|
Post by craigscfc on Mar 29, 2008 23:30:00 GMT
i have emailed fifa.. im just hoping something will be done about this. cant see us having the three points, but i hope wednesday get points taken away from them, they dont deserve to get away with this. as mentioned many times throughout this thread, rules are rules.. and they've broke them
Shocking in my opinion
|
|
|
Post by Alvechurch Assassin on Mar 30, 2008 0:12:58 GMT
This is very serious and deserves a bigger punishment than previous examples.
If SW are fined, the FL have then set a precedence for teams like Stoke to field all their loanees and just pay the fines. So that won't happen.
If they are deducted a point, it would put everyone off doing it, so that seems logical.
However, in our case we have also been punished several times by their rule breaking.
1)We could have fielded all our loanees and given ourselves a better chance of winning the game.
2)We have lost two points due to an "illegal" player scoring their equaliser.
3)The whole game has been influenced by their decision to select 6 loan players.
I think we have a valid case for a 3-0 win. That should be the precedence set to stop this happening again.
|
|
|
Post by Alvechurch Assassin on Mar 30, 2008 0:25:46 GMT
I've e-mailed SkySports, as an apparent neutral, but suggesting that Stoke may be looking for compensation due to SW's rulebreaking. This should be part of the reporting they are doing on the game.
|
|
|
Post by daverichards on Mar 30, 2008 0:27:33 GMT
76.2.2 order a specific performance
if this is one of the possible sanctions, then that to me means they can rder the result to given as they see fit, 3-0 no chance, but a 1-0 win as it was the inelligible player that scored... may be
|
|
|
Post by algor on Mar 30, 2008 0:58:53 GMT
This should be pinned.. We can not let this rest. Admin this goes beyond sour grapes this is cheating!
|
|
|
Post by anarchicalan on Mar 30, 2008 1:05:33 GMT
It could be argued that we got treated generously over the Pearson signing. I think the club have got that one covered though.
My point is that even though SWFC may have their point deducted and a fine imposed, I can't see us getting the 3-0 award as has been suggested.
Personally, I'm in favour of rules being consistent and honestly applied. However, I'm sure Sheffield United fans will feel the same way as I do, and look what happened to them!
Let's just say I'm not holding my breath in anticipation of the best possible result for us.
|
|
|
Post by algor on Mar 30, 2008 1:18:12 GMT
???
|
|
|
Post by daverichards on Mar 30, 2008 1:20:58 GMT
I think he is refering to Shef United going down at the expense of West Ham who fielded ineligible player all season
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Mar 30, 2008 1:27:19 GMT
They haven't got a leg to stand on, have they? This is far more than a technical breach.
Through their illegally-constructed 16, they were able to cover for tactical and injury-related eventualities throughout the 90 minutes that they couldn't have done if they'd played by the rules.
And they weren't doing it against an invisible enemy; we suffered directly and the rest of the Championship suffered indirectly.
If we'd have flouted the rules as flagrantly, we could have had the option of Gallagher at some point, as opposed to Buxton, who was never going to be a serious option to come on.
If we took it as far as we could, I'm sure we could get some very interesting results.
The only reason Leeds weren't deducted points is that they didn't earn any in the match in question. The fact Songo'o scored the goal, they gained a point and we effectively lost 2 gives this case an altogether different edge.
|
|
|
Post by prong on Mar 30, 2008 1:53:39 GMT
Oooohhh Chokey Chokey Chokey!!!!
They put their loanees in, you put your shit ones out, In out, in out, You hoof the ball about, The Wendies bag a goal and you start to cry, That's what it's all about!
Oooohhh Chokey Chokey Chokey! Oooohhh Chokey Chokey Chokey! Oooohhh Chokey Chokey Chokey!
Wendies down, Stoke fucked, ra ra ra!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2008 1:59:14 GMT
'ere y are prong, I'm going to log in at 3:01 - wondering where that hour went - and give you some karma stuff for making me laugh. been a traumatic day on 'ere ... now go to bed before we find out you drew 0-0 with brighton (brighton!) ah
|
|
big p
Spectator
Posts: 49
|
Post by big p on Mar 30, 2008 2:04:07 GMT
they drew 0-0 with brighton? a club with a big bunch of mincing rimmers as fans v brighton good result for the might leeds methinks.
|
|
|
Post by prong on Mar 30, 2008 2:06:47 GMT
Hahaha!!!
We drew 0-0, but Brighton fielded 8 Mike Tysons, 14 Ricky Hattons, Sooty & Sweep, 50 of them cage fighters, those german blokes from the casino with the dancing tigers, Bonnie Langford, the entire population of Wigan, 17 oatcake sellers, Peter Sellers, Big Issue sellers and the Harvester cellar, 5 Peter Sissons, 8 cheeky girls, 6 Barry Whites, 5 Gold Rings, 4 calling birds, 3 frog hens, 2 turtles heads and Alan Pardew.
Did we moan? Did we fuck.
I'm thinking of paying the Wendies fine myself.
|
|
big p
Spectator
Posts: 49
|
Post by big p on Mar 30, 2008 2:11:19 GMT
just pay yer court fine cunty before the rozzas come down on yer real hard real fast.
|
|
|
Post by prong on Mar 30, 2008 2:17:14 GMT
Sorry...
|
|
|
Post by markscfc72 on Mar 30, 2008 6:43:29 GMT
lets e-mail kammy see what he has to say about it!!
skysportsclub@bskyb.com
make sure you put 'Chris Kamara' in the subject line!
|
|
berty
Spectator
Posts: 36
|
Post by berty on Mar 30, 2008 8:15:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2008 8:22:34 GMT
"League regulations prohibit a club from naming more than five loan players in their match-day 16, but an oversight by the Wednesday coaching staff means the Owls appear to have fallen foul of the rule."
An oversight my arse - they knew exactly what they were doing!
|
|
|
Post by OldStokie on Mar 30, 2008 8:24:54 GMT
I can't see how we will benefit from this error by Wednesday. They will be dealt with severely but I can't see any way we will be awarded anything. To award Stoke a 3-0 win in the current situation would cause as much furore from the others vying for promotion as we have with them fielding 6 loanees.
A replay anyone?
Ps, given their curent situation, does anyone seriously think Wednesday did this on purpose? They may be idiots and whoever is running the club should be hung, drawn and quartered, but they've probably just brought themselves relegation by doing it. No way will the league allow the point they gained to stand. Would they?
OS.
|
|
berty
Spectator
Posts: 36
|
Post by berty on Mar 30, 2008 8:28:19 GMT
I think a replay would be a fair solution - with both teams competing on a level playing field (ie only using the 5 loan players). Anything else just vindicates cheating.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Mar 30, 2008 8:32:50 GMT
I think a replay would be fair. I can't see it happening to be honest.
Perhaps they could wait to the end of the season and see where Stoke and Wednesday finish and have a quick replay 3 days after the end of the season if a changed result would affect the relegation and promotion situations? Whatever happens, Wednesday should face a large penalty though. The rule they broke is not an obscure one - the implications were discussed on this board before the game and were being chewed over when we saw that we had seven loan players on the pitch during the warm up.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2008 8:37:57 GMT
Taken from the owls board:- Emergency loans can be taken out at any time between Friday 8 February and 5pm on March 27, 2008 and can only be used by Football League clubs loaning players in from other clubs in England, including those from the Premier League. International switches are not allowed including Scotland and Ireland.
Players can be signed for a maximum period of 93 days on such loans. Players on emergency loan can be recalled by their own clubs after 28 days have expired, but not before.
Only five loan players (whether standard or emergency) can be named on the team sheet for any one game and no more than four players can be loaned from one club to another in any one season.
Emergency loan signings can be made up to three hours before a league game.One poster wrote "The Football League would bottle taking off points at this stage of the season and as we're in a relegation battle. The authorities are gutless beyond common sense and would only deduct points from a safe side."How totally true that statement is and how ridiculous that it wouldn't work the other way around
|
|
|
Post by Mr_DaftBurger on Mar 30, 2008 8:51:17 GMT
And they pinched it from Luton. The problem the FA have is how to compensate us as we are the team who have suffered directly by this. Giving Wednesday a one or two point deduction, which seems to be the historical penalty for fielding ineligible players, would be ok with their rivals but would do nothing for us. One part of me wants to move on and stop mardarsing around. The other thinks that fucker who scored their goal shouldn't have been on the pitch and cost us 2 points which as we all know will probably be crucial to us. We should replay the game 11 against 10 although with our record against 10 men probably not! Shouldn't one the Stoke admin/backroom team check these sort of things and complain at the time?
|
|
|
Post by Mama's Mama on Mar 30, 2008 9:52:31 GMT
In theory there bloke that scored should not have been in the team. The lad that scored could've still been in the team, someone else might not of played.
|
|
|
Post by Stick It On Cort's Head on Mar 30, 2008 9:54:20 GMT
If we would have took our chances.......
Lets concentrate on the Palace game, this will be a fine/warning at the most.
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Mar 30, 2008 10:01:12 GMT
I can see them at least losing the point they gained yesterday.
Whether anyone in the corridors of power has the balls to go further is a moot point.
|
|
|
Post by stokemark on Mar 30, 2008 10:26:09 GMT
We will get fuck all out of this - The League will bottle it
Disgraceful IMHO and Wednesday knew EXACTLY what they were doing
That said, Stoke should have picked up on this earlier and TP should have been referring to this in his post match excuse, sorry analysis !!
|
|
|
Post by Marc01 on Mar 30, 2008 10:37:39 GMT
Doubt Stoke would risk accepting a replay - may end up losing the replay and losing out on promotion by one point!
|
|
|
Post by wardrobe monster on Mar 30, 2008 10:44:00 GMT
It wont be a replay, as that give Wednesday a chance to capitalise on their breach by winning the game. It will a fine and points deduction probably, but the best we can possibly hope for is a 0-3 score reversal imposed by the FL, but that is highly unlikely as it's too controversial and the FL dont do controversial.
|
|
|
Post by winger on Mar 30, 2008 10:51:36 GMT
deck your whinging you bunch of girls, you exemplify all that is wrong with society today. we should of won the match easily if Cresswell had stuck one more of seventeen chances away, that's the fucking point, not that they've got some fringe Chelsea player on loan or something.
|
|