Saturday, 12 May 2012

Play-Offs

Sheffield United failed to score at Stevenage last night but they take a precious draw back to Bramall Lane and must be favourites for the Wembley show-down. I have been rooting for the Blades to get up for months but the Ched Evans affair has left a bad taste in the mouth. Huddersfield have to negotiate a tricky looking encounter with MK Dons today away from home. I have a sneaking feeling they may be chasing the return leg on Tuesday.


Also today, of interest only to probably three Addicks, Elgin City go to Albion Rovers defending a precarious looking one-nil lead in their play-off trial to swap places with their opponents and reach the Scottish Second Division for the first time. I used to work with the current Albion Rovers Chairman, Frank Meade. Frank enjoyed his best ever season supporting his hometown side of Coatbridge last year but they have struggled to find their feet in the Second Division. No time for sentiment - C'mon Elgin! If they can make the big time, I will definitely get up for a home game or two next season.

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

And me! I've been an Albion Rovers fan for 37 years since my primary school classmate's uncle played for them!
Hongkongaddick

Anonymous said...

I don't see how Ched as an individual with his individual actions should leave a bad taste in your mouth about an entire club. Its Sheffield United that have suffered from Ched's actions and Sheffield Wednesday that therefore benefitted from them.

Dave said...

Anon - something of Ched-rape-denial been going on at Bramall Lane since the verdict.

Kings Hill Addick said...

Also Anon, there is some question in my mind if, in his absence, someone else would have sored the 35 goals Evans scored

Anonymous said...

Dave, There has been no denial, shock yes and a few fans that were out of order again mostly due to shock. I don't think as a club Sheffield United have denied it. What they haven't done is condemn it. This is due to the fact that there is an appeal so legally they would damage themselves if they said something that offered an opinion.

Anonymous said...

Kings Hill.. I don't want to sound like a defender of all anti Blades sentiment here. Obviously it is very difficult to replace a 35 goal a season man especially with three games to go. But just to remind you that when we were top just before you overtook us at the begining of the season Ched had not played for us. He was out for the first 12 games of the season. We are very dissapointed in Ched but Ched is not Sheffield United the board the players, the manager and the fans make up Sheffield United. Not Ched.

Kings Hill Addick said...

Anon,

I take on board what you say, and I like United - I went to watch them many times when I was at University in Sheffield. I was merely trying to justify (or explain) why some people, me included, are happy to see another club promoted this season.

The club are clearly hedging their bets. They could have sacked him, and they may well do so, but the longer it goes on the more it looks like their decision is a financial one, and even though I have no problem with that, many others do.

Anonymous said...

Kings Hill,

He is out of contract next month. So I don't see how this applies.
He will not play for United again either way. If he is vindicated in appeal (very unlikely in my opinion) he will play somewhere else and if it is found that the guilty verdict is safe he will not play anywhere again. So United will not benefit either way so I don't see how United gain financially in any way.

Anonymous said...

Also to add further to the financial "reason" allegedly now laid at SUFC's door. The Blades backed Paddy Kenny to the hilt publically as well as keeping him on pay for the year he was banned only for him to scarper after his ban was up to QPR. Ched is out of contract in a month so would be free to do the same. I doubt the Blades would back him financially for that reason. It is more likely due to legal advice that they have remained quiet and not as yet sacked him. If the appeal goes as I believe it will with Ched remaining guity, I believe you will see statements from the club at that juncture.

Kings Hill Addick said...

Anon

I was under the impression that if the player is under 24 the club can still claim a ‘development fee’ for him.

Irrespective, there is no good, moral, reason at all for the club to not have sacked him immediately once he was found guilty. The clubs refusal to act, combined with the continued defence of its actions by the fans is why, in my opinion, neutrals don’t want to see them promoted this season.

You can argue about it all day long if you like but it won’t change the facts. The club refused to sack a player that was found guilty of rape. Appeal or no appeal, it wouldn’t have reflected badly on the club if they had sacked him. Just as a man is innocent until proven guilty, if he is found guilty by a jury of his peers he is guilty until proved innocent in any subsequent appeal

Anonymous said...

Kings Hill,
If I demonstrate one by one why the Blades have taken the decision they have and why it was the right thing to do in the circumstances (as the U24 player rules are not cut and dried regarding receiving a fee if you read rules 60 to 66) you have decided its wrong anyway as you state. Therefore discussion with you is futile. i.e. "I've decided the Blades are wrong because it doesn't 'feel right'therefore no facts will get in the way of that."