[Waller is my hero]

That was just embarrassing from Oldham fans at the end, just got home to see what happened on TNT…shameful being physical and pushing over Tyrer when they ran on the pitch.

It was like they’d won the World Cup …they didn’t deserve anything from that game…& Unsworth saying they deserved & better team with a great performance…glad he’s not our manager.

And the ref at the end WOW!

We were the better team….bizarre ending

[Benno Spire]

Oldham were Bunkum quite simply and scum fans who soon ran away when town fans went forward and cowardly attack on Tyrer

[Burnsy]

There was some Oldham fans looking for fights in the car park shouting n screaming at car n trying to get in one car .

[Blue roan lily]

Burnsy, on 19 August 2023 - 03:26 PM, said:

There was some Oldham fans looking for fights in the car park shouting n screaming at car n trying to get in one car .

They are an embarrassment to their club..

[dart in the crossbar]

On the ref's final whistle decision.

If, as has been reported the ref has said that he ended the game early due to safety concerns, it would seem that the ref 'terminated' the game (due to safety concerns).

If so, this may be relevant.

'Using the powers given him by Law 5, the referee may stop, suspend or terminate the match, at his discretion, for any infringements of the Laws or for grave disorder (see below). If he decides to terminate the match, he must provide the appropriate authorities with a match report which includes information on any disciplinary action taken against players, and/or team officials and any other incidents which occurred before, during or after the match. In no event may the referee determine the winner of any match, terminated or not. Nor may the referee decide whether or not a match must be replayed. Both of those decisions are up to the competition authority, i. e., the league, cup, tournament, etc.'

So it may be that the NL will decide what happens next. The risky precedent on offer to them being that they nod through the result opening the door for other 'fans' to mimic that of the Oldham louts. The wise move would be to either replay the game with no Oldham fans or to award Town the points and a 3:0 (or whatever the norm is) result.



We'll see.

[1978blue]

dart in the crossbar, on 19 August 2023 - 03:54 PM, said:

On the ref's final whistle decision.

If, as has been reported the ref has said that he ended the game early due to safety concerns, it would seem that the ref 'terminated' the game (due to safety concerns).

If so, this may be relevant.

'Using the powers given him by Law 5, the referee may stop, suspend or terminate the match, at his discretion, for any infringements of the Laws or for grave disorder (see below). If he decides to terminate the match, he must provide the appropriate authorities with a match report which includes information on any disciplinary action taken against players, and/or team officials and any other incidents which occurred before, during or after the match. In no event may the referee determine the winner of any match, terminated or not. Nor may the referee decide whether or not a match must be replayed. Both of those decisions are up to the competition authority, i. e., the league, cup, tournament, etc.'

So it may be that the NL will decide what happens next. The risky precedent on offer to them being that they nod through the result opening the door for other 'fans' to mimic that of the Oldham louts. The wise move would be to either replay the game with no Oldham fans or to award Town the points and a 3:0 (or whatever the norm is) result.



We'll see.

Never going to happen mate , this is the National League we're talking about!!

[Benno Spire]

dart in the crossbar, on 19 August 2023 - 03:54 PM, said:

On the ref's final whistle decision.

If, as has been reported the ref has said that he ended the game early due to safety concerns, it would seem that the ref 'terminated' the game (due to safety concerns).

If so, this may be relevant.

'Using the powers given him by Law 5, the referee may stop, suspend or terminate the match, at his discretion, for any infringements of the Laws or for grave disorder (see below). If he decides to terminate the match, he must provide the appropriate authorities with a match report which includes information on any disciplinary action taken against players, and/or team officials and any other incidents which occurred before, during or after the match. In no event may the referee determine the winner of any match, terminated or not. Nor may the referee decide whether or not a match must be replayed. Both of those decisions are up to the competition authority, i. e., the league, cup, tournament, etc.'

So it may be that the NL will decide what happens next. The risky precedent on offer to them being that they nod through the result opening the door for other 'fans' to mimic that of the Oldham louts. The wise move would be to either replay the game with no Oldham fans or to award Town the points and a 3:0 (or whatever the norm is) result.



We'll see.

The NL board have no balls, they will probably lay all the blame on Chesterfield

[Lincs Spireite]

Benno Spire, on 19 August 2023 - 04:01 PM, said:

The NL board have no balls, they will probably lay all the blame on Chesterfield

Correct, they will blame our stewarding

[DerbySpireite59]

dart in the crossbar, on 19 August 2023 - 03:54 PM, said:

On the ref's final whistle decision.

If, as has been reported the ref has said that he ended the game early due to safety concerns, it would seem that the ref 'terminated' the game (due to safety concerns).

If so, this may be relevant.

'Using the powers given him by Law 5, the referee may stop, suspend or terminate the match, at his discretion, for any infringements of the Laws or for grave disorder (see below). If he decides to terminate the match, he must provide the appropriate authorities with a match report which includes information on any disciplinary action taken against players, and/or team officials and any other incidents which occurred before, during or after the match. In no event may the referee determine the winner of any match, terminated or not. Nor may the referee decide whether or not a match must be replayed. Both of those decisions are up to the competition authority, i. e., the league, cup, tournament, etc.'

So it may be that the NL will decide what happens next. The risky precedent on offer to them being that they nod through the result opening the door for other 'fans' to mimic that of the Oldham louts. The wise move would be to either replay the game with no Oldham fans or to award Town the points and a 3:0 (or whatever the norm is) result.



We'll see.

Reported by who?

[Spireite61]

dart in the crossbar, on 19 August 2023 - 03:54 PM, said:

On the ref's final whistle decision.

If, as has been reported the ref has said that he ended the game early due to safety concerns, it would seem that the ref 'terminated' the game (due to safety concerns).

If so, this may be relevant.

'Using the powers given him by Law 5, the referee may stop, suspend or terminate the match, at his discretion, for any infringements of the Laws or for grave disorder (see below). If he decides to terminate the match, he must provide the appropriate authorities with a match report which includes information on any disciplinary action taken against players, and/or team officials and any other incidents which occurred before, during or after the match. In no event may the referee determine the winner of any match, terminated or not. Nor may the referee decide whether or not a match must be replayed. Both of those decisions are up to the competition authority, i. e., the league, cup, tournament, etc.'

So it may be that the NL will decide what happens next. The risky precedent on offer to them being that they nod through the result opening the door for other 'fans' to mimic that of the Oldham louts. The wise move would be to either replay the game with no Oldham fans or to award Town the points and a 3:0 (or whatever the norm is) result.



We'll see.

The very least that should happen is Oldham have the point taken off them - whether they give us the two points back is another question. But surely it cannot be that actions of fans determine whether a game gets abandoned and there be no come back on that club.

[Benno Spire]

If Carling made decisions the ref and linesmen would review the goal away from the concerns of their own and player safety and decide correctly that Fondop is in an offside position and was interfering with play and disallow the goal and agree the remaining 2 minutes is played behind closed doors and Norwood sent off for inciting the crowd and getting a 10 game ban.

[warfey is a spireite]

dart in the crossbar, on 19 August 2023 - 03:54 PM, said:

On the ref's final whistle decision.

If, as has been reported the ref has said that he ended the game early due to safety concerns, it would seem that the ref 'terminated' the game (due to safety concerns).

If so, this may be relevant.

'Using the powers given him by Law 5, the referee may stop, suspend or terminate the match, at his discretion, for any infringements of the Laws or for grave disorder (see below). If he decides to terminate the match, he must provide the appropriate authorities with a match report which includes information on any disciplinary action taken against players, and/or team officials and any other incidents which occurred before, during or after the match. In no event may the referee determine the winner of any match, terminated or not. Nor may the referee decide whether or not a match must be replayed. Both of those decisions are up to the competition authority, i. e., the league, cup, tournament, etc.'

So it may be that the NL will decide what happens next. The risky precedent on offer to them being that they nod through the result opening the door for other 'fans' to mimic that of the Oldham louts. The wise move would be to either replay the game with no Oldham fans or to award Town the points and a 3:0 (or whatever the norm is) result.



We'll see.

But can this be done ,I mean award us the result?

[warfey is a spireite]

I was that angry I left fillet steak and chips and had nowt

[metallilad]

Lincs Spireite, on 19 August 2023 - 04:04 PM, said:

Correct, they will blame our stewarding

This is ultimately what's going to happen. They were under our roof, so ultimately we're our responsibility. There should have been enough stewarding to prevent any such action by the away supporters because with so many of them running onto the field of play would ultimately be deemed as a health & safety matter. Which was proven by the push on Tyrer.

The National league will want to make a precedence out of us because we are a big club and it will send a message out to the rest of the league.
I don't agree with it, but I can see it playing out this way.

[lindave]

I feared for my daughter and 2 young grandaughters sat not far away from the corner, one of whom wwas crying with fear. I dashed across from behind Cookie to make sure they were ok and stood in front of them. The tot`al nobs who came onto the pitch should be banned for years, especially the idiot who pushed Tyrer. Coming out of the ground one of our idiots was mouthing off saying they will ge
t plenty of retalliation from our lot their place. Hope not its near the end of season and we dont want any sanctions against our club. We travel in big numbers and our fans always behave exemplory and make the club proud, the whole of the NL who saw the match on BT will realise that the Oldham fans are nobs.

[danblue]

metallilad, on 19 August 2023 - 05:27 PM, said:

This is ultimately what's going to happen. They were under our roof, so ultimately we're our responsibility. There should have been enough stewarding to prevent any such action by the away supporters because with so many of them running onto the field of play would ultimately be deemed as a health & safety matter. Which was proven by the push on Tyrer.

The National league will want to make a precedence out of us because we are a big club and it will send a message out to the rest of the league.
I don't agree with it, but I can see it playing out this way.

We would have needed 200 stewards lined up with riot shields to physically stop them storming the pitch. It's a near impossible task to prevent it if the mob decides they're going to do it

[CFC91]

metallilad, on 19 August 2023 - 05:27 PM, said:

This is ultimately what's going to happen. They were under our roof, so ultimately we're our responsibility. There should have been enough stewarding to prevent any such action by the away supporters because with so many of them running onto the field of play would ultimately be deemed as a health & safety matter. Which was proven by the push on Tyrer.

The National league will want to make a precedence out of us because we are a big club and it will send a message out to the rest of the league.
I don't agree with it, but I can see it playing out this way.

Our stewards were way more bothered with fans on the Kop to even bother with the away fans. Was a line of 20/30 odd at the front for the last 20 mins or so.

They let all the Oldham fans congregate at the front for the last 10, was always going to happen if they scored, and annoyingly they did

We’ll get in trouble for it but hopefully learn lessons that the Kop nowadays is pretty tame and nobody was even at the front remotely close to going on the pitch

[metallilad]

danblue, on 19 August 2023 - 05:32 PM, said:

We would have needed 200 stewards lined up with riot shields to physically stop them storming the pitch. It's a near impossible task to prevent it if the mob decides they're going to do it

Unfortunately. That's for the powers that be to decide.

[valemadness]

Lincs Spireite, on 19 August 2023 - 04:04 PM, said:

Correct, they will blame our stewarding

If Norwood had ran over to his own fans instead of our fans, Oldham fans may have stayed more contained. It could be argued he incited crowd trouble with his actions.

[Westbars Spireite]

CFC91, on 19 August 2023 - 05:32 PM, said:

Our stewards were way more bothered with fans on the Kop to even bother with the away fans. Was a line of 20/30 odd at the front for the last 20 mins or so.

They let all the Oldham fans congregate at the front for the last 10, was always going to happen if they scored, and annoyingly they did

We’ll get in trouble for it but hopefully learn lessons that the Kop nowadays is pretty tame and nobody was even at the front remotely close to going on the pitch

I assume W7 was only sparsely populated. Could have become a real issue if more of our lot had jumped over to confront them.