Guernsey to forfeit 3 Pts ?

[Smudge]

out of interest should he have been playing for Northerners at all.His 2 match ban started on the 2nd March,yet he is playing on the 6th March,unless Northerners had 3 games in 4 days.Did they?Wish him well in his recovery.

[Big J R]

Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

 

Club Secs are ultimately responsible, and that is why some clubs utilise a disciplinary officer to keep tabs on naughty boys.

 

(NO - I don't want the job at DFC. Oh, alright, then).

 

Sorry to hear about his ankle though. Wouldn't wish that on any player, even if they DID play for.....................

Edited March 7, 2012 by Big J R

[HKP]

out of interest should he have been playing for Northerners at all.His 2 match ban started on the 2nd March,yet he is playing on the 6th March,unless Northerners had 3 games in 4 days.Did they?Wish him well in his recovery.

I wondered that too.... Unless North had a game at the weekend...

 

Also, will the player face any sanction as he played whilst banned?

[Green_Fingers]

out of interest should he have been playing for Northerners at all.His 2 match ban started on the 2nd March,yet he is playing on the 6th March,unless Northerners had 3 games in 4 days.Did they?Wish him well in his recovery.

I wondered that too.... Unless North had a game at the weekend...

 

Also, will the player face any sanction as he played whilst banned?

 

 

The GFA said following Kieran Mahon's second dismissal of the season was suspended for two of North's Saturday-type fixtures and would be unable to play CCL fixtures until that suspension had been served.

The suspension does not apply to representative or non-Saturday type football.

 

Was last nights game considered non-Saturday type?

Edited March 7, 2012 by Green_Fingers

[Don't Blame Me]

One thing that has not been picked up is Guernsey's honesty and openness in informing the CCL as soon as they were aware that the rules had been broken. I wonder how many other clubs would have done the same?

[Smudge]

Maybe he found a loophole in the rules,it was non saturday type,silly me, it was Midweek type

[maisiecat]

No, the game last night was a Guernsey FA Cup game..

[Smudge]

Between 2 Saturday type teams?

[Jurg78]

Who cares, as it wasn't between any sides in the CCL!

[HKP]

It must be that the FA cup is treated differently for whatever reason. Rules are mostly set by the FA these days.

[Big J R]

Guernsey Rules OK ?

[Tripster71]

One thing that has not been picked up is Guernsey's honesty and openness in informing the CCL as soon as they were aware that the rules had been broken. I wonder how many other clubs would have done the same?

 

Good Point !

 

Would they of gotten away with it anyway ?

 

and is Gotten even a word ?

 

at the end of the day the damage is done we all know the score now so lets move on end of !

 

I still think Guernsey will win the league they have just made it a slightly longer process !

[HKP]

Maybe he found a loophole in the rules,it was non saturday type,silly me, it was Midweek type

I believe the Guernsey FA cup would be treated differently, in fact it has to be as its open to ALL teams in Guernsey and therefore I can see why.

[Big J R]

One thing that has not been picked up is Guernsey's honesty and openness in informing the CCL as soon as they were aware that the rules had been broken. I wonder how many other clubs would have done the same?

 

Good Point !

 

Would they of gotten away with it anyway ?

 

and is Gotten even a word ?

 

at the end of the day the damage is done we all know the score now so lets move on end of !

 

I still think Guernsey will win the league they have just made it a slightly longer process !

 

I believe it is in the US of A !

[Weeble]

Set the scene...2 teams one game left ..

 

P W D L GD PTS

 

Team A 21 10 9 2 +34 39

 

Team B 21 10 9 2 +33 39

 

Team A can't afford team B to get a anything from the game... Team A could load up their team with ringers / unregistered quality players from much higher levels in an effort to win the game. ( ALTHOUGH NOT GUARANTEED TO WIN THE GAME )They win the game and go to 42 points... A weel later they are found out and get the 3 pt deduction and still win the league. Team B do not get the points or even the offer of a replay WHY????

Edited March 9, 2012 by Weeble

[HKP]

In some leagues if a team does a "Guernsey" then the other team is awarded the match by three goals to nil. Perhaps this would be fairer?

[Don't Blame Me]

And then there is West Ham and the nonsense regarding the "ownership" of Carlos Tevez. They managed to stay in the Prem owing to his winner at Old Trafford. Coupled with Sheffield United's last game defeat to Wign, this resulted with The Blades going down. Sure, West Ham were hit with a fine but no points deduction.

 

I await the outcry from East London should Portsmouth go into liquidation before the season's end and subsequently lose 6 points.

 

There is such an inconsistency in the way the game is administered from the highest to the lowest levels. If a player gets sent off in a park game, the ban is something like 28 days. Bans adminsitered in County Cup competitions can be even more draconian. Where is the fairness or consistency in this?

 

Another example. Swindon Town won a play off final to gain promotion to the top flight. They were found guilty of illegal payments to players and were relegated to the 3rd tier. On appeal, this was reduced to relegation to the 2nd tier. Not so long after, Tottenham were found guilty of exactly the same thing. They were hit with a fine and a points deduction. This was appealed and the points deduction became suspended. WHERE IS THE CONSISTENCY?

 

As I said earlier, Guernsey were open and honest and informed the CCL as soon as they became aware and great credit should be given for this. Weeble's example poses an interesting conundrum. Obviously the 3 point deduction would be worthless owing to the goal difference. What then? Award a 2-0 win to the offended team? What if the goal difference before the game was +5? A 2 goal swing would still not be enough of a punishment.

 

Therefore, I propose a 4 point deduction in addition to the loss of any points gained from the match in question. This would also cater for clubs who are 3 points ahead and either win or draw with ringers or inelligible players taking part in the match. A potential 7 point deficit should focus the minds a little bit more as well as acting as a fairly good deterrent.

[Windsor_Sec]

Is the punishment a 3 point deduction for EACH offence, if so 11 ringers would be 11 offences and a 33 point punishment ?

 

More likely though is that the management committee would hold a special meeting and deal out what they deem to be an appropriate punishment taking into account the severity of the offence which I'm sure wouldn't disadvantage the non-guilty team !

 

In answer to the question about clubs' honesty I believe all the points deductions this season have come about when clubs have notified the league of any discretion rather than vice-versa. We voluntarily suspended a player for the correct games earlier in the season following a sending-off for which no paperwork was received from the county FA - in fact any secretary who has read the new rules for this season will know the emphasis is on them to do so or face the subsequent consequences which almost certainly would include an extended ban for the player, a fine for the club and, once reported by the county FA to the league, possible points deductions for any games which the player took part in whilst suspended.

[Chris Clapham]

Can't all the county websites have a page with all current suspensions on it?

Given the money they rake in from clubs, they could certainly afford it!

[Green_Fingers]

Here is the League rule covering. The League can levy "penalty" points as well as deduct any points gained from the match, in which case the offending team can end up with less points than they started.

 

 

6.9 PLAYING AN INELIGIBLE PLAYER

 

Any Club found to have played an ineligible player in a match shall have any points gained from that match deducted from its record and have levied upon it a fine. The Company may vary this decision in respect of the points gained only in circumstances where the ineligibility is due to the failure to obtain an International Transfer Certificate or where the ineligibility is related to the Player’s status only.

The Board may also order that such match be replayed on such terms as are decided by the Board which may also levy penalty points against the Club in default.