FA Inter League Cup

[Whitley Bay]

Personally I think it's a joke, how can the league not check these things in the first place, the team have done an amazing job getting to that final aund now they are punished by missing out on a great cup final day,

Is it the League or the Rep Team Management that should have made the check?

[Munchkin]

Is it the League or the Rep Team Management that should have made the check?

Oh come on, I know you like to play devil's advocate, but even this is pushing it.

 

The league in this case are the "club" and as such whoever was acting as the "secretary" on behalf of the league should be aware of the rules and check player eligibility. Did they even provide the competition rules to the manager?

[SpanishAsh]

I have it on good authority that the league did not provide the manager with any 'rules' other than a player has to be signed to a step 7 team and cannot presently be under a contract and play.

[CM_Grendon]

Did the Yorkshire League do background checks? 

Edited March 17, 2016 by CM_Grendon

[Munchkin]

Did the Yorkshire League do background checks?

Would appear so based on their previous similar problem.

[SpanishAsh]

Their background checks are incorrect. Nathan Graham was only ever paid expenses. FIFA deems a player as 'professional' when his wage outweighs his expenses. All other players are classed as amateur. The competition is for amateur players as described in the UEFA regions cup rules. The league needs to pull their finger out and get this sorted out as we have been wrongly eliminated.

[CM_Grendon]

Their background checks are incorrect. Nathan Graham was only ever paid expenses. FIFA deems a player as 'professional' when his wage outweighs his expenses. All other players are classed as amateur. The competition is for amateur players as described in the UEFA regions cup rules. The league needs to pull their finger out and get this sorted out as we have been wrongly eliminated.

 

 

But was he on a contract? Which is what the rule is.

[Munchkin]

But was he on a contract? Which is what the rule is.

Not strictly true. The rule states pro contract and links to FIFA clause II, which states

 

A professional is a player who has a written contract with a club and is paid more for his footballing activity than the expenses he effectively incurs. All other players are considered to be amateurs.

[Munchkin]

The problem with this one, is if you don't have the evidence I.e. the contract then any appeal will be difficult.

 

You can argue whether they should need to produce the evidence to expel, but I can why they have reached this decision without the document. anything in the contract such as win or goal bonus would make you a pro player for this purpose.

[SpanishAsh]

Copy of contract obtained. Paid £40 expenses only

[Munchkin]

Interesting, what the league saying?

[Whitley Bay]

Copy of contract obtained. Paid £40 expenses only

Not quite sure what "...paid £40 expenses only..." actually means. Was he paid a total of £40 throughout the term of his contract or £40 per week throughout the term of the contract?

 

If the latter, how can the actual level of expenses be known in advance, because if it includes travel costs it must be different for home and away games?

 

Spanish Ash - are you able to clarify?

[SamC]

Copy of contract obtained. Paid £40 expenses only

Surely the fact "copy of contract obtained" proves he was "on a contract" and the actual level of wage/expense is irrelevant...

[BigDogCol]

Best of luck with the appeal Spanish Ash, you definitely deserve to go through to the final pally!

[Munchkin]

Surely the fact "copy of contract obtained" proves he was "on a contract" and the actual level of wage/expense is irrelevant...

Definitely relevant based on the FIFA rule.

[SamC]

Definitely relevant based on the FIFA rule.

Just seen that now - you could well be right.

 

I really hope the league can appeal as it sounds like there could be a case.

[amerste]

It's now believed that one of their players was contracted to a league team at the age of 19. So both could be thrown out.