Forum | Cheating ain't Saintly but why the f did sfc waive the 2 week right to respond by BuenosSaint

Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread

Cheating ain't Saintly but why the f did sfc waive the 2 week right to respond 11:15 - May 20 with 1223 views

Apologies if this has been mentioned already but i can't catch up with everyone s understandable rantings.

So EFL playing by the rules. We should have too and demanded 14 days to respond. Which is also in the rules.

Things would have taken their course. We might have lost the play off final or we might have won. Either way it would have been very awkward for EFL to deal with.

SFC effectively gave them an easy route to chuck us out. Incompetence at the board level again

[Post edited 20 May 11:16]

Poll:

The Long Future

Cheating ain't Saintly but why the f did sfc waive the 2 week right to respond on 12:04 - May 20 with 1119 views

darthvader

I guess they thought if they do this they would be lenient

keep the faith coyr

Cheating ain't Saintly but why the f did sfc waive the 2 week right to respond on 13:44 - May 20 with 1050 views

BuenosSaint

Cheating ain't Saintly but why the f did sfc waive the 2 week right to respond on 12:04 - May 20 by darthvader
I guess they thought if they do this they would be lenient

I know. Fools. Unless there was a cast iron guarantee they should have seen who was on the board

Poll:

The Long Future

Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread