Match Day Thread Hull City v Watford

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

City win?

  • Total voters
    54
Muffinthegoat said:
Humberside did say that just after 2.00, but when we were driving home they clarified that the initial suggestion was wrong and that the sprinklers hadn’t been on at all. If you watch Look North tonight they have pictures of the big grass heaters over the area, and also of a blow torch being used.
Click to expand...
I didn’t hear that clarification, but it’s reassuring. As I said it seemed absolutely ridiculous at the time.
 
Charon said:
I drove all the way to Colchester a few years back to find out the pitch was waterlogged and the game was off - at least I didn't act like a Watford fanny wittering about it
Click to expand...
Yepp, I was there....I actually got inside the gate after the postponement and had a look at the pitch. It was 95% playable, but for a small area in one corner, slap bang to the corner post, where there was some water....If ever there was a case of a home side not wanting the game to go ahead it was Colchester.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Charon
Help! said:
I didn’t hear that clarification, but it’s reassuring. As I said it seemed absolutely ridiculous at the time.
Click to expand...
I dont think the sprinkers were used on Sunday (matchday) but were used after New Years Day match but the weather has been freezing since then and froze and made it worse than it needed to be and never has before.
 
PLT said:
Whoever is feeding Baz and Hoggarth this line of "it was a joint decision" and "all parties agreed" (presumably someone at the club) is doing no one any favours. It makes no sense, seemingly contradicts the EFL rulebook and fuels the Watford conspiracy theorists.

To me there were two clear issues on the day: why was the pitch surrounding area unplayable when it's never been an issue before and the conditions were not particularly extreme; and why was the decision made so late in the day. It was really poor on both fronts. But now there is the third issue that City are putting out unconvincing and confusing messages which clear nothing up and add fuel to the fire.
Click to expand...
But Hogarth clarified that when he says all parties agreed he means in the sense you agree to pay a fine. I.e ref calls game off, city and Watford agree with ref's decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rovertiger
SydneyTiger14 said:
But Hogarth clarified that when he says all parties agreed he means in the sense you agree to pay a fine. I.e ref calls game off, city and Watford agree with ref's decision.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if it's because your not a Brit ( parking fines are a sore subject here due to cowboy firms ) and just don't understand what he said, but his meaning wasn't that.... The reference to parking fine was that you don't agree but reluctantly accept to pay it because there's nothing you can do about it
 
  • Like
Reactions: SW3 Chelsea Tiger
Howdentiger2 said:
I'm not sure if it's because your not a Brit ( parking fines are a sore subject here due to cowboy firms ) and just don't understand what he said, but his meaning wasn't that.... The reference to parking fine was that you don't agree but reluctantly accept to pay it because there's nothing you can do about it
Click to expand...

Yes, funnily enough parking fines exist here too and I understood what he meant which is why I was clarifying to PLT that Hoggarth was not saying that it was a joint decision but a joint acceptance. Which is why I even said in my post that the ref made the decision (akin to issuing a fine) and City and Watford accepted it (i.e. reluctantly accepting to pay because there's nothing you can do).
 
SydneyTiger14 said:
Yes, funnily enough parking fines exist here too and I understood what he meant which is why I was clarifying to PLT that Hoggarth was not saying that it was a joint decision but a joint acceptance. Which is why I even said in my post that the ref made the decision (akin to issuing a fine) and City and Watford accepted it (i.e. reluctantly accepting to pay because there's nothing you can do).
Click to expand...

Parking fines exist in Australia, bloody hell I never knew that..... Every days a school day and all that!

You just really can't help being a smug sanctimonious twat can you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ric Glasgow, Mckechnie Orange, SW3 Chelsea Tiger and 2 others
Howdentiger2 said:
Parking fines exist in Australia, bloody hell I never knew that..... Every days a school day and all that!

You just really can't help being a smug sanctimonious twat can you.
Click to expand...

When you're condescending in the first place as if I don't understand the concept of paying fines, yeah I'll give it right back. Re-read my original post to PLT. I understood entirely that Hoggarth was making the comparison to reluctantly paying a fine because you have no choice. PLT's issue was that it seemed the local journos were suggesting Watford were involved in making the decision when Hoggarth clarified that wasn't the case.
 
SydneyTiger14 said:
When you're condescending in the first place as if I don't understand the concept of paying fines, yeah I'll give it right back. Re-read my original post to PLT. I understood entirely that Hoggarth was making the comparison to reluctantly paying a fine because you have no choice. PLT's issue was that it seemed the local journos were suggesting Watford were involved in making the decision when Hoggarth clarified that wasn't the case.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your rant.
 
balkan tiger said:
A very poor one
Click to expand...

It's just being used to convey the fact that someone can accept something even if they don't really want to, that's all. A fine is actually quite a good analogy for that as you pay a fine even though you don't want to as you have no choice.
 
For the sake of clarity, here’s my take on the situation.
The ref said the playing surface is fine but the outfield isn’t at the moment.The HSE bod said the outfield will need to be de iced before I can give it the nod.
The grounds person, asked do we use the sprinklers on the pitch boss.
The boss said do everything you normally do.
The grounds person said Boss the sprinklers have made the tech area icy.
The boss said tell the HSE bod and get it ****ing sorted.
The HSE bod said to the ref. The outfield needs to be de iced before I give it the nod.
The ref said didn’t we have this conversation an hour ago?
The gaffer tells the players to warm up but avoid the tech area because the boss said use the sprinklers and the grounds person did and now it’s as slippery as a pole dancers fanny.
The Watford gaffer wakes up from his slumber and sends his players out, but because of sensitivities doesn’t mention pole dancers or fannies, he just puts on his head master voice and shouts Walk don’t Run as the players cross the tech area.
The valiant grounds person uses a captured dragon to try to free the ice maiden (sorry got carried away).
It doesn’t work and the smell of burnt Astro turf draws the attention of the HSE bod who says “What the ****, the bastards haven’t got safety boots on or anything, that’s it!”
He speaks to the ref and the ref says, I have had enough of you saying that the outfield is icy, that’s it, I’m off and I am taking me ball with me.
The Watford gaffer is woken from another slumber by the Hull gaffer who points to the half eaten, week old turkey butty the Watford gaffer has in his hand and says “ It’s off” the Watford gaffer says “Yer, I know, the lads will be disappointed, my missus made enough for them all to have two each”

And my version is closest to the truth.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: TinpotTiger, Howden Tigress, springtiger and 4 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back