SWFC loan player thing - Fooftball League reply

[Deleted]

Don't get too excited....

I received the following response from the Football League tonight, following my request for a comment from them over Sheffield Wednesday's abuse of the loan player rule.

Basically a "No Comment" response

My own email to them is under their response.

- -
From: [e-mail]
Subject: RE: Sheffield Wednesday V Stoke City - Loan Players - Saturday 29 March, 2008
Date: 2 April 2008 17:47:31 BDT
To: [REAL NAME REMOVED TO PROTECT ME FROM ABUSIVE SWFC and BCFC FANS]


Dear Malvern

Thank you for your email.

The League is of course aware that Sheffield Wednesday named six loan players in their 16 man matchday squad. This is however a matter for the Board to consider and we are not in a position to comment further.

Patricia Brown
Customer Services
The Football League
www.football-league.co.uk

This e-mail and any attachments are intended only for the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged and confidential information. If you have received this message in error or there are any problems, please notify the sender immediately and delete the message from your computer and any copies. The unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is forbidden. Any views set out in this e-mail are the views of the individual sending it, and not the views of The Football League Limited unless otherwise stated. This e-mail should not be seen as forming a legally binding contract unless otherwise stated. Although we believe this e-mail and any attachment are virus-free it is your responsibility to ensure this on receipt.


________________________________

From:
Sent: 31 March 2008 16:31
To: FL
Subject: Sheffield Wednesday V Stoke City - Loan Players - Saturday 29 March, 2008


Dear Sirs

I do not know if this is a FA or League matter, however, I would appreciate your comments on the following:
Re: Loan Players - Sheffield Wednesday V Stoke City on Saturday 29 March, 2008
I understand that Sheffield Wednesday face a fine for including too many loan signings in their squad against Stoke City on Saturday 29, a game that ended in a 1-1 draw with one of Sheffield Wednesday's loan players scoring their equaliser.

There are five issues here:
1. The rules
2. The advantage to Wednesday
3. The disadvantage to Stoke
4. The disadvantage to those competing with Wedneday against relegation
5. The advantage to those teams competing with Stoke for promotion
You can argue that because of a breach of the rules, Wednesday were advantaged and Stoke were disadvantaged. Also advantaged/disadvantaged were all the teams competing with both Stoke and Wednesday for promotion/survival respectively.

To genuinely enforce the rules and prevent any further reoccurrence from any other club, one needs to undo the effect of the breach, i.e award Stoke the match and all three points and to dock Wednesday their point. Only after that should the breach itself be penalised through further points deduction or fine. In this way no team would flaunt the rules again.

A fine alone would open up the floodgates to abusing this rule - particularly at this time of the season when promotion and relegation are acute issues worth millions of pounds. A fine of a few thousand pounds does not right the wrong, nor does it compensate Stoke. Conversely it encourages teams to abuse the system and steal a march on their competitors in return for a relatively meagre fine. It is no real disincentive.

One could argue that this breach did not have a material effect on this particular match and that no advantage / disadvantage element took place. However Stoke left out two Premiership loan players namely Paul Gallagher and Gabriel Zakuani in order to comply with this very rule which needs to be considered.

I would be most interested in your response.
Thank you
MalvernStokie
- -

[fullerlegend]

fucksake.

[Linx]

Well, what did we expect?

[robin1302]

Same old FA

[Timmy]

It's probably an automated (clone) reply, FA just want to ensure people have had a reply. Personally i dont think stoke will be awarded with sweet FA but there's always lady luck!

[Deleted]

I assume that this is a 'shut up and go away' response. But I do think that it is worth making them address the issue fully. I think I will follow it up by requesting they send me a full response when the board have reached their decision.

[Vodkab1ock]

its the obvious reply and i dont think you would of got anything different, until they make there decision we just got to wait. The fact the league is so close at the top and the bottom they got to make the right decision or there could be lawsuits flying around everywhere. time will tell.

[Orbs]

Like i said at the time you are wasting your time writing in the first place. - Hope you see this Ilford Dave!

[CalgaryPotter]

cdscfc said:

its the obvious reply and i dont think you would of got anything different, until they make there decision we just got to wait. The fact the league is so close at the top and the bottom they got to make the right decision or there could be lawsuits flying around everywhere. time will tell.

No real reason for a lawsuit to be involved.
They broke the law, have no defence and should receive a harsh punishment.
If we benefit as we should then great, if not, they should have a minimum of a point deducted or else the door is wide open for further abuse.
With Zakuani on the bench we could've replaced Cort instead of letting him play 60 minutes injured.

The FA (and indeed UEFA and FIFA) are all wank and do nothing but pamper to the Big 4.

[doningtonphil]

I received my reply. Interesting that the lady added the closing line...

"We are also aware that Sheffield Wednesday only used 4 of the 6 players".

[stokelad]

wankers

[DannyStokie]

It's pluddy stupid anyway, how could Brian anti laws not have noticed it.

[Soi Cowboy]

To be honest what reply did you expect? Thanks for pointing that out- we are probably going to fine them but have yet to discuss it and make it public but will tell you in the mean-time. Be fair there was nothing else they could do except perhaps not reply at all


Well written letter but you couldn't honestly expect a reply saying what course of action they are going to take


Is a delicate matter and put yourself in their shoes- whatever decision they make is going to upset someone. Seems to me Wednesday expect a slap on the wrist which I what I expect they'll get- IF they had played all loanees then it would have been a far more serious matter- they didn't but did break the rules. Points deduction would be very harsh I feel.

[Mr Jon]

A typical non-commital response from the powers-that-be.

When is the Board supposed to be making this decision? The season is drawing to a close so they'd best get a move-on.

Or shall they bury their heads in the sand and hope that Stoke go up automatically and that the Fowls survive by more than 1 point, thus making any decision irrelevant?

FA - never has there been a more suitable acronym

[Deleted]

And the correspondence continues...


- -

Dear Patricia

Thank you for your response.

In the first instance, can you to let me know when the board are due to discuss this matter.

Further could I request that the FL address the points in my original email at such time as the board have finished deliberating.

Kind regards
Malvern

- -

Dear Malvern

We are in receipt of your further email but are not in a position to advise when the Board will consider the matter.

Patricia Brown
Customer Services
The Football League
www.football-league.co.uk

________________________________

I don't think they are going to discuss it properly. I think they are going to procrastinate until it is all forgotten.

They really should clear this up before the next round of games or it becomes a massive problem. Right now that could make any decision they want and the impact can be taken in the context of a single game played less than a week ago. If they wait another few games it is a decision taken in the context of the entire season for one or other club. It is going to be a much more difficult decision to make. All this waiting favours SWFC and not Stoke.

[andy9196]

Got the same reply

[andy9196]

and another when I asked to be kept informed, as they said'

Dear Mr Stokes

Thank you for your further email.

Such decision will be widely covered in the media and, due to our limited resources and the high volume of communications we receive, we woudl suggest that you monitor this source.

Patricia '

Tossers, they need to sort it out !

[PerCyfilth ....Captains Log]

They will bottle it till the season ends hoping that any decision they finally make would not have affected the outcomes for either team. If you employ rules then any punishment should be known to all BEFORE it happens not after.If they decide not to punish Wednesday by at least deducting the point whats the point of the rule? Or is it like a speed camera just a money making cash cow for the FL.? Fucking amateurs! After all if we didnt have rules where would we be??? FRANCE!