Week 31 - Results & Tables

[Charnwood]

Week 31 Results

Ipswich Town

1) Ipswich Town 1 v 1 Lincoln City

2) Who will score Towns first goal ? James Wilson (72)
( No goals or OG is an option)

3) “Golden Goal Time” of 1st goal scored. (+/- 2min Scores 5 points) ? 29 min (27-31 mins scores 5 points)

4) What will Towns league position be at 10pm on Tuesday. ? 7th

5) Name either players involved in Towns first substitution ? Keanan Bennetts replaces Gwion Edwards (60)


Premier League

6) Manchester City 5 v 2 Southampton


Championship

7) Blackburn Rovers 1 v 1 Swansea City

Luton Town v Rotherham United

9) Queens Park Rangers 1 v 0 Wycombe Wanderers

10) Barnsley 0 v 0 Derby County


League One

11) Wimbledon 0 v 1 Burton Albion

12) Crewe Alexandra 1 v 0 Doncaster Rovers

13) MK Dons 0 v 1 Blackpool

14) Peterborough United 1 v 3 Hull City

15) Fleetwood Town 1 v 0 Gillingham

16) Portsmouth 0 v 2 Sunderland


Match of The Day ( Double Points )

17) Liverpool 2 v 0 RB Leipzig (Champions League Round of 16)


H2H Week 15 (Results)

Number9 8 V 19 BlueBlood

Wellywood 5 V 11 Superchef

Kerry Blue 15 V 3 Marko

Todd 6 V 22 Blue Wilf

Nicscreamer 12 V 12 Frosty

BlueMike 14 V 31 AzzuroMark

Charnwood 14 V 13 Lucy

HallamBlue (13) 10 V 0 Ando


BYE - Tangfastic 18








Individual Championship - Week 31

1) Tangfastic (18) 545
2) Frosty (12) 493
3) Number9 (8) 491
4) BlueBlood (19) 479
5) Charnwood (14) 479
6) Azzuromark (31*) 455
7) BlueMike (14) 440
Kerry Blue (15) 434
9) Todd66 (6) 434
10) Nicscreamer (12) 433
11) Lucy (13) 432
12) Wellywood (5) 425
13) HallamBlue (13) 398
14) Blue Wilf (22) 397
15) Superchef (11) 391
16) Marko69 (3) 384


League Trophy


Premier League

Charnwood 20+12+14 = 46
...............................
Tangfastic 22+3+18 = 43
Frosty 13+14+12 = 39
Kerry Blue 16+5+15 = 36
Number9 19+9+8 = 36
Marko69 21+9+3 = 33
..............................
BlueMike 11+7+14 = 32
Nicscreamer 9+0+12 = 21



League One

Azzuromark 24+14+31 = 69
Blue Wilf 18+10+22 = 50
....................
BlueBlood 17+13+19 = 49
WellyWood 16+21+5 = 42
Lucy 10+12+13 = 35
HallamBlue 13+8+13 = 34
Todd66 16+12+6 = 34
Superchef 11+6+11 = 28

[tangfastic]

Query :

The first sub. Wasn’t that a triple substitution in a break of play?

Involving Bennetts, Edwards, Lankester, Judge, Bishop, Parrott

[Bluemike]

I looked at that too but I am assuming Andy has, as we always do, taken the results from the BBC where it says this substitution happened in the 60th minute and the other two in the 61st minute, will await Andy's reply.

[tangfastic]

Isn’t that evidence enough.... they’re all on the touch line watching Netflix.

[Bluemike]

It could well be that you are correct, we will stick to the same system as we use every week, just waiting for Andys input.

[marko69]

Caption that "Netflix" pic.


Judge: "Looks like that's where James is going to be......"
Parrott: "That looks offside though......"
Bennetts: (whispers) "What is offside again? Never learnt it."
Judge: "Right there. What James is doing."
Bennetts: "Ah, ok. Any of you want a drink?"
Parrott: "That's hand sanitiser, Keanan."
Judge: "What's this on the other page? Oh wow! What did Meghan say?"

Paul cook caption:

Headline:
"THE LAZINESS OF PAUL COOK IS APPARENT WHEN HE SAYS HE HAS HIS FINGERS IN HIS EARS WHEN HE HEARS NEGATIVITY"

[lucy]

Caption that "Netflix" pic.


Judge: "Looks like that's where James is going to be......"
Parrott: "That looks offside though......"
Bennetts: (whispers) "What is offside again? Never learnt it."
Judge: "Right there. What James is doing."
Bennetts: "Ah, ok. Any of you want a drink?"
Parrott: "That's hand sanitiser, Keanan."
Judge: "What's this on the other page? Oh wow! What did Meghan say?"

Paul cook caption:

Headline:
"THE LAZINESS OF PAUL COOK IS APPARENT WHEN HE SAYS HE HAS HIS FINGERS IN HIS EARS WHEN HE HEARS NEGATIVITY"

I have to ageee with Tang on this one. Because technically there was no First Substitution. They were all made at the Same time.

[Charnwood]

Hey Guys apologies but I’ve only just seen this whilst updating tonight’s match results although it’s not come completely out of the blue as Mike did message me earlier.
I didn’t watch the match last night and when I updated our results I did wonder if it was a triple substitution so I checked the BBC’s timings (our bible) against Sky Sports Match report, they also had one substitution at 60 mins and the other two at 61mins so strictly speaking Bennett’s replacing Edward’s was the first substitution regardless of how close the second and third followed.
We have had situations before when a time has been an issue and we’ve always used BBC Sport/football times as final and I think we should stick with that. We’ve had tight calls on timing questions before, but we’ve always applied BBC times to ensure consistency and transparency. I’ve noticed when I’ve watched a match live on tv and a goal has been scored and I freeze the screen at 20.25 mins, the official time is always shown as 21 min which is a bummer if you’ve predicted 20mins, but we always take the official time regardless of anyone taking a screen shot and proving different.
If we take anything other than the official time we open a huge can of worms even if it feels a little unfair. Most important is that we maintain consistency and transparency. I’ve not checked but we may have a H2H game where one player has a 60th minute sub and the other a 61st, giving points to both players could p*ss off the one who predicted exactly correct using our official source especially if it changed the game result.
Any question involving a correct time answer has the potential to p*ss someone off when they’re just a minute out of range, but that’s the way it is, I guess it’s no different when a team score a goal in the 90+7 min with the last kick of the game hitch changes a match result.
I’m really sorry Tang if this isn’t the answer you were hoping for but any deviation from our time served rules which are both transparent and consistent would in my opinion be detrimental to the fairness of our competition which has always been played in good spirit.
Sorry for the long winded answer.

[lucy]

Whilst we are on Subject of sticking to Rules. How come late Predictions were allowed?. I thought there was a Rule brought in to prevent that happening?.

[AzzurroMark]

Sorry BlueMike, you were right when you said people saved their highest scores when they play you in the H2H. I don't recall ever getting 10 points on the MOTD question, nor ever scoring in excess of 30 points.

Will just say thank you for being my lucky charm

[Charnwood]

Lucy, the Prediction League Moderators (Bluemike, Frosty & Myself) agreed that given the overloaded schedule at the moment and in consideration that some of our players work, we would apply a degree of flexibility for midweek games only as long as an entry is received before predicted games have kicked off and nobody gains an advantage. Any games that have kicked off will automatically be treated as void.
I announced this with this coming weeks fixtures, and fortunately we only have two more midweek rounds on 16 March and 20 April, plus an Easter Double Round to give us the required number of rounds to complete our programme.
Since running the midweek comps I have tried to send a personal email to any player running late to give them a reminder that time is running out, as I recall you were one of the recipients last week. Unfortunately yesterday was a busy day for me and in the afternoon I was playing in a golf competition which meant the reminders went out very late hardly giving the two people involved time to post. Knowing this impacted on the integrity of the H2H Comp which I thought nobody would want to win by default, we agreed for Midweek games only to flex the rules.
We thought players would appreciate this especially as we ensured that nobody could gain an advantage.
I’m disappointed that you disagree, and if a majority of our players support your position I will put it back to the Moderators that we reverse this decision and stick rigidly to the thread lock rules although not retrospectively. If we do this I will not take responsibility for sending out reminders just in case circumstances prevent me from doing this because this is meant to be light hearted and fun.

[number 9]

I don’t wanna sound like a pr*ck, but I agree with Lucy in that deadlines should be adhered to. Even if a match hasn’t started, late injury reports can affect the out come of a game. That’s just one example. I’ve never received emails reminding me to post my predictions, and in a few circumstances I’ve accepted the results when I didn’t make the deadline. With that said, I think you all do a fantastic job moderating the league and I will support any decision you go with.

[lucy]

I didn't intend it to Sound the way it did. Sorry if i offended anyone. You all do a geeat Job looking after this Place.

[Bluemike]

Sorry BlueMike, you were right when you said people saved their highest scores when they play you in the H2H. I don't recall ever getting 10 points on the MOTD question, nor ever scoring in excess of 30 points.

Will just say thank you for being my lucky charm

Mate, its pretty much every bloody week lol, but well done to you sir

[tangfastic]

Hey Guys apologies but I’ve only just seen this whilst updating tonight’s match results although it’s not come completely out of the blue as Mike did message me earlier.
I didn’t watch the match last night and when I updated our results I did wonder if it was a triple substitution so I checked the BBC’s timings (our bible) against Sky Sports Match report, they also had one substitution at 60 mins and the other two at 61mins so strictly speaking Bennett’s replacing Edward’s was the first substitution regardless of how close the second and third followed.
We have had situations before when a time has been an issue and we’ve always used BBC Sport/football times as final and I think we should stick with that. We’ve had tight calls on timing questions before, but we’ve always applied BBC times to ensure consistency and transparency. I’ve noticed when I’ve watched a match live on tv and a goal has been scored and I freeze the screen at 20.25 mins, the official time is always shown as 21 min which is a bummer if you’ve predicted 20mins, but we always take the official time regardless of anyone taking a screen shot and proving different.
If we take anything other than the official time we open a huge can of worms even if it feels a little unfair. Most important is that we maintain consistency and transparency. I’ve not checked but we may have a H2H game where one player has a 60th minute sub and the other a 61st, giving points to both players could p*ss off the one who predicted exactly correct using our official source especially if it changed the game result.
Any question involving a correct time answer has the potential to p*ss someone off when they’re just a minute out of range, but that’s the way it is, I guess it’s no different when a team score a goal in the 90+7 min with the last kick of the game hitch changes a match result.
I’m really sorry Tang if this isn’t the answer you were hoping for but any deviation from our time served rules which are both transparent and consistent would in my opinion be detrimental to the fairness of our competition which has always been played in good spirit.
Sorry for the long winded answer.

Thanks for the response. Have to say it’s good you stick rigidly to one source - the BBC - for the scoring.

The thing is we were asked to predict the player/s involved in the first substitution, not the time. I would say a substitution is when player/s are going on/off in a break of play. In this case, 6 players were involved during the break in play. I understand you’re going by the timings on the bbc site and if Edwards/Bennetts is logged as 60 and the rest as 61 - you can say they were the first subs. Or at least they were officially registered as going off first before play re-started. But what happens in the next game when in a double or triple substitution all players are logged as 60 minutes. You’re going to be forced to say that 4 or 6 players were involved in a first substitution - and not 2. You wouldn’t know who first, second or third substitutions are ? It’s kind of bending the interpretation of what a first substitution is from game to game.

Just my thoughts ....

[Charnwood]

I don’t wanna sound like a pr*ck, but I agree with Lucy in that deadlines should be adhered to. Even if a match hasn’t started, late injury reports can affect the out come of a game. That’s just one example. I’ve never received emails reminding me to post my predictions, and in a few circumstances I’ve accepted the results when I didn’t make the deadline. With that said, I think you all do a fantastic job moderating the league and I will support any decision you go with.

The reason you’ve not received a reminder No9 is simply because you’ve not been late ! For those who have run late I’ve sent out reminders a few hours before the deadline including my opponent last week AzzurroMark which cost me dearly, I didn’t want to win by default just because he was busy working and forgot to post, I thought that was the spirit this competition was played in. It will be a sad day when people start hoping their opponent forgets to post just so they can win. As for late posters having time to check the internet for latest injury news I find that bizarre. I could understand for bonus questions involving players but not match results.
As I said the only reason I extended this week is because I hadn’t sent out reminders as I had previous weeks which disadvantaged
Blueblood and Marko compared with previous week stragglers. I thought this was the best way to keep our competitions alive and keep everyone involved.
If there is a general consensus that I’m wrong I’m refer back to the other Mods to find a resolution.

[Charnwood]

Hey Guys apologies but I’ve only just seen this whilst updating tonight’s match results although it’s not come completely out of the blue as Mike did message me earlier.
I didn’t watch the match last night and when I updated our results I did wonder if it was a triple substitution so I checked the BBC’s timings (our bible) against Sky Sports Match report, they also had one substitution at 60 mins and the other two at 61mins so strictly speaking Bennett’s replacing Edward’s was the first substitution regardless of how close the second and third followed.
We have had situations before when a time has been an issue and we’ve always used BBC Sport/football times as final and I think we should stick with that. We’ve had tight calls on timing questions before, but we’ve always applied BBC times to ensure consistency and transparency. I’ve noticed when I’ve watched a match live on tv and a goal has been scored and I freeze the screen at 20.25 mins, the official time is always shown as 21 min which is a bummer if you’ve predicted 20mins, but we always take the official time regardless of anyone taking a screen shot and proving different.
If we take anything other than the official time we open a huge can of worms even if it feels a little unfair. Most important is that we maintain consistency and transparency. I’ve not checked but we may have a H2H game where one player has a 60th minute sub and the other a 61st, giving points to both players could p*ss off the one who predicted exactly correct using our official source especially if it changed the game result.
Any question involving a correct time answer has the potential to p*ss someone off when they’re just a minute out of range, but that’s the way it is, I guess it’s no different when a team score a goal in the 90+7 min with the last kick of the game hitch changes a match result.
I’m really sorry Tang if this isn’t the answer you were hoping for but any deviation from our time served rules which are both transparent and consistent would in my opinion be detrimental to the fairness of our competition which has always been played in good spirit.
Sorry for the long winded answer.

Thanks for the response. Have to say it’s good you stick rigidly to one source - the BBC - for the scoring.

The thing is we were asked to predict the player/s involved in the first substitution, not the time. I would say a substitution is when player/s are going on/off in a break of play. In this case, 6 players were involved during the break in play. I understand you’re going by the timings on the bbc site and if Edwards/Bennetts is logged as 60 and the rest as 61 - you can say they were the first subs. Or at least they were officially registered as going off first before play re-started. But what happens in the next game when in a double or triple substitution all players are logged as 60 minutes. You’re going to be forced to say that 4 or 6 players were involved in a first substitution - and not 2. You wouldn’t know who first, second or third substitutions are ? It’s kind of bending the interpretation of what a first substitution is from game to game.

Just my thoughts ....

At the moment Tang the rules are clear, in the situation you describe all four or all six players would be named as the correct answer. If you look back over previous results this has already happened.

[Bluemike]

I think we stay away from substitution questions lmao

[number 9]

I don’t wanna sound like a pr*ck, but I agree with Lucy in that deadlines should be adhered to. Even if a match hasn’t started, late injury reports can affect the out come of a game. That’s just one example. I’ve never received emails reminding me to post my predictions, and in a few circumstances I’ve accepted the results when I didn’t make the deadline. With that said, I think you all do a fantastic job moderating the league and I will support any decision you go with.

The reason you’ve not received a reminder No9 is simply because you’ve not been late ! For those who have run late I’ve sent out reminders a few hours before the deadline including my opponent last week AzzurroMark which cost me dearly, I didn’t want to win by default just because he was busy working and forgot to post, I thought that was the spirit this competition was played in. It will be a sad day when people start hoping their opponent forgets to post just so they can win. As for late posters having time to check the internet for latest injury news I find that bizarre. I could understand for bonus questions involving players but not match results.
As I said the only reason I extended this week is because I hadn’t sent out reminders as I had previous weeks which disadvantaged
Blueblood and Marko compared with previous week stragglers. I thought this was the best way to keep our competitions alive and keep everyone involved.
If there is a general consensus that I’m wrong I’m refer back to the other Mods to find a resolution.

If Harry Kane is injured during warm ups, it could significantly affect the outcome of a Spurs result. Also, bonus questions are worth 5 points...that’s significant. In all honesty, I’m not really bothered Charny it’s just a game.

Why not make the deadline’until the first match kick off’?

[Bluemike]

The rules are there for anyone to read, it's not wise to start chopping and changing mid competition but any ideas with a view to next season would be gratefully received and considered.

[nicscreamer]

I missed out last week due to family issues, didnt get a reminder email, and couldnt give a toss lol....

This is just a bit of fun, and we really shouldnt get caught up in the tiny details of the rules... lets just accept Charnys decision and move on hey? I know i couldnt give the sort of time needed to run this comp, the forum as a whole or take the crap they get dished out

[tangfastic]

Hey Guys apologies but I’ve only just seen this whilst updating tonight’s match results although it’s not come completely out of the blue as Mike did message me earlier.
I didn’t watch the match last night and when I updated our results I did wonder if it was a triple substitution so I checked the BBC’s timings (our bible) against Sky Sports Match report, they also had one substitution at 60 mins and the other two at 61mins so strictly speaking Bennett’s replacing Edward’s was the first substitution regardless of how close the second and third followed.
We have had situations before when a time has been an issue and we’ve always used BBC Sport/football times as final and I think we should stick with that. We’ve had tight calls on timing questions before, but we’ve always applied BBC times to ensure consistency and transparency. I’ve noticed when I’ve watched a match live on tv and a goal has been scored and I freeze the screen at 20.25 mins, the official time is always shown as 21 min which is a bummer if you’ve predicted 20mins, but we always take the official time regardless of anyone taking a screen shot and proving different.
If we take anything other than the official time we open a huge can of worms even if it feels a little unfair. Most important is that we maintain consistency and transparency. I’ve not checked but we may have a H2H game where one player has a 60th minute sub and the other a 61st, giving points to both players could p*ss off the one who predicted exactly correct using our official source especially if it changed the game result.
Any question involving a correct time answer has the potential to p*ss someone off when they’re just a minute out of range, but that’s the way it is, I guess it’s no different when a team score a goal in the 90+7 min with the last kick of the game hitch changes a match result.
I’m really sorry Tang if this isn’t the answer you were hoping for but any deviation from our time served rules which are both transparent and consistent would in my opinion be detrimental to the fairness of our competition which has always been played in good spirit.
Sorry for the long winded answer.

Thanks for the response. Have to say it’s good you stick rigidly to one source - the BBC - for the scoring.

The thing is we were asked to predict the player/s involved in the first substitution, not the time. I would say a substitution is when player/s are going on/off in a break of play. In this case, 6 players were involved during the break in play. I understand you’re going by the timings on the bbc site and if Edwards/Bennetts is logged as 60 and the rest as 61 - you can say they were the first subs. Or at least they were officially registered as going off first before play re-started. But what happens in the next game when in a double or triple substitution all players are logged as 60 minutes. You’re going to be forced to say that 4 or 6 players were involved in a first substitution - and not 2. You wouldn’t know who first, second or third substitutions are ? It’s kind of bending the interpretation of what a first substitution is from game to game.

Just my thoughts ....

At the moment Tang the rules are clear, in the situation you describe all four or all six players would be named as the correct answer. If you look back over previous results this has already happened.

That’s clear now.

[Frosty]

I missed out last week due to family issues, didnt get a reminder email, and couldnt give a toss lol....

This is just a bit of fun, and we really shouldnt get caught up in the tiny details of the rules... lets just accept Charnys decision and move on hey? I know i couldnt give the sort of time needed to run this comp, the forum as a whole or take the crap they get dished out

By the way you, ruined my chance of going top in the head to head comp this week you pr*ck!


Hope all is good btw mate

[number 9]

I missed out last week due to family issues, didnt get a reminder email, and couldnt give a toss lol....

This is just a bit of fun, and we really shouldnt get caught up in the tiny details of the rules... lets just accept Charnys decision and move on hey? I know i couldnt give the sort of time needed to run this comp, the forum as a whole or take the crap they get dished out

Ah well the leader has spoken! How dare we stray from what you think is wrong or right. After Lucy and Tang’s initial comments, Charnwood’s response suggested others give their input to his response. That’s exactly what I did, and frankly I don’t give a toss. Run the comp however you like...flexible deadlines and all. But don’t come on here with your self righteousness and try to make me look bad. You’ve done it before during debates on Black Lives Matter and during debates on contentious threads. If you don’t like what I post just ignore it. You hardly post anymore now anyway and I’m sure you’ll say it’s because of people like me.

[Bluemike]

I think we all draw a line under this now guys before it goes any further, we'll welcome any suggestions going forward for next seasons competitions but we don't want to lose any more posters through differences of opinion that get out of hand. The forum has been pretty active lately with some new posters and some faces from the past so let's build on that and keep it a fun place to air or views.

[nicscreamer]

I missed out last week due to family issues, didnt get a reminder email, and couldnt give a toss lol....

This is just a bit of fun, and we really shouldnt get caught up in the tiny details of the rules... lets just accept Charnys decision and move on hey? I know i couldnt give the sort of time needed to run this comp, the forum as a whole or take the crap they get dished out

Ah well the leader has spoken! How dare we stray from what you think is wrong or right. After Lucy and Tang’s initial comments, Charnwood’s response suggested others give their input to his response. That’s exactly what I did, and frankly I don’t give a toss. Run the comp however you like...flexible deadlines and all. But don’t come on here with your self righteousness and try to make me look bad. You’ve done it before during debates on Black Lives Matter and during debates on contentious threads. If you don’t like what I post just ignore it. You hardly post anymore now anyway and I’m sure you’ll say it’s because of people like me.

Yep, you are totally correct and i withdraw my previous statement in full. xx

[nicscreamer]

I missed out last week due to family issues, didnt get a reminder email, and couldnt give a toss lol....

This is just a bit of fun, and we really shouldnt get caught up in the tiny details of the rules... lets just accept Charnys decision and move on hey? I know i couldnt give the sort of time needed to run this comp, the forum as a whole or take the crap they get dished out

By the way you, ruined my chance of going top in the head to head comp this week you pr*ck!


Hope all is good btw mate

Yeah, i did it on purpose mate

[Charnwood]

I think we stay away from substitution questions lmao

What’s bloody annoying Mike, is that it I never intended to add an extra Q5 in the Town Section, it only happened because I ran out of fixtures as there were fewer Premier League and Championship games than I expected, hence I dug deep for the Liverpool Champions League game for MOTD, which still left me one Q short. At the time the sub question seemed an easy fix but given Cookie’s liking for multiple substitutions I’ll take your advice and not use it again. That’s a promise. Scouts honour.

[Charnwood]

I don’t wanna sound like a pr*ck, but I agree with Lucy in that deadlines should be adhered to. Even if a match hasn’t started, late injury reports can affect the out come of a game. That’s just one example. I’ve never received emails reminding me to post my predictions, and in a few circumstances I’ve accepted the results when I didn’t make the deadline. With that said, I think you all do a fantastic job moderating the league and I will support any decision you go with.

The reason you’ve not received a reminder No9 is simply because you’ve not been late ! For those who have run late I’ve sent out reminders a few hours before the deadline including my opponent last week AzzurroMark which cost me dearly, I didn’t want to win by default just because he was busy working and forgot to post, I thought that was the spirit this competition was played in. It will be a sad day when people start hoping their opponent forgets to post just so they can win. As for late posters having time to check the internet for latest injury news I find that bizarre. I could understand for bonus questions involving players but not match results.
As I said the only reason I extended this week is because I hadn’t sent out reminders as I had previous weeks which disadvantaged
Blueblood and Marko compared with previous week stragglers. I thought this was the best way to keep our competitions alive and keep everyone involved.
If there is a general consensus that I’m wrong I’m refer back to the other Mods to find a resolution.

If Harry Kane is injured during warm ups, it could significantly affect the outcome of a Spurs result. Also, bonus questions are worth 5 points...that’s significant. In all honesty, I’m not really bothered Charny it’s just a game.

Why not make the deadline’until the first match kick off’?

It’s probably best No9 if we go back to a Fixed Time deadline with NO EXCEPTIONS, it’s far easier for me to manage and it’s Crystal clear for everyone to understand. I was simply trying to be over helpful given that I’ve been mindful that we’ve had an overload of PL rounds in quick succession and some of our players have work commitments to fit in around their leisure time. Clearly I got it wrong, lesson learned.

[Charnwood]

I missed out last week due to family issues, didnt get a reminder email, and couldnt give a toss lol....

This is just a bit of fun, and we really shouldnt get caught up in the tiny details of the rules... lets just accept Charnys decision and move on hey? I know i couldnt give the sort of time needed to run this comp, the forum as a whole or take the crap they get dished out

Nic, if you look at my earlier post you will see that I’ve only sent emails for late midweek entries, not Saturdays as I’m never around due to it being one of my golf days. Unfortunately now we’re out of lockdown Tuesday is a golf day too, hence me not getting timely reminders out to Marko and Blueblood which led me to accepting their late entries which I clearly got wrong.
I did however send you an email on Sunday when I realised you’d missed Saturdays Round, I’ve just copied and paste it below;

Hi Nic

I only realised last night that you’d missed your Week 30 Predictions, had I noticed sooner I’d have sent a reminder. Fortunately it looks to be a low scoring round so should have little impact as long as you can do Week 31 before Tuesday.

I’ll also try to get next weeks up early as zi know you like to get yours in early in the week.

Cheers

Andy


Sent from my iPhone

As you said, probably best we just move on.