Matches Crewe

[Oufc28]

Full press conference. 15 minutes long

He is making our team talk for when we play them a very simple one..

 

[mooro]

TBH I can understand our club's concerns. It seems like Crewe did not do full squad testing after Wintle was +ve and only took this action after Beckles +ve test became public. More players then did test +ve last week so I can understand that we would want some assurance that the squad coming down Tuesday had current tests. If there was any ambiguity or lack of clarity over that from Crewe then to protect our players has to be paramount.
The behaviour of Crewe on 3rd Oct probably undermined our confidence that they are following protocols and thus raised our concerns to a higher level.

EFL/PHE gave Crewe an ultimatum - if you cannot give assurances of X, Y & Z, then the game cannot go ahead.
CRewe were unable to give those assurances, so the game couldn't go ahead.

Whether that means that Crewe called it off because they couldnt give the assurances or the EFL/PHE called it because they weren't given the assurances, is sort of immaterial and a matter of semantics - the outcome of the conversation was the same either way...

Mind you, it does also raise the wisdom of re-arranging the game so soon after the first one, and before any outbreak had been dealt with....

 

[Dilla]

Crewe fans are a strange bunch aren't they.

 

[bazzer9461]

So who was responsible because someone is LYING

 

[Wallop]

EFL/PHE gave Crewe an ultimatum - if you cannot give assurances of X, Y & Z, then the game cannot go ahead.
CRewe were unable to give those assurances, so the game couldn't go ahead.

Whether that means that Crewe called it off because they couldnt give the assurances or the EFL/PHE called it because they weren't given the assurances, is sort of immaterial and a matter of semantics - the outcome of the conversation was the same either way...

Mind you, it does also raise the wisdom of re-arranging the game so soon after the first one, and before any outbreak had been dealt with....

It's looking that way but as a previous posting of mine said, what is needed is a CLEAR AND ACCURATE STATEMENT FROM THE EFL EXPLAINING THE REASON(S) FOR THE POSTPONEMENT.

Until then all of our posts have an element of guesswork and conjecture to them.

 

[ttg17]

Ok - so if (and this is not officially confirmed yet) Oxford did report Crewe to PHE then what is the harm in that? I know from seniors at OUFC that they were genuinely shocked at the lax attitude of Crewe officials regarding the first postponement. PHE presumably would then talk to Crewe and ascertain if C19 protocols have been followed or not. If they have, it's game on, if they haven't it's game off and KR has every right to start questioning their behaviour and whether points should be awarded. Given the first episode, I'm not surprised that OUFC asked PHE to check that all was well at Gresty Road.

I'm not trying to score any points here (no pun intended) but what in the above summary could be deemed poor behaviour by OUFC? If I have a concern about the safety of my employees at work due to a third party's actions, the first thing I would do is seek the intervention of the right Executive Body to ensure that regulations are being adhered to. Indeed, not to do so could be seen as a dereliction of my duty of care responsibilities to my staff and could land me in hot water and facing legal claims.

Very well said.

For all Artell’s bluster, the fact remains if Crewe were considered by PHE and the EFL to be in a position to play, the match would have been played.

 

[Kamal]

Full press conference. 15 minutes long

What an utter cock he is.

 

[bazzer9461]

EFL/PHE gave Crewe an ultimatum - if you cannot give assurances of X, Y & Z, then the game cannot go ahead.
CRewe were unable to give those assurances, so the game couldn't go ahead.

Whether that means that Crewe called it off because they couldnt give the assurances or the EFL/PHE called it because they weren't given the assurances, is sort of immaterial and a matter of semantics - the outcome of the conversation was the same either way...

Mind you, it does also raise the wisdom of re-arranging the game so soon after the first one, and before any outbreak had been dealt with....

But they played Wigan 4 days previously surely questions have to be asked about that as well if our game was called off.

 

[Essexyellows]

Unless evidence of the conversation was within the messages, of course.

Which is what I said...................... in the bit you quoted.

I`m sticking with my assessment that there are so many "mis-truths" (or blatant lies) being told all the participants can no longer tell their proverbial a*** from their elbow.
Crewe have called a game off, twice.
They forfeit the game and we all move on and maybe get the season finished.

 

[m]

But they played Wigan 4 days previously surely questions have to be asked about that as well if our game was called off.

Sheridan thinks so:

Wigan Athletic boss wants answers over Covid controversy

John Sheridan says he has left the peculiar case of Crewe Alexandra's Covid controversy 'in other people's hands' after Wigan Athletic's visit last weekend.

www.wigantoday.net

 

[bazzer9461]

Sheridan thinks so:

Wigan Athletic boss wants answers over Covid controversy

John Sheridan says he has left the peculiar case of Crewe Alexandra's Covid controversy 'in other people's hands' after Wigan Athletic's visit last weekend.

www.wigantoday.net

Would love to know why @Crewe is still adamant that his railway set team have done nothing wrong. Surely from the many posts from various posters and attachments added they’re either all lying or Crewe have acted diabolically..... I know
Which one I would believe.

 

[Crewe]

Bazza, I must admit, I absolutely love reading your posts. Fantastic entertainment. However, for what seems like the billionth time, I never said Crewe did nothing wrong. Or at least I think I didn’t. If I did, please quote me?

 

[Gobbledgook]

If only common sense had prevailed..................

3 October 2020 09:00
OB "Gaffa I've just had a =+ve test"
DA "Hi Karl its David Artell on the phone. Really sorry to tell you this but I've just found out I've a +ve tested player who's travelled down with us, so obviously we can't come anywhere near your ground and we'll have to postpone under the circumstances"
KR "No worries David, totally understandable. Thanks for letting us know and hope all of your players get well soon. Looking forward to welcoming you back for the rearranged fixture".

.........then all of this BS wouldn't be happening!

 

[Crewe]

Which is what I said...................... in the bit you quoted.

I`m sticking with my assessment that there are so many "mis-truths" (or blatant lies) being told all the participants can no longer tell their proverbial a*** from their elbow.
Crewe have called a game off, twice.
They forfeit the game and we all move on and maybe get the season finished.

Excellent. So we agree that I was telling you things I was told.

 

[brassmonkey]

So it looks like we (oufc) checked with PHE that crewe were following covid regulations and werent so the game was called off. That correct?

 

[Crewe]

So it looks like we (oufc) checked with PHE that crewe were following covid regulations and werent so the game was called off. That correct?

Ummm, in regards to not following regulations, unsure. On the face of it that would seem to be the case, but Artell says in the press conference that no PHE regulations were broken by Crewe.

 

[AbbeyOx]

 

[Oxt1]

View attachment 4777

Don't knock it, this is the only thing to read whilst refreshing and hoping something pops up in the transfer deadline section!!!

 

[YellowShark]

In one of the articles released today (not sure which one) Artell says the EFL called it off. I was told PHE called it off, and the EFL relayed that to the club. So that differs slightly to what Artell said.

However artell did say PHE had been into the training ground this week to check the clubs protocols. So PHE have definitely been involved. So it seems to me that they have lent on the EFL. I was told ‘we can’t play again until we get the squad tested’. That has got to have come from PHE.

That actually makes some sort of sense. My guess is events went something like this:

Following the first postponement and subsequent Wigan game, PHE (possibly at the request of some third party) decide to check Crewe's C!9 protocols.

PHE find that protocols are not being correctly followed and inform the club and EFL of this. The match is then postponed.

Everything else that comes from Crewe (club not poster) is simply badly handled PR damage limitation.

BTW PHE do not generally "lean on" people or organisations, and they do try and be discrete where possible. They much prefer the cooperation of the people the work and will therefore try to avoid causing embarrassment if they can.

 

[Junior_1]

NO

All about power Baz... or self importance..