The log shows the following: 03-07-2017 09:42 - Rangers FC bid 13.1 M for Keeper05 35 sen 32 4 7 7 11 500 500 500 500 . 04-07-2017 09:14 - Rangers FC bid 13.1 M for Keeper05 35 sen 32 4 7 7 11 500 500 500 500 . 04-07-2017 10:41 - Benfica bid 13.2 M for Keeper05 35 sen 32 4 7 7 11 500 500 500 500 .
So whether or not Rangers actually put in that second bid, it was for the same amount, so it's not a new bid. Under the rules of EFL, if a bid stands for 24 hrs, the auction is over. Which is what has happened.
I can't explain how the duplicate bid happened; the minimum bid should always be forced 0.1M higher than the current bid. So yes, it does mean that the website displayed some misleading information. But that doesn't change the rules of the game.
Incidentally, what would Rangers' motivation be for deliberately putting in the second bid of 13.1M?
Obviously Malky has the say on interpreting the rules. I just wanted to give my point of view given that I have access to the log which records all actions (although unfortunately doesn't record IP address etc).
The only thing I can think might have happened is that Gazza refreshed the page with the bid command still sitting there, and it re-sent the command. Or maybe next time he visited the website his browser somehow sent the command again. Unfortunately the site is built in a pretty basic way, and there are not many protections against these little things that can go wrong. Which is why I don't do this for a living.
Scott, that's a pretty elaborate plan. If you're half an hour away from winning an auction you want, why would you keep it open for another 23.5 hours? Or, if you really don't want the player, why would you start a thread saying that you want the player?
ianmcnamara: Can't believe we're in this posision with two games to go. We just silently crept up on Everton and capitalized. If I end up taking up a new challange at the end of the season leaving Schalk with a title win would be the perfect way to end my time there.
Mar 21, 2019 12:51:54 GMT