Midweek Fixtures - 23rd/24th October

[Savagebee]

What a result for Southall FC.

Edited October 24, 2012 by Savagebee

[Savagebee]

What a result for Southall FC.

 

Southall FC may have to forfeit the game

 

Edited October 24, 2012 by Savagebee

[paddywack]

Why

[ForumWarrior]

 

 

Southall FC may have to forfeit the game

 

[

 

Southall FC may have to forfeit the game

 

 

 

Its a joke clerical error on team sheet has f*cked us up but we will only have to forfeit if dunstable want to appeal which they will coz you could see that they were fuming we played them off the park. And before anyone calls us a cheat we was 4-1 up when we tried to make last substitution and the player coming on wasn't on team sheet. But the linesman apparnently only noticed his mistake in not checking the names as the come on 5mins into the guy being on the pitch.

 

Ahh well it's just going to boost us for the league, promotions all we care about, woulda been great to play another prem team this year though.

[Karen Browne]

Wednesday 24^th October

LEAGUE CHALLENGE TROPHY Second Round

1-3 Aylesbury United v Oxhey Jets

4-4* Crawley Green v London Tigers (Crawley Green won 7-6 on penalties)

4-0 London Lions v Kentish Town

4-1 Southall v AFC Dunstable

[phoinex]

 

This was the result of the night for me, Stony Stratford keeping it to just 2-0

 

TWAT

[Ian H]

Its a joke clerical error on team sheet has f*cked us up but we will only have to forfeit if dunstable want to appeal which they will coz you could see that they were fuming we played them off the park. And before anyone calls us a cheat we was 4-1 up when we tried to make last substitution and the player coming on wasn't on team sheet. But the linesman apparnently only noticed his mistake in not checking the names as the come on 5mins into the guy being on the pitch.

 

Ahh well it's just going to boost us for the league, promotions all we care about, woulda been great to play another prem team this year though.

 

I was told coming out the ground that Southall's final sub gave his name to the assistant when he came on - but his name had already been given by a previous sub - No 16. He was called over by the referee, and confirmed his real name, which was not on the teamsheet, therefore ineligable to play. The ref was apparantly going to abandon the game but both teams wanted to continue to the end.

If that scenario is the case, then it is a farcial error on Southall's part , for 1) Cheating and 2) Not getting their players to get their stories straight!.

 

In all honesty it is a shame as I enjoyed the game. Two sides who played good football on a good surface and game was played in a good spirit and was well refereed.

[X man]

Went to watch Aylesbury last night . They was very unlucky to be 2.0 down at half time , second see them miss more chances it just wasn't there night . O jets really did impress me propa footballing side they just get it down and play . Looking forward to going Aylesbury sat

[Savagebee]

Its a joke clerical error on team sheet has f*cked us up but we will only have to forfeit if dunstable want to appeal which they will coz you could see that they were fuming we played them off the park. And before anyone calls us a cheat we was 4-1 up when we tried to make last substitution and the player coming on wasn't on team sheet. But the linesman apparnently only noticed his mistake in not checking the names as the come on 5mins into the guy being on the pitch.

 

Ahh well it's just going to boost us for the league, promotions all we care about, woulda been great to play another prem team this year though.

 

I was told coming out the ground that Southall's final sub gave his name to the assistant when he came on - but his name had already been given by a previous sub - No 16. He was called over by the referee, and confirmed his real name, which was not on the teamsheet, therefore ineligable to play. The ref was apparantly going to abandon the game but both teams wanted to continue to the end.

If that scenario is the case, then it is a farcial error on Southall's part , for 1) Cheating and 2) Not getting their players to get their stories straight!.

 

In all honesty it is a shame as I enjoyed the game. Two sides who played good football on a good surface and game was played in a good spirit and was well refereed.

I hear AFC Dunstable want the result to stand.

[Karen Browne]

I hear AFC Dunstable want the result to stand.

 

Fair play to AFC Dunstable if that is the case however not so sure the SSML Officials will allow it if a rule has been broken.

[Savagebee]

Fair play to AFC Dunstable if that is the case however not so sure the SSML Officials will allow it if a rule has been broken.

 

Agree.

[Munchkin]

It does depend on which version of events is true.

 

Honest mistake with eligilble player not named on team sheet.

Or

Attempt to play an ineligible player who has completely cocked it up by giving the wrong name.

 

Obviously one is more serious than the other. i dont think the league will let it go either way. justifiably, if it is the 2nd one, it casts doubt on the eligibility of all players involved. Why on earth would you send on an ineligible player if 4-1 up anyway?

[smellynuts]

It does depend on which version of events is true.

 

Honest mistake with eligilble player not named on team sheet.

Or

Attempt to play an ineligible player who has completely cocked it up by giving the wrong name.

 

Obviously one is more serious than the other. i dont think the league will let it go either way. justifiably, if it is the 2nd one, it casts doubt on the eligibility of all players involved. Why on earth would you send on an ineligible player if 4-1 up anyway?

Southalls final sub came onto the pitch and wasnt who he said he was. This was obvious because the lino said he was already on the pitch, and rightly asked for the players real name.

The sub already on the pitch also wasnt who he said he was, and couldnt even pronounce the name when shown the team sheet.

Southall had at least one illegal player on the pitch and it was farcical to hear them digging a hole for themselves.

Draw your own conclusions as to whether this constitues cheating.

Although AFC did have key players missing, Southall were the better team.

I can confirm AFC have said they will not contest the result.

Good luck to Southall in the next round.

[Karen Browne]

I can confirm AFC have said they will not contest the result.

Good luck to Southall in the next round.

 

With a number of League officials reading this forum I don't think they will allow Southall to progress if the case is true.

[Savagebee]

The sub already on the pitch also wasnt who he said he was, and couldnt even pronounce the name when shown the team sheet.

Southall had at least one illegal player on the pitch and it was farcical to hear them digging a hole for themselves.

Draw your own conclusions as to whether this constitues cheating.

 

[petethegreek]

Are there any match reports available from the Southall vs AFC Dunstable match?

[Karen Browne]

Are there any match reports available from the Southall vs AFC Dunstable match?

 

Why was your report not good enough

[petethegreek]

Why was your report not good enough

 

Nothing to do with me, guv.

[HTFCew]

I saw the same thing happen at Clapton v Hertford a few years ago. A Clapton sub couldn't remember what he was supposed to be called that day. They lost the game but think they got fined for attempting to play a ringer.

[Munchkin]

As noble an offer it is from AFC Dunstable, there is absolutely no way the league could let that go. It would open up all sorts of issues about not applying competition rules.