|
Post by dexter97 on Mar 29, 2008 21:18:18 GMT
Maybe we should enlist the support of Leicester. Coventry, Southampton and Barnsley (ESPECIALLY Barnsley!) in this campaign.
|
|
|
Post by Vodkab1ock on Mar 29, 2008 21:19:21 GMT
Maybe we should enlist the support of Leicester. Coventry, Southampton and Barnsley (ESPECIALLY Barnsley!) in this campaign. there managers + chairman etc should be informed imediately i hope scholes is on to that already.
|
|
|
Post by markscfc72 on Mar 29, 2008 21:22:56 GMT
Maybe we should enlist the support of Leicester. Coventry, Southampton and Barnsley (ESPECIALLY Barnsley!) in this campaign. yes good idea, we need to inform them all
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Mar 29, 2008 21:24:30 GMT
Knowles you could ring talksport, they have a football show on, it's a football quiz show but they let you talk about football as well. 08717 22 33 44 SHOUT IT FROM THE ROOF TOPS
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Mar 29, 2008 21:26:15 GMT
Wonder if any Owls heads will roll if they lose points? news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sport/football/572586.stmMonday, 20 December, 1999, 12:39 GMT
Hammers' secretary resigns
West Ham company secretary Graham Mackrell has resigned in the wake of the Emmanuel Omoyimni affair.
Omoyimni played for the Hammers in their Worthington Cup quarter-final against Aston Villa, having already represented Gillingham in the same competition this season.
Mackrell said: "I thought it was the right decision to make. We acted upon information which was given to me that the player was eligible to play.
"It patently wasn't correct and as a result I'm responsible, and I felt the only honourable thing to do was to resign.
"The club have won a match and they're being forced to replay it.
"That's very unfortunate for the players and particularly our supporters."
It was revealed on Friday that the Hammers, who have not played at Wembley since 1981, had fielded an ineligible player.
Villa, who went out of the Worthington Cup after Gareth Southgate missed the crucial penalty, immediately demanded they be reinstated in the competition and on Saturday the Football League announced the game would be replayed at Upton Park next year.
Mackrell has been at the club for just six months after moving from Sheffield Wednesday. He will stay with West Ham until a new appointment is made.
Hammers' football secretary Alison O'Dowd has also resigned.
West Ham chairman Terence Brown said: "The board would like to thank Mr Mackrell for all his hard work on behalf of the club since his appointment in June.
"We feel Graham has made an honourable decision but it seems a high price to have to pay for what was a small and genuine administrative error."
|
|
|
Post by markscfc72 on Mar 29, 2008 21:26:52 GMT
Out of interest, I don't think anyone has mentioned it (sorry if they have- can't be bothered to trawl back to the start!)- was any of this mentioned on Radio Stoke? If so, what were their views? Yes someone phoned in and mentioned it. listen to the show here54mins 48 secs it is mentioned if you want to listen
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Mar 29, 2008 21:30:32 GMT
Those arrogant Owls
|
|
|
Post by knowles on Mar 29, 2008 21:34:22 GMT
Thanks Serpico/Mark, just listened. They didn't have enough time to really discuss it sadly
How long is the show on Serpico? I might give them a ring a bit later!
"Would be nice if they gave Stoke the points" ;D Yes it would Mr Acres!!
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Mar 29, 2008 21:35:58 GMT
on Till 10pm knowles.
|
|
|
Post by knowles on Mar 29, 2008 21:37:37 GMT
Won't make that one- sorry!
I'm annoyed I didn't manage a chat with Greeny on 6-0-6
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Mar 29, 2008 21:38:39 GMT
anyone e-mailed sky sports news ? the fact the club is actually investigating it should be news worthy.
|
|
|
Post by markscfc72 on Mar 29, 2008 21:38:41 GMT
anyway i have gotta go out now
keep sending those e-mails, inparticular to those clubs who are near the bottom, get them involved!
|
|
|
Post by markscfc72 on Mar 29, 2008 21:39:28 GMT
anyone e-mailed sky sports news ? the fact the club is actually investigating it should be news worthy. yes i e-mailed them mate you lot try u2us@skysports.com
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Mar 29, 2008 21:39:57 GMT
anyone e-mailed sky sports news ? the fact the club is actually investigating it should be news worthy. yes i e-mailed them mate you lot try u2us@skysports.com cheers.
|
|
|
Post by donaldingleton on Mar 29, 2008 21:40:17 GMT
In the morning, I`m emailing Matt Smith at breakfast@bbc.co.uk as he was at Hillsboro today.
Just him reading out the email might just draw it to the attention of someone out there!
Bombard him with emails!!!
d.
|
|
|
Post by knowles on Mar 29, 2008 21:42:59 GMT
Done it Mark
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Mar 29, 2008 21:48:03 GMT
just mailed SSN
|
|
|
Post by Vodkab1ock on Mar 29, 2008 21:48:37 GMT
be nice if the admin could pin this until there is a outcome as i think its going to be very topical this week.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2008 22:07:42 GMT
Should be a VERY interesting outcome. (IMHO) we don't deserve / shouldn't / won't get the 3 points awarded to us - however, if Wednesday get a very small fine, or worse, no punishment whatsoever, then the FA will set a precendent, and it will be worth every penny of any fine we would receive in future should we name the best 16 players we have, irrespective of whether they're on loan or not.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Mar 29, 2008 22:15:08 GMT
Should be a VERY interesting outcome. (IMHO) we don't deserve / shouldn't / won't get the 3 points awarded to us - It adds salt to the wound given that it was a loan player who scored the sheff wed equalizer, why shouldn't we get the 3pts ? they have cheated us out of 2 points , 2 points that come the end of the season could be vital. We're not talking about a on loan sub goalie here.
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Mar 29, 2008 22:19:30 GMT
I like this Wednesdayite's view. To be honest, I think he's right that the punishment will be MUCH more severe than the one Leeds got. The FA have got to nail this thing and make an example of someone or the rule will become an irrelevance. www.owlstalk.co.uk/forums/index.php?showtopic=77949&st=120&start=120KivoOwlI really think this is very serious.
IMO, the match won't be replayed, the result will be given as 3-0 to Stoke, meaning they have an extra 2 points added, and the Owls deducted one point. The fact that two of the players didn't play maked no difference, when Leeds were fined for using six players in their 16, one of them was an unused sub, and the thing that Leeds argued was that they had a late injury to Matt Kilgallon to contend with, which helped their cause.
Wednesday's case is far more serious as they earned a point from the match AND there was no injury crisis.
With the West Ham precedent, two members of the WHU backroom staff resigned over the Omoyimni incident, the chief executive Graham Mackrell.
If Wednesday are deducted points, it will be the first time in their 128 year Football League history that such a thing has happened, and those to blame should consider their positions at the club. This includes the manager and those responsible for player registrations etc... Go to the top of the page
|
|
|
Post by milton potteress on Mar 29, 2008 22:20:12 GMT
Should be a VERY interesting outcome. (IMHO) we don't deserve / shouldn't / won't get the 3 points awarded to us - It adds salt to the wound given that it was a loan player who scored the sheff wed equalizer, why shouldn't we get the 3pts ? they have cheated us out of 2 points , 2 points that come the end of the season could be vital. We're not talking about a on loan sub goalie here. completly agree with you serpico rules are rules and imo we should be awarded the points!
|
|
|
Post by potters11 on Mar 29, 2008 22:21:01 GMT
I think we should just settle for that outcome, job done!!!
|
|
|
Post by potter84 on Mar 29, 2008 22:22:13 GMT
Interesting comment there. It wont suprise me if the FA deducted them points........BUT they wont.
Right time for MOTD - till tomorrow - nite chaps.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2008 22:24:10 GMT
Bearing in mind, it's just my opinion, but we didn't do enough to deserve the 3 points on the day, irrespective of how the opposition 16 was assembled. Granted, it does smart that one of the loan players scored that equaliser - what actually annoys me more is that we left out 2 players because of the rules. Zakuani could/should have come on to replace Cort earlier in the game, and Gallagher COULD have been the player to turn it around for us. However, all that is purely subjective - a load of 'shoulda woulda couldas' - which I personally think just tries to mask the truth that we didn't deserve any more than a point out of today's game as it was played. Like I said, is just my opinion, and Wednesday should get some sort of punishment. And if it's a small token gesture enforced upon them by the FA, then I think they've then set a precedent, and one we should take advantage of during our next 5 games by fielding our strongest 16, whether we have more than the 5 loan players in the squad or not.
|
|
|
Post by chrispk76 on Mar 29, 2008 22:59:44 GMT
if the football league or ssn are reading this, take note YOU CAN BE SURE THAT IF THE POINTS ARE TAKEN OFF WEDNESDAY AND GIVEN TO STOKE THEN NO OTHER TEAM IN THE FOOTBALL LEAGUE WOULD DARE TO BREAK THIS RULE AGAIN
|
|
|
Post by Linx on Mar 29, 2008 23:11:07 GMT
If Wednesday are allowed to get away with this, then the system is wide open for any club to bring in a completely different starting eleven based on loan players from Premiership clubs to turn it around at the crucial point in the season. Regardless of how we would benefit (and I don't think we will), Wednesday have to be punished to preserve the integrity of the league.
The FA set a precedent with their treatment of Leeds. The Owls should be treated likewise.
|
|
|
Post by algor on Mar 29, 2008 23:12:02 GMT
I doubt we will be awarded a win however, We really should follow this through. Wednesday have broken the rules and a fine will not surfice, any club could then field as many loanies as they like knowing that a result would just cost a couple of grand. If we miss out on promotion because of 2 points I can see a law suit arising
|
|
|
Post by Premier Endonstokie on Mar 29, 2008 23:17:25 GMT
If the game is replayed by any remote chance would shawcross and fuller be eligible for the game
|
|
|
Post by algor on Mar 29, 2008 23:22:35 GMT
If the game is replayed by any remote chance would shawcross and fuller be eligible for the game I really can't see that happening mate, but if it did the who could play for what club business is a bit of a mind blower i.e which Wednesday loan players could play and can our previously suspended players play? I reckon they will just get the point deducted and a fine. We will not benefit from it.
|
|