whole team after getting a confirmed case, then pitch up at the ground with a team who had been in close contact with a newly confirmed case and demand that the game be played. And wanted congratulating after for being honest. No surprise if KR didnt trust them, I dont. Football is a game, covid isnt.
 
Man I've been trying really hard to see both sides to this and not to just see Crewe as agitators but f**k me they're making it hard.

That is honestly a Trumpian statement from Artell. Gaslighting, hyperbole and contradiction from one sentence to the next, all in one short article. And that's before you consider his words and actions at our place on the 3rd.

I think the poster who suggested they're close to a points deduction might be on the right track. That would explain the attempts to shift the blame onto Oxford and KR (providing a convenient scapegoat if they are deducted points), as well as the pointed reference to "the integrity of competition" in the interview - very similar to the meaningless repetitions of 'but what about the integrity of the competition!!' by Sunderland, Peterborough etc fans in June. It is an extraordinary statement, and one they would have been unlikely to make if their backs weren't right up against the wall.
 
A fuller interview


More juicy stuff from Artell.

“I completely understand the first postponement because no-one could foresee that happening on the day of the game ..."

Err, maybe Omar Beckles could for it was he that had a test. The results were going to come through at some point.

“I understand that the EFL act cautiously but there has to be some justification to it and not just based on falsehoods and accusations from another football club and them kicking off. That is what happens when you cannot test. We have been tested again this week because of this and we have had them all back, players and staff…all negative."

Can't test or won't test, David? You could have had the whole squad tested after Wintle went off but didn't forcing one of your own defenders to seek out a private one.

The above still doesn't explain the reasons for the postponement (what on earth happened there by the way and why is KR calling their players?), but it still shows that Artell still believes his club did everything right when they didn't.

@Crewe - your thoughts on this soap opera would be welcome too.
 
Last edited:
A fuller interview

Very telling that this has been published three days after the 'disgusting' events apparently occurred. A bit of time needed to get the story straight, perhaps?

Also very strange that he should say, "I don’t have an answer for why the game was postponed. That is the honest truth. ... we were ready to play a game of football on Tuesday and for whatever reason, someone didn’t want to play." Yet the other article, admittedly from what looks like a less official source, says, "on Tuesday with the potential for a misconduct charge hanging over them ahead of the re-arranged visit to the Kassam Stadium, Crewe informed the governing body they couldn't play."

Seems very odd that a club would request that a game not be played, but not inform the manager about it. Scarcely credible, in fact...
 
Very telling that this has been published three days after the 'disgusting' events apparently occurred. A bit of time needed to get the story straight, perhaps?

Also very strange that he should say, "I don’t have an answer for why the game was postponed. That is the honest truth. ... we were ready to play a game of football on Tuesday and for whatever reason, someone didn’t want to play." Yet the other article, admittedly from what looks like a less official source, says, "on Tuesday with the potential for a misconduct charge hanging over them ahead of the re-arranged visit to the Kassam Stadium, Crewe informed the governing body they couldn't play."

Seems very odd that a club would request that a game not be played, but not inform the manager about it. Scarcely credible, in fact...

Yet this was the wording from the EFL.


What is it, Crewe? You could and wanted to play or you couldn't? As a poster says above, Artell's rant is gaslighting.
 
Yet this was the wording from the EFL.


What is it, Crewe? You could and wanted to play or you couldn't? As a poster says above, Artell's rant is gaslighting.
"Following consultation with the Club, they have determined they're unable to fulfil this fixture."

This is ambiguous. Does it mean that the EFL have determined Crewe are unable to fulfil this fixture, or that Crewe have determined that they themselves are unable to fulfil the fixture? It's quite an important distinction, based on what Artell has now said.
 
Sounds to me like they were asked if they'd tested following saturdays game and they hadnt...again. Hence the tests last day or so
 
"Following consultation with the Club, they have determined they're unable to fulfil this fixture."

This is ambiguous. Does it mean that the EFL have determined Crewe are unable to fulfil this fixture, or that Crewe have determined that they themselves are unable to fulfil the fixture? It's quite an important distinction, based on what Artell has now said.
"Decision has been taken after the club considered the relevant guidance from the EFL and Government"

They have failed to meet the guidance in some way
 
"Following consultation with the Club, they have determined they're unable to fulfil this fixture."

This is ambiguous. Does it mean that the EFL have determined Crewe are unable to fulfil this fixture, or that Crewe have determined that they themselves are unable to fulfil the fixture? It's quite an important distinction, based on what Artell has now said.
As @Jerome'SAle mentions above, the first line of the second paragraph answers that. If the Club, being Crewe, considered the guidance from the EFL and government and realised the game couldn't go ahead, so be it.

Artell's comments are even more bewildering. If the EFL statement mentions his club was the reason behind the postponement, how on earth can he say he doesn't know the reason why? Has no executive at Crewe whatsoever explained it to him? Has Artell not asked his board, chairman, MD, whoever in the last three days why the game couldn't go ahead?

Pick up a phone, send a text/email, seek out the relevant person in their office. Your club called it off, David Artell, you seek out the answers before spinning this back on Oxford.
 
Back
Top Bottom