|
Post by polofrance on Aug 14, 2015 19:18:26 GMT
Then how the fuck did QPR get away with loaning Barton to Marseille when he was on that 10 game ban - if i recall he was allowed to play for then from day 1 and then was allowed to go straight back into the QPR team on his return! He still served his ban, 8league games and one cup match, QPR had already played one match www.20minutes.fr/sport/998741-20120906-joey-barton-va-bien-purger-suspension-france Another similar one is the Rangers guy who got suspended for two months for fighting after the playoff's he's been transferred to my local team here in France and will not play until November
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 14, 2015 19:21:11 GMT
From the Barton example:
The Fifa regulation cited in the statement reads: "Any disciplinary suspension imposed on a player prior to a transfer must be enforced or applied by the new association at which the player is registered.
"The former association is obliged to notify the new association of any sanction in writing and upon issuing the ITC (International Transfer Certificate)."
|
|
|
Post by Fred Ferret on Aug 14, 2015 19:25:34 GMT
I agree that it is very likely somebody would attempt to use it for gain in the future. What makes this different to situations like above is that he incurred the suspension under Italian rules but is being punished under English ones? If you get sent off in the cup here, you know you are going to be banned for the next calendar game end of? It appears also that the FA did have the option to exercise a cup ban if they so wished? Somebody has suggested they could/should have exercised a cup ban, that doesn't mean they're correct and the FA did have that option available to them though. If UEFA say that all bans to players have to be honoured, then I'm not really sure what else the FA could do in this case, without creating a potentially extremely uncomfortable rod for their own back in the future. And the FA haven't used their discretion in any other situation? What about the way they handled the WHU / Sheff Utd grubby Tevez situation? Didn't they choose not to impose the appropriate penalty on WHU? Granted, not the same issue but the FA will no doubt have a number of skeletons in their decision cupboard? Something smells about the FA and yet it doesn't seem to linger when it involves certain favoured clubs. The FA could quite simply apply an inherited Italian penalty in an Italian way. Anybody, incurring a penalty under FA jurisdiction could equally have no right to make use a foreign sanction to suit their own ends in an English scenario. We know shit happens, we also know the FA and Dyke are full of shit.
|
|
|
Post by baystokie on Aug 14, 2015 19:26:32 GMT
Hahahahahahaha Let me get this straight. So a ban for a yellow card in February 2015, which is specific to the Italian cup competition and not transferable to an Italian league game is somehow applicable to an English Premier League game in the following season? That is the largest load of bitter, vindictive, prejudiced, corrupt FA bollocks I have ever had the misfortune to have to attempt to make sense of. Seems quite simple to me - Italian FA distinguish between competitions so a Coppa related ban applies only to the next Coppa match - XS team were knocked out so ban hangs fire until his next Coppa match. Transferred to Stoke FA do NOT distinguish between competitions so when they received the clearance with it's attached ban, they implemented it for first competitive game in England. FIFA allows each country's FA to have their own rules so there is unlikely to be consistency in regulations The one question I have is - did we ask if there were disciplinary issues involving the player when negotiating? If we were told 'yes', we ought to have assumed that he would miss the NEXT match, whatever it was (he came under our FA rules when he signed). Any appeal would surely fail as the FA could not go against their own 'non-distinguishing rule. If we were told 'No' - that's something else.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 14, 2015 19:29:41 GMT
Somebody has suggested they could/should have exercised a cup ban, that doesn't mean they're correct and the FA did have that option available to them though. If UEFA say that all bans to players have to be honoured, then I'm not really sure what else the FA could do in this case, without creating a potentially extremely uncomfortable rod for their own back in the future. And the FA haven't used their discretion in any other situation? What about the way they handled the WHU / Sheff Utd grubby Tevez situation? Didn't they choose not to impose the appropriate penalty on WHU? Granted, not the same issue but the FA will no doubt have a number of skeletons in their decision cupboard? Something smells about the FA and yet it doesn't seem to linger when it involves certain favoured clubs. The FA could quite simply apply an inherited Italian penalty in an Italian way. Anybody, incurring a penalty under FA jurisdiction could equally have no right to make use a foreign sanction to suit their own ends in an English scenario. We know shit happens, we also know the FA and Dyke are full of shit. What discretion could they have used though? What do you want them to do, simply pretend that he didn't have the suspension at all and completely break FIFA's rules or move it to the Luton game, which would have opened a massive can of worms for the future?
|
|
|
Post by baystokie on Aug 14, 2015 19:33:44 GMT
From the Barton example: The Fifa regulation cited in the statement reads: "Any disciplinary suspension imposed on a player prior to a transfer must be enforced or applied by the new association at which the player is registered. "The former association is obliged to notify the new association of any sanction in writing and upon issuing the ITC (International Transfer Certificate)." Wish this post had been made nearer page 1 !
|
|
|
Post by hooftastic on Aug 14, 2015 19:36:23 GMT
And the FA haven't used their discretion in any other situation? What about the way they handled the WHU / Sheff Utd grubby Tevez situation? Didn't they choose not to impose the appropriate penalty on WHU? Granted, not the same issue but the FA will no doubt have a number of skeletons in their decision cupboard? Something smells about the FA and yet it doesn't seem to linger when it involves certain favoured clubs. The FA could quite simply apply an inherited Italian penalty in an Italian way. Anybody, incurring a penalty under FA jurisdiction could equally have no right to make use a foreign sanction to suit their own ends in an English scenario. We know shit happens, we also know the FA and Dyke are full of shit. What discretion could they have used though? What do you want them to do, simply pretend that he didn't have the suspension at all and completely break FIFA's rules or move it to the Luton game, which would have opened a massive can of worms for the future? Punish him as intended? Miss the Luton game.
|
|
|
Post by jeycov on Aug 14, 2015 19:38:47 GMT
Seems strange that our club were unaware of it though?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 14, 2015 19:39:18 GMT
What discretion could they have used though? What do you want them to do, simply pretend that he didn't have the suspension at all and completely break FIFA's rules or move it to the Luton game, which would have opened a massive can of worms for the future? Punish him as intended? Miss the Luton game. So you don't think that would set a massive (and potentially chaotic) precedent for the future?
|
|
|
Post by oatcakesteve on Aug 14, 2015 19:42:17 GMT
I think most people are pissed off at how late this has come about. It fucking stinks.
|
|
|
Post by ukcstokie on Aug 14, 2015 19:43:27 GMT
Must be Scholes fault.
|
|
|
Post by Smudge_SCFC on Aug 14, 2015 19:44:48 GMT
And the FA haven't used their discretion in any other situation? What about the way they handled the WHU / Sheff Utd grubby Tevez situation? Didn't they choose not to impose the appropriate penalty on WHU? Granted, not the same issue but the FA will no doubt have a number of skeletons in their decision cupboard? Something smells about the FA and yet it doesn't seem to linger when it involves certain favoured clubs. The FA could quite simply apply an inherited Italian penalty in an Italian way. Anybody, incurring a penalty under FA jurisdiction could equally have no right to make use a foreign sanction to suit their own ends in an English scenario. We know shit happens, we also know the FA and Dyke are full of shit. What discretion could they have used though? What do you want them to do, simply pretend that he didn't have the suspension at all and completely break FIFA's rules or move it to the Luton game, which would have opened a massive can of worms for the future? I have to disagree Paul. I don't think it's setting a dangerous precedent at all. Shaqiri's ban was competition specific and this in itself negates any club trying to switch their bans around as they would run straight into that brick wall at the very first moment. This ban was to be served specifically and ONLY in one competition. Furthermore, if we (the FA) now want to apply the ban to a league game then it could be argued that one one of the league games in which Shaqiri didn't play for Inter towards the end of last season covers the ban. I don't see how it doesn't in fact, if we're applying the criteria we are to this situation. There is no possibility on this planet that one of the bigger clubs would have this done to them and their record signing. No chance whatsoever. That's one of the things that really stinks about this whole thing. Remember when Wayne Rooney was sent off in that World Cup qualifier? This same FA fought tooth and nail to get his (deserved) ban reduced or overturned. They fight when it suits them.
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Aug 14, 2015 19:45:37 GMT
Hahahahahahaha Let me get this straight. So a ban for a yellow card in February 2015, which is specific to the Italian cup competition and not transferable to an Italian league game is somehow applicable to an English Premier League game in the following season? That is the largest load of bitter, vindictive, prejudiced, corrupt FA bollocks I have ever had the misfortune to have to attempt to make sense of. Seems quite simple to me - Italian FA distinguish between competitions so a Coppa related ban applies only to the next Coppa match - XS team were knocked out so ban hangs fire until his next Coppa match. Transferred to Stoke FA do NOT distinguish between competitions so when they received the clearance with it's attached ban, they implemented it for first competitive game in England. FIFA allows each country's FA to have their own rules so there is unlikely to be consistency in regulations The one question I have is - did we ask if there were disciplinary issues involving the player when negotiating? If we were told 'yes', we ought to have assumed that he would miss the NEXT match, whatever it was (he came under our FA rules when he signed). Any appeal would surely fail as the FA could not go against their own 'non-distinguishing rule. If we were told 'No' - that's something else. I think you've summed it up perfectly. A sense of proportion rather than paranoia is required here. The ideas that the FA apply special rules to Stoke City or that Greg Dyke personally has anything to do with this application of the rules are, with respect to fellow posters, absurd. As you say there is a question of why Stoke City were unaware of this, but actually it wouldn't have made any difference whatever to the decision to sign him. It has only made a difference to those fans who weren't going to Tottenham but changed their mind when we signed him.
|
|
|
Post by MuddyWoody on Aug 14, 2015 19:46:42 GMT
Hahahahahahaha Let me get this straight. So a ban for a yellow card in February 2015, which is specific to the Italian cup competition and not transferable to an Italian league game is somehow applicable to an English Premier League game in the following season? That is the largest load of bitter, vindictive, prejudiced, corrupt FA bollocks I have ever had the misfortune to have to attempt to make sense of. Seems quite simple to me - Italian FA distinguish between competitions so a Coppa related ban applies only to the next Coppa match - XS team were knocked out so ban hangs fire until his next Coppa match. Transferred to Stoke FA do NOT distinguish between competitions so when they received the clearance with it's attached ban, they implemented it for first competitive game in England. FIFA allows each country's FA to have their own rules so there is unlikely to be consistency in regulations The one question I have is - did we ask if there were disciplinary issues involving the player when negotiating? If we were told 'yes', we ought to have assumed that he would miss the NEXT match, whatever it was (he came under our FA rules when he signed). Any appeal would surely fail as the FA could not go against their own 'non-distinguishing rule. If we were told 'No' - that's something else. Well I'm glad it seems simple to someone.................
|
|
|
Post by crouchie on Aug 14, 2015 19:47:24 GMT
surely to god all cards are voided at the end of a season and you start from scratch at the start of the next one
|
|
|
Post by oatcakesteve on Aug 14, 2015 19:49:40 GMT
surely to god all cards are voided at the end of a season and you start from scratch at the start of the next one You'd think so.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 14, 2015 19:52:49 GMT
What discretion could they have used though? What do you want them to do, simply pretend that he didn't have the suspension at all and completely break FIFA's rules or move it to the Luton game, which would have opened a massive can of worms for the future? I have to disagree Paul. I don't think it's setting a dangerous precedent at all. Shaqiri's ban was competition specific and this in itself negates any club trying to switch their bans around as they would run straight into that brick wall at the very first moment. This ban was to be served specifically and ONLY in one competition. Furthermore, if we (the FA) now want to apply the ban to a league game then it could be argued that one one of the league games in which Shaqiri didn't play for Inter towards the end of last season covers the ban. I don't see how it doesn't in fact, if we're applying the criteria we are to this situation. There is no possibility on this planet that one of the bigger clubs would have this done to them and their record signing. No chance whatsoever. That's one of the things that really stinks about this whole thing. Remember when Wayne Rooney was sent off in that World Cup qualifier? This same FA fought tooth and nail to get his (deserved) ban reduced or overturned. They fight when it suits them. It sets a huge precedent Smudge. The original suspension is for a one match ban, that one match ban was still on his shoulders when we signed him. It's completely irrelevant how the Italian FA impose those bans, we're talking about two completely different FA's here with their own rules and in this country the ban applies to the next game the player is available for, regardless of the competition. If the ban had been carried over to the Luton game, then the next time ANY player was sent off in a cup game in England, then their club would argue that a precedent had been set and as a result, would argue that their player shouldn't be suspended until their next cup match as well.
|
|
|
Post by petemac on Aug 14, 2015 19:53:39 GMT
I'm gutted, was looking forward to seeing the lad in action,
On a positive note, he gets to kick off his Stoke career at home in front of the faithful, he will be more fired up.
|
|
|
Post by crouchie on Aug 14, 2015 19:54:45 GMT
Italian FA distinguish between competitions so a Coppa related ban applies only to the next Coppa match - XS team were knocked out so ban hangs fire until his next Coppa match. that sums it up to me
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Aug 14, 2015 19:55:37 GMT
And the FA haven't used their discretion in any other situation? What about the way they handled the WHU / Sheff Utd grubby Tevez situation? Didn't they choose not to impose the appropriate penalty on WHU? Granted, not the same issue but the FA will no doubt have a number of skeletons in their decision cupboard? Something smells about the FA and yet it doesn't seem to linger when it involves certain favoured clubs. The FA could quite simply apply an inherited Italian penalty in an Italian way. Anybody, incurring a penalty under FA jurisdiction could equally have no right to make use a foreign sanction to suit their own ends in an English scenario. We know shit happens, we also know the FA and Dyke are full of shit. What discretion could they have used though? What do you want them to do, simply pretend that he didn't have the suspension at all and completely break FIFA's rules or move it to the Luton game, which would have opened a massive can of worms for the future? I agree, thems the rules, shit happens, people need to spit out the sour grapes and hopes he tears Norwich a new arsehole next week.
|
|
|
Post by Fred Ferret on Aug 14, 2015 19:55:57 GMT
What discretion could they have used though? What do you want them to do, simply pretend that he didn't have the suspension at all and completely break FIFA's rules or move it to the Luton game, which would have opened a massive can of worms for the future? Punish him as intended? Miss the Luton game. Precisely, and just what I meant in my 2nd last para.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Aug 14, 2015 19:57:36 GMT
Maybe not the end of the world trying out a virtually new midfield v spurs. Would have liked to have seen him but maybe to our advantage to break him in v an easier team.
Of course I'd like to see him play for the excitement factor.
|
|
|
Post by oatcakesteve on Aug 14, 2015 19:58:49 GMT
I'm gutted, was looking forward to seeing the lad in action, On a positive note, he gets to kick off his Stoke career at home in front of the faithful, he will be more fired up. That's a positive, yes. Fuck em, we'll be even more intimidating at home.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2015 19:58:36 GMT
Hahahahahahaha Let me get this straight. So a ban for a yellow card in February 2015, which is specific to the Italian cup competition and not transferable to an Italian league game is somehow applicable to an English Premier League game in the following season? That is the largest load of bitter, vindictive, prejudiced, corrupt FA bollocks I have ever had the misfortune to have to attempt to make sense of. Mental isn't it? The rules maybe the rules but it feels rediculous
|
|
|
Post by crouchie on Aug 14, 2015 20:03:17 GMT
call me stupid but this ban specifically states his next coppa italia match so what the fuck has this got to do with us, he can serve it if and when he goes back to italy
|
|
|
Post by petemac on Aug 14, 2015 20:03:50 GMT
Do we think Spuds have been doing some digging before the game (like a head boy at school) sir he's not allowed to play!!
|
|
|
Post by stokiejoe on Aug 14, 2015 20:05:26 GMT
simple, ban him from the next Coppa game
but, ok it gives him time to settle in and be ready to debut at home game
|
|
|
Post by Olgrligm on Aug 14, 2015 20:08:31 GMT
From the Barton example: The Fifa regulation cited in the statement reads: "Any disciplinary suspension imposed on a player prior to a transfer must be enforced or applied by the new association at which the player is registered. "The former association is obliged to notify the new association of any sanction in writing and upon issuing the ITC (International Transfer Certificate)." Ok, so there is a FIFA regulation that states that the ban has to carry over. I didn't know about that, but at least it's not random FA craziness. I don't think it should be applied to our next cup game, but I do seriously question whether or not a very petty cumulative yellow card ban should be carried across to a different association. Common sense says that only suspensions for red card offences and serious off the field misbehaviour should be carried across. I do have to ask again, though, is there a precedent for this happening in this country?
|
|
|
Post by steakandchips on Aug 14, 2015 20:09:54 GMT
I'm gutted, was looking forward to seeing the lad in action, On a positive note, he gets to kick off his Stoke career at home in front of the faithful, he will be more fired up. He'll make his debut away at Norwich next weekend
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Aug 14, 2015 20:13:38 GMT
From the Barton example: The Fifa regulation cited in the statement reads: "Any disciplinary suspension imposed on a player prior to a transfer must be enforced or applied by the new association at which the player is registered. "The former association is obliged to notify the new association of any sanction in writing and upon issuing the ITC (International Transfer Certificate)." Ok, so there is a FIFA regulation that states that the ban has to carry over. I didn't know about that, but at least it's not random FA craziness. I don't think it should be applied to our next cup game, but I do seriously question whether or not a very petty cumulative yellow card ban should be carried across to a different association. Common sense says that only suspensions for red card offences and serious off the field misbehaviour should be carried across. I do have to ask again, though, is there a precedent for this happening in this country? I don't know if there's any precedent for it happening in this country, although I'd actually be very surprised if there wasn't. However a ban is a ban, it says there in black and white in the FIFA ruling - "ANY disciplinary suspension imposed on a player prior to a transfer must be enforced or applied by the new association at which the player is registered."
|
|