|
|
Post by knowingeye on Apr 11, 2008 8:25:24 GMT
Yorkshire Post 10th April 2008
By Richard Sutcliffe
FOOTBALL League board members will today meet to discuss whether to punish Sheffield Wednesday over their breach of the loan rules.
The Owls, in the dock for naming too many loan players in their matchday 16 to face Stoke City in March, will be hoping to escape with a rap over the knuckles.
However, should League officials instead decide that a more appropriate sanction would be the docking of the point gained from last month's 1-1 draw with the Potters then it would hand a major boost to Barnsley and the rest of Wednesday's relegation rivals.
There could even be a knock-on effect for clubs such as Hull City at the top end of the Championship with promotion-chasing Stoke then possibly calling for two points to be added to their current tally of 69.
Any plea by the Potters would be likely to focus on the March 29 equaliser being scored by one of the loanees, Franck Songo'o, and the fact that manager Tony Pulis had to omit on-loan duo Paul Gallagher and Gabriel Zakuani from his own matchday 16 at Hillsborough to comply with League rules.
The matter will be discussed at the League's monthly board meeting, although spokesman John Nagle last night stressed that a decision will not necessarily be reached today over what punishment, if any, will be handed out.
However, he did confirm to the Yorkshire Post: "The matter is on the agenda."
Neither the Owls nor Stoke would comment yesterday with the Potters' only public pronouncement so far coming 24 hours after the game.
Chief executive Tony Scholes said: "We are waiting to see what emerges before deciding whether it is appropriate for us to consider any further action on the matter."
Much will depend on how serious the League board view the breach, though precedent points to Wednesday being hit with, at worst, a fine.
When Leeds United were guilty of the same offence last season during a 2-1 defeat at Burnley, they were fined £2,000 (half of which was suspended) with the fact not all six loanees named in the 16 made it on to the field weighing heavily in their favour.
That has clear parallels with Wednesday's case due to two of the six loanees, Adam Bolder and Bartosz Sluarski, being confined to the bench throughout the 90 minutes against Stoke.
Any fans from S6 worried that Leeds losing at Burnley may have been a factor in the Elland Road club's punishment being a fine rather than the docking of points are also likely to be cheered by the case of Swansea City in 2003.
Like the Owls, the Welsh club named half-a-dozen loan players in their 16 for a game that finished 1-1, but due to not all six getting on the field, they were let off with a reprimand.
Such an outcome this time around would be a major boost to not only Laws's men, but also Stoke's rivals in the race for automatic promotion.
The addition of two points to their current tally of 69, for instance, would give Pulis's side a massive boost in the race for the Premier League and leave the division's other high-fliers fuming.
One chairman who is unconcerned by the saga, however, is Hull's Paul Duffen – even though the Tigers trail Stoke by a point wit
h a game in hand.
Duffen said: "Whatever the Football League decide to do over Sheffield Wednesday having too many loan players, we do not envisage any additional points being awarded to Stoke."
The League, meanwhile, have confirmed that the Championship play-off final will take place on Saturday, May 24.
The switch from the traditional Bank Holiday Monday date is due to Euro 2008 with the deadline for players to be called up by the competing nations being midnight on the Saturday.
With none of the home countries having qualified, a possible return to the Monday was considered, but the League felt the presence of several foreign internationals in the Championship meant it should remain on the original date.
The League One final will take place on Sunday, May 25 with the League Two promotion decider rounding off the play-off final weekend at Wembley the following day.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2008 8:26:29 GMT
Link didn't work for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by jpm64 on Apr 11, 2008 8:30:33 GMT
Owls in the dock over 'Stoke six'
Owls: League to consider 'infringement'
« Previous « PreviousNext » Next »
View GalleryBy Riochard Sutcliffe
FOOTBALL League board members will today meet to discuss whether to punish Sheffield Wednesday over their breach of the loan rules.
The Owls, in the dock for naming too many loan players in their matchday 16 to face Stoke City in March, will be hoping to escape with a rap over the knuckles.
However, should League officials instead decide that a more appropriate sanction would be the docking of the point gained from last month's 1-1 draw with the Potters then it would hand a major boost to Barnsley and the rest of Wednesday's relegation rivals.
There could even be a knock-on effect for clubs such as Hull City at the top end of the Championship with promotion-chasing Stoke then possibly calling for two points to be added to their current tally of 69.
Any plea by the Potters would be likely to focus on the March 29 equaliser being scored by one of the loanees, Franck Songo'o, and the fact that manager Tony Pulis had to omit on-loan duo Paul Gallagher and Gabriel Zakuani from his own matchday 16 at Hillsborough to comply with League rules.
The matter will be discussed at the League's monthly board meeting, although spokesman John Nagle last night stressed that a decision will not necessarily be reached today over what punishment, if any, will be handed out.
However, he did confirm to the Yorkshire Post: "The matter is on the agenda."
Neither the Owls nor Stoke would comment yesterday with the Potters' only public pronouncement so far coming 24 hours after the game.
Chief executive Tony Scholes said: "We are waiting to see what emerges before deciding whether it is appropriate for us to consider any further action on the matter."
Much will depend on how serious the League board view the breach, though precedent points to Wednesday being hit with, at worst, a fine.
When Leeds United were guilty of the same offence last season during a 2-1 defeat at Burnley, they were fined £2,000 (half of which was suspended) with the fact not all six loanees named in the 16 made it on to the field weighing heavily in their favour.
That has clear parallels with Wednesday's case due to two of the six loanees, Adam Bolder and Bartosz Sluarski, being confined to the bench throughout the 90 minutes against Stoke.
Any fans from S6 worried that Leeds losing at Burnley may have been a factor in the Elland Road club's punishment being a fine rather than the docking of points are also likely to be cheered by the case of Swansea City in 2003.
Like the Owls, the Welsh club named half-a-dozen loan players in their 16 for a game that finished 1-1, but due to not all six getting on the field, they were let off with a reprimand.
Such an outcome this time around would be a major boost to not only Laws's men, but also Stoke's rivals in the race for automatic promotion.
The addition of two points to their current tally of 69, for instance, would give Pulis's side a massive boost in the race for the Premier League and leave the division's other high-fliers fuming.
One chairman who is unconcerned by the saga, however, is Hull's Paul Duffen – even though the Tigers trail Stoke by a point with a game in hand.
Duffen said: "Whatever the Football League decide to do over Sheffield Wednesday having too many loan players, we do not envisage any additional points being awarded to Stoke."
The League, meanwhile, have confirmed that the Championship play-off final will take place on Saturday, May 24.
The switch from the traditional Bank Holiday Monday date is due to Euro 2008 with the deadline for players to be called up by the competing nations being midnight on the Saturday.
With none of the home countries having qualified, a possible return to the Monday was considered, but the League felt the presence of several foreign internationals in the Championship meant it should remain on the original date.
The League One final will take place on Sunday, May 25 with the League Two promotion decider rounding off the play-off final weekend at Wembley the following day.
The full article contains 731 words and appears in n/a newspaper.Last Updated: 10 April 2008 9:15 AM
Page 1 of 1
|
|
|
|
Post by wardrobe monster on Apr 11, 2008 8:33:15 GMT
Looking at the Swansea incident, this issue is dead and buried......time to move on.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrblobbysdad on Apr 11, 2008 8:43:43 GMT
Re-arrange these words to make a well known saying....
"At Straws Clutching".
We need to just focus on the remaining games. Cant see anything coming Stoke's way from this.
|
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Apr 11, 2008 8:49:25 GMT
To be fair, as people were saying last week, I can't see how the Swansea affair is a real precedent.
Swansea themselves informed the ref well before kick-off that they'd accidentally named an illegal 16.
They then withdrew the 6th loanee and played the 90 minutes with 4 subs.
So, if anything, their cock-up left them at a major disadvantage and a slap on the knuckles was clearly the right thing in that case.
Laws had illegal options to call on right until the last minute of injury-time.
And, as a parting shot, he claimed he was unaware of the rule. Almost laughable.
|
|
|
|
Post by stokebill on Apr 11, 2008 9:41:49 GMT
Owls escape points loss over 'Stoke six'
By Ian Appleyard
Exclusive
SHEFFIELD Wednesday have been fined £2,000 by the Football League for breaking rules regarding loan players.
Owls manager Brian Laws picked six loan players in the matchday 16 for last month's Championship game against Stoke City – exceeding the maximum of five permitted under League rules.
If the board of the Football League had bowed to pressure from Stoke and reviewed the result of the game, which ended in a 1-1 draw, it could have had a significant effect on the both the relegation battle and promotion race.
However, since only four of the loan signings actually took to the field during the game, they have ruled that a financial penalty is sufficient.
The League will inform all its members of the decison today and make the decision public soon after.
In recent years, both Leeds United and Swansea City have been rapped on the knuckles for commiting similar offences in relation to loan players.
The Owls, who host Plymouth Argyle in a televised game on Monday, no longer have six loan players on their books as striker Enoch Showunmi has returned to Bristol City.
On-loan Sunderland midfielder Graham Kavanagh will miss out on Monday due to a hamstring injury, but Frank Songo'o, Ben Sahar, Adam Bolder and Bartosz Slusarski are all likely to feature.
Laws, meanwhile, has stressed the need for the Owls to hold their nerve in the knowledge that the club could drop back into the relegation zone this weekend without kicking a ball.
Leicester City, who occupy the third relegation spot, are just one point behind the Owls and host bottom-of-the-table Colchester United tomorrow, whose relegation has already been confirmed.
Laws said: "There is every chance that we could drop back into the bottom three on Saturday, but we have to hold our nerve and remember that our destiny is in our own hands.
"We cannot rely on anyone else doing us favours," he added. "There are seven or eight teams still involved in this scrap and we have to look on our final four games as four Cup finals."
|
|
|
|
Post by knowingeye on Apr 11, 2008 9:43:21 GMT
£2,000??????????????? Where's the punishment in that?
|
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Apr 11, 2008 9:46:15 GMT
Utter farce.
I wasn't expecting anything for us (that's just the way things work) but I genuinely thought they'd have to give them them more than slapped knuckles - certainly a BIG fine and probably deduct the point
They were the first club who benefited from an outright rule breach. The Swansea and Leeds examples were sufficiently different for them to look at it with fresh eyes.
Laws' claim that he was unaware of the rule was breathtaking.
But they've got away with it and just had to pay a week's wage for a fringe player.
Defies belief really.
Obviously the rule may as well be removed from the book now. It's clearly not worth the paper it's written on.
|
|
|
|
Post by knowingeye on Apr 11, 2008 9:47:09 GMT
What if it was Stoke? We all know what would happen then.
|
|
|
|
Post by knowles on Apr 11, 2008 9:56:35 GMT
Utterly outraged by this.
Where on earth is the justice for Stoke, Southampton, Leicester, Coventry, Barnsley and Blackpool?
This is scandalous- they have set the benchmark with this outcome.
I see no reason why every club across the country shouldn't break the rules from between now and the end of the season.
Line up for tomorrow:
Nash
Zakuani
Shawcross
Riggott
Dicko
Gallagher
Whelan
Delap
Pearson
Ameobi
Bothroyd
That is fine- it will only cost us £2,000
Piss off Football League
|
|
|
|
Post by viewfromthecrowsnest on Apr 11, 2008 10:08:13 GMT
Football league, what's the point in rules if you are not going to enforce them effectively? Especially if a side benefits from breaking a rule and ends up with a soft penalty. 2000 is so insignificant, there's little perceptible difference in breaking a rule than abiding by it.
You may as well give teams an option to pay 2000 to field/name extra loanees before a match.
Good reply Knowles, but TP is too honest to go down that route...
|
|
|
|
Post by knowles on Apr 11, 2008 10:14:13 GMT
You're right crowy- we won't break the rules as, like you say, TP is far too honest. I wouldn't want to go up cheating anyway  |
|
|
|
Post by Denis Smiths fow staith on Apr 11, 2008 10:30:57 GMT
That decision is wrong for the simple reason that Wedneday, although they didn't use all the loan subs, had a distinct advantage in being able to choose who to bring on i.e an attacker or defender depending on the situation of the game. Cheats never prosper eh !
|
|
|
|
Post by stokemark on Apr 11, 2008 10:32:35 GMT
Disgraceful cop out by the Football League IMHO
I didnt expect Stoke to get anything but £2000 fine ?
Pathetic
|
|
|
|
Post by knowingeye on Apr 11, 2008 11:07:51 GMT
It's akin to getting a parking ticket for committing multiple murders! Ridiculous!!!!!
|
|
owlzat
Academy Starlet
WAWAW
Posts: 126
|
Post by owlzat on Apr 11, 2008 11:14:30 GMT
I said from the beginning on here that yor fans were clutching at straws if you thought Stoke would be awarded points for this oversight which is what it obviously was.
If Stoke played all thier loan players on purpose for the remaining games as some have suggested they do on here then don't you think the league would see this as a serious breech of the rules on purpose and not just an oversight resulting in a bigger fine and probable points deduction?
|
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Apr 11, 2008 11:21:47 GMT
owlzat - don't try to pull the "oversight" card. If most Stoke fans and most Owls fans knew the rule then don't even try to pretend that Laws didn't know it. He may be a bad manager but I refuse to believe that he is that incompetant.
Most Stoke fans were not clutching at straws, we didn't expect two points to be awarded to us and we'd be embarrassed if they were. But most of us HOPED that Wednesday would suffer at least a 1 point deduction as that is the ONLY way to compensate the other clubs at the foot of the division for Wednesday's cheating.
|
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Apr 11, 2008 11:24:43 GMT
I said from the beginning on here that yor fans were clutching at straws if you thought Stoke would be awarded points for this oversight which is what it obviously was. If Stoke played all thier loan players on purpose for the remaining games as some have suggested they do on here then don't you think the league would see this as a serious breech of the rules on purpose and not just an oversight resulting in a bigger fine and probable points deduction? Beleive you me know stoke fan thought we'd get the points, hoped to get the points ? yes, thought we would ? NO. And Im not buying for one moment that Laws didn't know the rule, or SOMEONE at the club didn't know the rule, it's pretty unimaginable that it didn't cross the minds of anyone at Sheff Wed. even us peons were aware of the rule. You've got off extremely lightly. |
|
|
|
Post by DrGonzo on Apr 11, 2008 11:35:26 GMT
If a precedent is set, then a precedent is set. If we have more loan players in our squad than which is allowed we will be fined the same amount as you have.
You CANNOT say that because we did it 'deliberately' that we should have a bigger punishment, especially as it's more than likely that you did it deliberately as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by anarchicalan on Apr 11, 2008 11:40:30 GMT
It's akin to getting a parking ticket for committing multiple murders! Ridiculous!!!!! Don't talk crap! This is football, not somebody's life! You usually talk reasonable sense, but you should retract this immediately. |
|
|
|
Post by anarchicalan on Apr 11, 2008 11:43:37 GMT
You're right crowy- we won't break the rules as, like you say, TP is far too honest. I wouldn't want to go up cheating anyway Don't know about his being honest, but he's not stupid enough to believe we'd get away with it. I agree we shouldn't go up cheating anyway. If we get promoted, let's do it with heads held high. |
|
|
|
Post by stokebill on Apr 11, 2008 11:52:12 GMT
Owlzat, In the wake of the Ameobi and Pearson signings, the team for Sheffield was much debated on here. Most of us knew the loan rule from the outset, all of us by kick off. To be fair - few of us knew the 4 on the pitch part of it though.  Did Laws think he could just play an indefinite amount of loan players? He can't be that thick. I'd like to think he didn't do it on purpose but ignorance just can't be any sort of defence. The fact only 4 Sheffield players took to the field of play at any one time was pure fluke. Law's claimed to not know the rule at all, so he can't then take plead leniency because only 4 were on the pitch. They should have purely ruled on there being too many loan players in the squad, nothing more. Two threads of many in the days pre-Sheffield. As you can see we're considering (and did) playing injured players and leaving out a loan replacement, Zakuani. oatcakefanzine.proboards27.com/index.c.cgi?board=Potters&action=display&thread=1206640740oatcakefanzine.proboards27.com/index.c.cgi?board=Potters&action=display&thread=1206704256You have been incredibly lucky. |
|
|
|
Post by knowingeye on Apr 11, 2008 11:55:24 GMT
It's akin to getting a parking ticket for committing multiple murders! Ridiculous!!!!! Don't talk crap! This is football, not somebody's life! You usually talk reasonable sense, but you should retract this immediately. I'm making the point how ridiculous the decision is with an even more ridiculous example, albeit perhaps in bad taste. Ridiculous nevertheless. |
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Apr 11, 2008 12:54:41 GMT
If Wednesday can successfully play the 'ignorance of the rule' card, surely that really means anyone can - at any time in the future.
How the hell could professional football administrators be oblivious to this most widely known Football League regulation after two publicised cases (although neither involved the precedent of a team benefiting by an outright breach) and the fat that even us plebs on here were fully conversant with the law.
It's schoolboy stuff.
|
|
