COUNTY CUP

[GlenSTFC]

It’s so black and white, Marlow can’t deny or defend it and if they even tried any back door shenanigans they’ll make them look even more tinpot than they already are. I just hope as a club we have the courtesy to offer Marlow some tickets (complimentary naturally...) to the final.

[Guest Wycombe Rebel]

See Bartley is now waxing lyrical about the rules on Twitter, even intimating that we played an ineligible player it seems

[Gashimoto]

Surely that can't be right? Be interested to know which player he thinks we played incorrectly

[Reading Rebel]

He doesn't say it was us, he could have trawled through previous rounds and seen the rule broken by another club.

Bringing up the bit about the rules not allowing Reading and MK Dons to compete in the competition is irrelevant.

The B&B FA would have known this rule exists and given those teams special dispensation to compete.

Again IMO any rules that may have been broken in previous rounds is in the past and can't be changed, the Marlow game is current and can be changed. 

[Holyport Rebel]

I don't think Mark Bartley is saying we fielded an ineligible player. Reading his tweet's I think he is saying that he thinks according to the Berks and Bucks rules that Reading should be kicked out for fielding a whole team of ineligible players.( And Milton Keynes before them ).He seems to me to suggest that the B and B rules say that only players under contract to clubs operating at steps 1 -6 of the National League system (i.e  non-league) are eligible to play in the B and B Cup. Therefore , although Reading and Milton Keynes are allowed to play in the B and B Cup competition, they seemingly are not allowed to play any players they have under contract with them in their B and B cup matches ! One would assume that any players Reading or Milton Keynes played in the B and B Cup were under contract, then they have broken the B and b Cup rules and should be kicked out. That's what I take from his tweets. I could quite easily be wrong though !

[Rebel Wokingham]

He has stated that for the same reason as above, Matthew Stevens was ineligible.

[SloughFlyer]

Previous rounds are totally irrelevant though as I believe teams have 3 days to appeal this type of thing. So what Reading, MK or even Marlow themselves did in previous rounds doesn't matter to the current situation.

[rebelbrewer]

He seems to be saying (in a tweet lower down on the thread) that we did break a rule, if not that one. Unless he is prepared to actually mention it, that's mudslinging in my view. Sad to see from a former rebel.

[Rebel Wokingham]

4 minutes ago, rebelbrewer said:

He seems to be saying (in a tweet lower down on the thread) that we did break a rule, if not that one. Unless he is prepared to actually mention it, that's mudslinging in my view. Sad to see from a former rebel.

He does say what rule it is, he claims Matthew Stevens as a contracted player at Peterborough was ineligible. 

[Irishadrian]

25 minutes ago, SloughFlyer said:

Previous rounds are totally irrelevant though as I believe teams have 3 days to appeal this type of thing. So what Reading, MK or even Marlow themselves did in previous rounds doesn't matter to the current situation.

Also my understanding  There is a short time frame in which to raise any breach of the rules Once that has expired the matter is closed Marlow's transgression was spotted and queried within the required time frame and must result in our reinstatement imo

[Alan Greenaway]

It is a shame that this has got so sordid and a bit disappointed in a former players attitude to this.

I just hope that the B&B make a clear decision as soon as possible this week and possibly clarify the situation regarding Reading Fc and their contract players.

Going forward it may be a good time for the B&B to look at their rules , particularly how their rules do differ with other county FA's and if needed to realign them. They should also reissue and clarify their rules to all the senior clubs before next years applications are open.

[rebelbrewer]

2 hours ago, rebelsry said:

He does say what rule it is, he claims Matthew Stevens as a contracted player at Peterborough was ineligible. 

Couldn't see that on the twItter thread I read 

[Reading Rebel]

2 hours ago, SloughFlyer said:

Previous rounds are totally irrelevant though as I believe teams have 3 days to appeal this type of thing. So what Reading, MK or even Marlow themselves did in previous rounds doesn't matter to the current situation.

Exactly.

There must be a time limit to get your appeal in, if anything untoward happened in previous rounds and wasn't spotted at the time it's too late now. 

[Cornish Rebel]

That's not really the point though is it.Whatever round you do something dodgy in it's still cheating and it doesn't make it alright because you got away with it.

[Reading Rebel]

27 minutes ago, Cornish Rebel said:

That's not really the point though is it.Whatever round you do something dodgy in it's still cheating and it doesn't make it alright because you got away with it.

Sometimes/most times when a rule is broken it is probably a genuine mistake.

So the point being it is probably impossible to prove one way or another so all that can be done is to abide by B&B rules/regs and when a club appeals in the timescale given and it is proven to be a correct appeal then the offending club has to be thrown out of the competition.

Edited April 7, 2019 by Reading Rebel

[Longshot]

I have been watching Reading in this competition and they have been fielding very young teams, Mostly U18's I believe.  Don't know what sort of contracts they have players on at that age.

 

[Hammer_rebel]

The rule states that you can play if your contract is with the same club I.e they have a contract with reading but can play for reading in a cup match 

[Reading Rebel]

Just now, Hammer_rebel said:

The rule states that you can play if your contract is with the same club I.e they have a contract with reading but can play for reading in a cup match 

HR, it does say only at National league levels 1-6.

[Longshot]

I can't imagine a club with Reading' status would not check thoroughly  which players can and cant play, But you never know.

[Reading Rebel]

3 hours ago, Longshot said:

I can't imagine a club with Reading' status would not check thoroughly  which players can and cant play, But you never know.

Providing they did check at all.

Edited April 8, 2019 by Reading Rebel