CHERTSEY TOWN FC v FA

[Farnborough fc manager]

The opinion expressed in this posting below is the work of the author and not Chertsey Town FC

 

 

The Judge in the case of CTFC v FA removed the confidentiality clause earlier this week and I feel appropriate that lower League clubs are made aware of its findings so that they can use the ‘rules’ to their advantage and also not fall foul of them.

 

CTFC run the club both on and off the pitch guided by rules published by the FA and Leagues and obviously guided by advice given by those officials. In this case we stated we were entitled to promotion as the FA had ACCEPTED in writing that they had failed to apply their own rules regarding North Greenford. The Head of the FA League Committee had also confirmed in writing that we could not appeal as it ‘was a private matter between the club (NG) and the FA’. The FA then refused to hear ANY appeal at all. At this stage with the FA’s clear admission of two breaches of the rules we did not seek to stop NG promotion, instead we argued that there was an obvious opportunity for two clubs to be promoted with no precedent set. Again the FA refused and we had no choice but to seek a hearing in front of a Judge.

 

At this stage the FA instructed City Lawyers and although the Judge only put a mornings time estimate on the case sent over 800 pages of so called evidence in the form of case laws that included Wayne Rooney v Paul Stretford, Sheffield Utd v Carlos Tevez and numerous other football and Athletics cases! CTFC never instructed Lawyers except for basic telephone advice as the case was deemed a simple one win or lose. Incredibly when it was suggested that this ’evidence’ was totally irrelevant the FA withdraw the WHOLE lot the night before the hearing!

 

The issues were put before the Judge and although the case ran through its course the Judge ruled at the end that CTFC made the mistake of accepting the Head of the Leagues Committee statement and that we should have appealed at that stage and therefore even though he had ‘sympathy’ for CTFC our further case was ‘fatally flawed’ as we were out of time. So we lost in hindsight before we started because the Head of the FA Leagues Committee had got it wrong!

 

However no one knew the ruling at this stage so evidence was put before the Judge and this is even more concerning. How many of you know out there that the rule 8(1) gives the FA power to overrule ANY of its ‘rules’ if it sees fit in ‘exceptional circumstances’ ? CTFC were thrown out of the League Cup the season before last for playing a player that had played three games for the Club including the semi final but one of those games was a non qualifying game. The rule was there to stop clubs signing better players just for a final so in our case that was clearly not the point and now we could appeal that under rule 8(1) and make a very good case. Clubs work to the rules on and off the pitch but this case has shown a major flaw that is going to lead to chaos if the FA does not clean the ‘rules’. You cannot just change rules to please yourselves and the ‘Law of the Land’ takes precedence in any law where a ‘financial implication’ is relevant. Promotion, relegation, ground sharing, cup finals etc clearly have financial implications but the only way to challenge this is at the High Court of London where a simple case will cost tens of thousands of which 99.9% of clubs will never be able to fund and which the FA will rely upon as shown in this hearing with their heavy handed tactics.

 

CTFC put the Head of the FA under cross examination and he faced some of the following having been ordered to hand over all evidence regarding North Greenfords promotion

 

 

1.Why did it take NG nearly six weeks to apply from promotion despite knowing the same application date for years-the FA failed to comment

 

2. Why having the FA having listed and Amended the step 4 promotion lists did NG still take over a further two weeks to apply-no comment

 

3. Only an email was ever sent by NG, have NG ever formally applied for promotion this season?-no comment

 

4. NG evidence was that their Secretary was the only person who could apply. When CTFC crossed the FA about the numerous other committee members including the Chairman who was the Secretaries husband the FA made no comment

 

5. NG stated that the Secretary was the Secretary of all of NG teams and due to snow had to deal with lots of postponements. When CTFC proved that she was not the Sec of lots of NG teams including the second and third most senior teams at NG the FA made no comment

 

6. The FA made no comment to the question that as the Secretary was a member of the Middlesex FA a favour was sought behind the scenes

 

7.The Head of The FA stated that ‘Ordinarily’ the application should be in by 31^st Dec. When told the rules stated the word ‘MUST’ the FA made no comment

 

8. NG stated that there had been a car accident in mid Dec. The FA made no comment that only some papers were recovered from the car and the most important, well known application form was ignored for over six weeks and despite numerous comments in the media , forums and websites.

 

The Head of the FA just stated that the Leagues Committee had accepted NG late submission and accepted them! What does this show for the rules as the rest of Step 5 have to obey? The FA just used rule 8(1) and this is clearly no ‘exceptional circumstances’-to the contrary the above statements are pretty hard to accept by clubs that get punished for the most minor infringements such as too many people standing up in dugouts, one day late paperwork, fines galore etc

 

CTFC are not the only ones with issues with the FA. At least 11 other non league clubs are in action against the FA and the FA hiding behind rule 8(1) is not acceptable in my view.

 

The Judge did comment in his ruling that the FA can use 8(1) and did so with NG and hence we would have lost anyway although the evidence is pretty strong but you can make your own minds up.

 

Having been told that we had lost the FA seeked costs which they are entitled to do. For a morning case estimated at four hours they wanted £14,000!!!! The Judge accepted that CTFC’s submission that the FA had to take some proportionate blame as if they had taken a normal appeal this case would have cost less than £500. He ordered only 15% against CTFC which tells its own story. The FA appealed last week!! The Judge has upped it to just over £4000 in total still only 30% of what the FA had spent trying to squash us. For those of you who believe in conspiracies (and biast I do) guess how much the FA owe CTFC from its FA Vase run last year-you guessed it £4000! So less than £100 will actually pass hands.

 

In conclusion CTFC lost the case because we accepted in writing from the Head of the FA Leagues Committe that it was ‘a private matter’ when we should have appealed. To then go this route was ‘fatally flawed’ as we were out of time. Even so the FA would have hid behind rule 8(1) to break their own rules despite the clear evidence. Bottom line is don’t trust what you see as ‘rules’ as they are always open to rule 8(1) and you can also use that to your advantage. It’s about time the FA leave rules as rules, this grey area is going to lead to more and more cases. We have rules on the pitch that must be obeyed and off the pitch this must also be the case, if a Club gets it wrong then we are punished and the same should be the same of the FA.

 

It’s over now, we lost and, rant over we move on to the new season, I just feel it’s important for genuine clubs to see what has gone on behind the scenes and the FA’s attempt to keep it confidential has thankfully been removed so this type of case is exposed and hopefully we can all move on with better information. No wonder so many grass roots football clubs are struggling and I often wonder if it’s worth it.......

 

 

Spencer Day

[return of the mac]

Thanks for all the information Spencer, Just shows that The F.A. are just money grabbers and really don't give a [****!!****] about the welfare of "little" clubs and only look after the professional Clubs that put more money into there organisation.

 

IMHO Chertsey are too bigger club to be in the ccl along with Camberley and a few more, who got shafted when the old ryman 2 went.

 

Fair play for standing upto them and just sorry the Chertsey will not get what they deserve, monetry or league status .

[Ex EL_Gaffer]

Shame Spencer but i'm not really suprised, The FA are a complete joke at the moment especially over the whole Capello business

 

Best of luck for next season

[johnnojudo]

You've been rear ended by the Fa.

 

For Chertsey to be promoted on a technicality would be wrong. Clubs should be promoted and relegated on fairness and success or ultimately, failure.

 

There is a case for North Greenford not to go up but if we all honest about it.......NGU apply for promotion every year so why would they not on this occasion? An error has been made but its just an error and everyone makes them. For NGU not to be promoted on a technical mistake by somebody would be unjust and very sad for NGU. Not all the teams in the premier division have the ground or funds to gain promotion. For a team to strive every year for promotion, apply every year for promotion,and finally get there, for it to be taken away on a technicality would not be right.

 

I do understand that CTFC were not asking for NGU to not be promoted but to gain promotion themselves

 

Never has 2 teams been promoted from 1 step 5 division so again, it would be unjust to allow it now.

 

If it was allowed, it would then open up the floodgates for every team that finished 2nd and had the facilities for promotion.

 

How many teams would that be?

 

I dont agree that CTFC should have to pay all that money. They should be rewarded for flying the ccl flag for such a long time in the fa vase.

 

The LAW is an ASS!!

[Smudge]

The F.A. never make errors,they just move the Goalposts,as they have in this case.Johnno's case is flawed because just saying that you done something last year,does not mean you will do it this year.The thing that really annoys me though, is that even if you have a case to put,they will punish you Financially,and have the Finances to break any appeals,which in turn stops people or Clubs Appealing.I did however get a rule changed by the Surrey F.A and the F.A.,not by taking them to Court,but by picketing outside their Headquarters in Soho Square for 3 Days.So hears a point when you phone in your Results,or send your Fines in,tell them you meant to send them,like you have any other time you were required to do so. Spencer admire you for courage in taking the big boys on,but you know in your heart,you cannot win,but damn it you gave it a go.RULES ARE RULES AFTER ALL EXCEPT, WHERE IT DOES NOT FAVOUR THE RULE MAKER.

[CTFCBOY]

The opinion expressed in this posting below is the work of the author and not Chertsey Town FC

 

 

The Judge in the case of CTFC v FA removed the confidentiality clause earlier this week and I feel appropriate that lower League clubs are made aware of its findings so that they can use the ‘rules’ to their advantage and also not fall foul of them.

 

CTFC run the club both on and off the pitch guided by rules published by the FA and Leagues and obviously guided by advice given by those officials. In this case we stated we were entitled to promotion as the FA had ACCEPTED in writing that they had failed to apply their own rules regarding North Greenford. The Head of the FA League Committee had also confirmed in writing that we could not appeal as it ‘was a private matter between the club (NG) and the FA’. The FA then refused to hear ANY appeal at all. At this stage with the FA’s clear admission of two breaches of the rules we did not seek to stop NG promotion, instead we argued that there was an obvious opportunity for two clubs to be promoted with no precedent set. Again the FA refused and we had no choice but to seek a hearing in front of a Judge.

 

At this stage the FA instructed City Lawyers and although the Judge only put a mornings time estimate on the case sent over 800 pages of so called evidence in the form of case laws that included Wayne Rooney v Paul Stretford, Sheffield Utd v Carlos Tevez and numerous other football and Athletics cases! CTFC never instructed Lawyers except for basic telephone advice as the case was deemed a simple one win or lose. Incredibly when it was suggested that this ’evidence’ was totally irrelevant the FA withdraw the WHOLE lot the night before the hearing!

 

The issues were put before the Judge and although the case ran through its course the Judge ruled at the end that CTFC made the mistake of accepting the Head of the Leagues Committee statement and that we should have appealed at that stage and therefore even though he had ‘sympathy’ for CTFC our further case was ‘fatally flawed’ as we were out of time. So we lost in hindsight before we started because the Head of the FA Leagues Committee had got it wrong!

 

However no one knew the ruling at this stage so evidence was put before the Judge and this is even more concerning. How many of you know out there that the rule 8(1) gives the FA power to overrule ANY of its ‘rules’ if it sees fit in ‘exceptional circumstances’ ? CTFC were thrown out of the League Cup the season before last for playing a player that had played three games for the Club including the semi final but one of those games was a non qualifying game. The rule was there to stop clubs signing better players just for a final so in our case that was clearly not the point and now we could appeal that under rule 8(1) and make a very good case. Clubs work to the rules on and off the pitch but this case has shown a major flaw that is going to lead to chaos if the FA does not clean the ‘rules’. You cannot just change rules to please yourselves and the ‘Law of the Land’ takes precedence in any law where a ‘financial implication’ is relevant. Promotion, relegation, ground sharing, cup finals etc clearly have financial implications but the only way to challenge this is at the High Court of London where a simple case will cost tens of thousands of which 99.9% of clubs will never be able to fund and which the FA will rely upon as shown in this hearing with their heavy handed tactics.

 

CTFC put the Head of the FA under cross examination and he faced some of the following having been ordered to hand over all evidence regarding North Greenfords promotion

 

 

1.Why did it take NG nearly six weeks to apply from promotion despite knowing the same application date for years-the FA failed to comment

 

2. Why having the FA having listed and Amended the step 4 promotion lists did NG still take over a further two weeks to apply-no comment

 

3. Only an email was ever sent by NG, have NG ever formally applied for promotion this season?-no comment

 

4. NG evidence was that their Secretary was the only person who could apply. When CTFC crossed the FA about the numerous other committee members including the Chairman who was the Secretaries husband the FA made no comment

 

5. NG stated that the Secretary was the Secretary of all of NG teams and due to snow had to deal with lots of postponements. When CTFC proved that she was not the Sec of lots of NG teams including the second and third most senior teams at NG the FA made no comment

 

6. The FA made no comment to the question that as the Secretary was a member of the Middlesex FA a favour was sought behind the scenes

 

7.The Head of The FA stated that ‘Ordinarily’ the application should be in by 31^st Dec. When told the rules stated the word ‘MUST’ the FA made no comment

 

8. NG stated that there had been a car accident in mid Dec. The FA made no comment that only some papers were recovered from the car and the most important, well known application form was ignored for over six weeks and despite numerous comments in the media , forums and websites.

 

The Head of the FA just stated that the Leagues Committee had accepted NG late submission and accepted them! What does this show for the rules as the rest of Step 5 have to obey? The FA just used rule 8(1) and this is clearly no ‘exceptional circumstances’-to the contrary the above statements are pretty hard to accept by clubs that get punished for the most minor infringements such as too many people standing up in dugouts, one day late paperwork, fines galore etc

 

CTFC are not the only ones with issues with the FA. At least 11 other non league clubs are in action against the FA and the FA hiding behind rule 8(1) is not acceptable in my view.

 

The Judge did comment in his ruling that the FA can use 8(1) and did so with NG and hence we would have lost anyway although the evidence is pretty strong but you can make your own minds up.

 

Having been told that we had lost the FA seeked costs which they are entitled to do. For a morning case estimated at four hours they wanted £14,000!!!! The Judge accepted that CTFC’s submission that the FA had to take some proportionate blame as if they had taken a normal appeal this case would have cost less than £500. He ordered only 15% against CTFC which tells its own story. The FA appealed last week!! The Judge has upped it to just over £4000 in total still only 30% of what the FA had spent trying to squash us. For those of you who believe in conspiracies (and biast I do) guess how much the FA owe CTFC from its FA Vase run last year-you guessed it £4000! So less than £100 will actually pass hands.

 

In conclusion CTFC lost the case because we accepted in writing from the Head of the FA Leagues Committe that it was ‘a private matter’ when we should have appealed. To then go this route was ‘fatally flawed’ as we were out of time. Even so the FA would have hid behind rule 8(1) to break their own rules despite the clear evidence. Bottom line is don’t trust what you see as ‘rules’ as they are always open to rule 8(1) and you can also use that to your advantage. It’s about time the FA leave rules as rules, this grey area is going to lead to more and more cases. We have rules on the pitch that must be obeyed and off the pitch this must also be the case, if a Club gets it wrong then we are punished and the same should be the same of the FA.

 

It’s over now, we lost and, rant over we move on to the new season, I just feel it’s important for genuine clubs to see what has gone on behind the scenes and the FA’s attempt to keep it confidential has thankfully been removed so this type of case is exposed and hopefully we can all move on with better information. No wonder so many grass roots football clubs are struggling and I often wonder if it’s worth it.......

 

 

Spencer Day

 

 

Spencer,

 

Gutted but not really surprised, what with the way we got thrown out of that cup final....FA are able to change the rules to suit them and thats what they have done. Remember that night away at NGU last year when the game kept playing until they got an undeserved equalizer? It was all against us last year, lets go out andwin it fair and square this time.

 

How we looking for new signins? Got any aces up your sleeve?

 

Best Regards

[Krooner]

Have some sympathy over this but the fact is you were never going to win. Look at Horsham YMCA last year. Finished 3rd and got promoted. Clubs get shafted all the way down the pyramid by bigger clubs. Premiership clubs to Championship clubs etc. Can we be confident that Chertsey have never broken any football rules (cue Weeble).

 

Good Luck to all the teams in the CCL next year and make sure to be as confident as you can of going up win the league

[Guvnor No1]

North Greenford were the best team, yeah its strange that there name wasnt highlighed in the promotional list but as Johnno said they apply every year so it would of been a surprise it there name wasnt highlighted espcially as they has they strongest team for the last 5 years.

 

 

Just gotta win the league this season and your past will be forgotton...gotta say think it will again be a tough season.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 3, 2010 by Guvnor No1

[pearcey]

Hard luck,I think you knew you was on hiding to nothing but fair play for having a go.

[Fat Boy]

Would have been a cheap way to gain promotion. Why did Chertsey deserve the spot over the team getting relegated for example?

 

NGU won the league and deserve to go up, simples.

 

 

[Confused]

Would have been a cheap way to gain promotion. Why did Chertsey deserve the spot over the team getting relegated for example?

 

NGU won the league and deserve to go up, simples.

 

 

 

why should sides in relegated spots 'deserve' to be reprieved, as happens constantly.

 

I am no Chertsey appolgist but isn't about time the FA opened up a proper sytem of promotion and relegation between steps 4 & 5 and stop protecting failures

 

also simples!

[Krooner]

Yes they should Confused. Clubs should not be reprieved and clubs should be promoted instead.

[The Fan]

fair play to spencer for having a go. most clubs would have just bitched, rather than give it a go. im sure there are a few clubs down the years, that think N G county connection has reared its head in a game.

[Weeble]

Have some sympathy over this but the fact is you were never going to win. Look at Horsham YMCA last year. Finished 3rd and got promoted. Clubs get shafted all the way down the pyramid by bigger clubs. Premiership clubs to Championship clubs etc. Can we be confident that Chertsey have never broken any football rules (cue Weeble).

 

Good Luck to all the teams in the CCL next year and make sure to be as confident as you can of going up win the league

Feel sorry that it did'nt work out ...Kroons, I don't think any club is whiter than white but if the FA are capable of employing Capello and signing him up for 2 years and then not knowing what to do with the man then they are capable of anything.

[Fat Boy]

Would have been a cheap way to gain promotion. Why did Chertsey deserve the spot over the team getting relegated for example?

 

NGU won the league and deserve to go up, simples.

 

 

 

why should sides in relegated spots 'deserve' to be reprieved, as happens constantly.

 

I am no Chertsey appolgist but isn't about time the FA opened up a proper sytem of promotion and relegation between steps 4 & 5 and stop protecting failures

 

also simples!

 

They don't deserve to, nor does a team that finishes outside the promotion slots. NGU won the league fair and square.

 

If they had chosen not to go up, then have a playoff between the 2nd place and the potential relegated team. But the facts in this matter are that NGU wanted to go up. A technicality should not get in the way of a long, hard-fought season. Football should always do the talking.

[Green_Fingers]

Would have been a cheap way to gain promotion. Why did Chertsey deserve the spot over the team getting relegated for example?

 

NGU won the league and deserve to go up, simples.

 

 

 

why should sides in relegated spots 'deserve' to be reprieved, as happens constantly.

 

I am no Chertsey appolgist but isn't about time the FA opened up a proper sytem of promotion and relegation between steps 4 & 5 and stop protecting failures

 

also simples!

 

They don't deserve to, nor does a team that finishes outside the promotion slots. NGU won the league fair and square.

 

If they had chosen not to go up, then have a playoff between the 2nd place and the potential relegated team. But the facts in this matter are that NGU wanted to go up. A technicality should not get in the way of a long, hard-fought season. Football should always do the talking.

 

 

Potential issue there is that there are 2nd placed teams from other Step 5 Leagues that may also like to take the slot - 3 Step 5 Leagues are feeding each Step 4

 

 

[Confused]

Would have been a cheap way to gain promotion. Why did Chertsey deserve the spot over the team getting relegated for example?

 

NGU won the league and deserve to go up, simples.

 

 

 

why should sides in relegated spots 'deserve' to be reprieved, as happens constantly.

 

I am no Chertsey appolgist but isn't about time the FA opened up a proper sytem of promotion and relegation between steps 4 & 5 and stop protecting failures

 

also simples!

 

They don't deserve to, nor does a team that finishes outside the promotion slots. NGU won the league fair and square.

 

If they had chosen not to go up, then have a playoff between the 2nd place and the potential relegated team. But the facts in this matter are that NGU wanted to go up. A technicality should not get in the way of a long, hard-fought season. Football should always do the talking.

 

 

Potential issue there is that there are 2nd placed teams from other Step 5 Leagues that may also like to take the slot - 3 Step 5 Leagues are feeding each Step 4

 

 

The FA deed to square off the fact that only 12 places are available for 14 potential champions before sorting out second places. The whole arrangement needs overhauling. They must know this but a copping a deaf 'un to all the moans in the NLP.

[Farnborough fc manager]

I feel some of you are missing the point!

 

 

The FA ACCEPTED in writing that they had broken the rules and it is quite clear from the evidence that NG had also broken the rules so why should they go up? We wated to use the FA failures first but they weren't having it so had to go after NG.

 

By saying they won the League is fair enough and I agree that these matters should be won and lost on the pitch not off it but that is not how it works. Chertsey won their semi final in the League Cup two years ago but broke the rules and were kicked out, it wasn't the players fault. Hence NG did break the rules and were incredibly 'lucky' to get away with it. One of their senior players told me in Jan that unless the Club applied then there would have been a mass walkout, they never applied in time and shouldn't have ben accepted. They even had another six weeks financial advantage over their competitors. All CTFC was taking the FA to court was over the rules. You can't have it both ways, yes NG were the best football side last year but if they break the rules then they should not have gone up and I fail to see why some posters seem to feel so. Don't complain if the rules work against you next time EG Cove stopped Camberley getting a new keeper which may or may not have contributed to their semi final win but those are the rules and were correctly observed.

 

All I am saying is that we should have clarity. Rules should be rules and if they are broken then there should be no 'back door' route out by the FA. Then we all know where we stand and most importantly titles, promotions, relegations etc will be decided on the rightplace, the pitch.

 

 

[Fat Boy]

;)Given your history, I hope that's all you were talking to the senior player from Greenford about

 

You haven't answered my question though. Why do you deserve to go up? You weren't good enough to win the league. Regardless of what NGU did or didn't do, you didn't earn your spot.

[Farnborough fc manager]

We earn't our spot as both the FA and NG broke the rules so yes we should have been promoted.

 

And as for our history you areeferring to one 'illegal approach' to Bedfont Green that was accepted by your manager and Chairman-hardly a hanging offence and your club have never done anything wrong?!!! We can not stop players contacting us and many of the players from different clubs are friends and speak to each other all the time but for the record we never had any interest in that player that contacted us and he had no interest in joining us as far starters he lives far too far away.

 

I hope that is a clear enough answer